. 2022 Apr 7;50(4):743–776. doi: 10.1007/s11747-022-00855-w

Table 6.

Effect of different types of controllability (follow-up study 1)

	Comprehensiveness			Brand Image			Purchase Intention			Choice
	β	t	p	β	t	p	β	t	p	β	t	p
Gender	.052	.963	.336	.032	.585	.559	.008	.146	.884	.027	.488	.626
Age	.037	.667	.505	−.004	−.069	.945	.031	.555	.580	.027	.473	.637
Sustainability Attitude	.074	1.247	.213	.219	3.562	<.001	.222	3.666	<.001	.265	4.336	<.001
Category knowledge	.065	1.073	.284	−.005	−.075	.940	.010	.159	.874	.007	.113	.910
Treamtment¹
- uncontrollable	.427	6.422	<.001	.219	3.184	.002	.242	3.582	<.001	.142	2.086	.038
- controllable 1 round	.143	2.122	.035	.128	1.832	.068	.267	3.889	<.001	.143	2.067	.040
- controllable 3 rounds no exit	.243	3.576	<.001	.191	2.719	.007	.173	2.494	.013	.144	2.065	.040
F	7.147			3.908			5.409			4.562
R²	.142			.083			.111			.096
R²adj	.122			.062			.091			.075

OLS regression, β = standardized coefficients. ¹ Treatment (dummy-coded): baseline = controllable, 3 rounds, exit option