Abstract
We use the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to investigate determinants of stockpiling behavior during the COVID-19 lockdown. We analyzed 518 responses to an online survey and used Partial Least Squares Path Modeling (PLS-PM) techniques to estimate relationships between variables. Negative attitude (perceived barriers) and others’ behavior (descriptive social norms) were revealed as significant predictors for both intention to over-purchase and the actual stockpiling behavior. The lack of significance obtained for perceived behavioral control (PBC) is also an important result, strengthening the evidence that factors’ contribution to TPB’s predictive power is strongly context-dependent, respectively that PBC is less relevant in settings dominated by uncertainty. The lack of significance is especially compelling when stockpiling behavior is regarded as deviant conduct from effective consumption. Our findings expand the understanding on the applicability of TPB and offer informed practical suggestions for improving managerial strategies, public and private ones, during extreme events when self-regulation and cognitive control are expedient but hard to achieve.
Highlights
The psychological impact of extreme events, either natural or socioeconomic ones (e.g., 1979 oil crisis, 2007 financial crisis), is most commonly observed through behavior changes [1]
The current study proposes a theory of planned behavior (TPB) approach to investigate the motives behind the panic buying observed in the beginning of the COVID-19 lockdown in Romania
While there is a growing literature discussing the impact of COVID-19 on consumer behavior [7,22] and some concrete examinations of panic buying correlates and antecedents [23,24], there is almost no research conducted on the topic under the TPB framework
Summary
The psychological impact of extreme events, either natural (e.g., earthquakes, hurricanes) or socioeconomic ones (e.g., 1979 oil crisis, 2007 financial crisis), is most commonly observed through behavior changes [1]. Psychological distress spiked in the early stages, from March to April 2020, and it has gradually returned to baseline by June 2020 [5], following the partial revival of the economic activity [6]. This immediate crisis reaction is relevant in developing and developed economies, but it is generated by different factors. In the former case, panic buying is a form of rational adaptation to disruptive phenomena such as hyperinflation [7], while in the latter one, the irrationality of panic buying derives from the absence of actual scarcity [1], being strongly impaired by emotions (e.g., threat perception, fear of the unknown, anxiety coping mechanisms, etc.) and social influences [8,9]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
