Causal Path Relationships | Hypotheses (proposed direction/sign) | Standardized Coefficient (p value) | ||
Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
Motivation for CRM to Skepticism | H1 (−ve) | −0.57** | −0.63** | |
Customer cause compatibility to Skepticism | H2 (−ve) | 0.12* | 0.19* | |
Company’s favorable image to Skepticism | H3 (−ve) | −0.24* | −0.37* | |
NPO’s favorable image to Skepticism | H4 (−ve) | −0.44** | −0.46** | |
Cause-company fit to Skepticism | H5 (−ve) | 0.28* | 0.32* | |
Favorable CRM communication to Skepticism | H6 (−ve) | −0.35* | −0.47** | |
Hedonism to Skepticism | H7 (−ve) | −0.42* | −0.41* | |
Utilitarianism to Skepticism | H8 (+ve) | 0.31* | 0.37* | |
Skepticism to purchase intention | H9 (−ve) | −0.34* | −0.37** | |
Two-way interactions |
|
| ||
Social Motivation × Hedonism |
| 0.51** | ||
Customer cause compatibility × Hedonism |
| 0.12 | ||
Company’s good image × Hedonism |
| 0.33* | ||
NPO’s good image × Hedonism |
| 0.47** | ||
Cause and company fit × Hedonism |
| 0.19* | ||
Good CRM communication × Hedonism |
| 0.56** | ||
Two-way interaction |
|
| ||
Social Motivation × Utilitarianism |
| 0.47** | ||
Customer cause compatibility × Utilitarianism |
| 0.23* | ||
Company’s good image × Utilitarianism |
| 0.32* | ||
NPO’s good image × Utilitarianism |
| 0.48 | ||
Cause and company fit × Utilitarianism |
| 0.29* | ||
Good CRM communication × Utilitarianism |
| 0.44** | ||
Fit Index |
|
| ||
ΔR |
| 0.126 | ||
R | 0.648 | 0.774 | ||
R2 | 0.419 | 0.599 | ||
Chi Square to degree of freedom | χ2 (576) = 1289.09 is below 3 | χ2 (574) = 1175.12 is below 3 | ||
CFI | 0.986 | 0.999 | ||
GFI | 0.992 | 0.996 | ||
AGFI | 0.965 | 0.973 | ||
RMSEA | 0.041 | 0.026 | ||