Fostering Sustainable Marine Product Consumption: Understanding the Impact of Food-Related Lifestyles and Social Influences on Attitudes

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine consumers’ marine product consumption patterns using a modular food-related lifestyle measurement scale and to investigate the influence of social factors on their attitudes toward marine product consumption. Data were collected over a one-week period in September 2023, and 349 responses from Korean consumers were analyzed. The results revealed significant differences in food-related lifestyles between consumers who consume marine products more than five times a week and those who do not consume them at all. Consumers who prioritize food-related lifestyles tend to place greater importance on checking the country of origin of marine products before consumption. The structural model indicated that food involvement and food responsibility positively influenced attitudes, while food innovativeness did not have a significant impact. Regarding social factors, such as subjective norms and information-seeking behavior on social media, a positive relationship between subjective norms and attitude was confirmed. The findings of this study have significant implications for promoting sustainable marine product consumption. By identifying Korean consumers’ marine product consumption behaviors and their food-related lifestyles, this study provides valuable insights into how targeted strategies can encourage sustainable and responsible marine product consumption.

1. Introduction

Global trends, such as an aging population, rising female employment rates, increasing obesity, and growing concerns about nutrition and health, have significantly influenced dietary habits [1]. Marine products remain a readily accessible and affordable source of protein, unsaturated fatty acids, minerals, and essential vitamins (such as vitamins A and D) [2]. They are widely recognized as a healthy food choice [3,4]. In 2022, the global average annual per capita consumption of marine products reached approximately 20 kg, doubling the 9 kg average of the 1960s [5]. In Europe, the average annual per capita consumption of marine products stood at 20.7 kg in 2022 [5]. However, Africa’s per capita consumption remains lower than in other regions. In South Africa, consumption was 6.3 kg per capita, whereas West Africa stands out as a region where marine products accounted for the highest proportion of total protein intake in 2022 [5].

Significant geographical differences in marine product consumption exist, with Asian populations consuming relatively more than their Western counterparts [6]. For example, inRepublic of Korea, marine products constitute the largest portion of per capita food consumption. The country’s annual per capita marine product consumption increased from 52.8 kg in 2001 [7] to 63.3 kg in 2022 [8]. Given this high level of consumption, Republic of Korea appears to be highly dependent on marine products. Traditionally, rice was the primary staple food in Republic of Korea; however, seafood consumption has grown significantly, surpassing rice consumption [9]. Similarly, in developed countries, marine products have increasingly substituted meat due to their promotion as a health-conscious food choice [2,3,4]. Consequently, marine products have become a vital part of diets worldwide, particularly as a protein source. Understanding consumer behavior related to marine product consumption is crucial, leading researchers to examine global consumption patterns. Recently, growing academic interest has focused on the impact of political and economic factors on food safety, dietary habits, nutrition, sustainability, and the fish industry [2,3]. Numerous factors, including socio-demographics, age, gender, place of residence, habits, and nutritional status, influence marine product consumption [4,10,11].

Lifestyle also plays a significant role in shaping marine product consumption patterns [10]. Lifestyle is dynamic, shaped by values, attitudes, beliefs, and socio-cultural environments [10]. The origin of food carries social and familial significance, deeply rooted in regional traditions and culture, which influence consumer behavior [4]. In recent years, food-related lifestyle (FRL) has gained academic attention. It has been extensively studied through research examining 69 items across five dimensions: ‘ways of shopping’, ‘quality aspects’, ‘cooking methods’, ‘consumption situations’, and ‘purchasing motives’ [1,4,11,12]. For instance, Weinrich and Elshiewy [13] applied the original 69-item FRL scale to analyze consumer attitudes toward microalgae consumption, finding that Western European consumers favored organic and sustainable food choices. However, due to the complexity of this scale, researchers have advocated for a more streamlined approach. Recently, a modified FRL (MFRL) model, comprising three core dimensions—food involvement, food innovativeness, and food responsibility—and 15 items was proposed [14,15]. Food involvement refers to the extent of consumer engagement in food-related activities. Food innovativeness reflects openness to new food experiences, and food responsibility encompasses ethical and sustainability considerations [14]. Brunsø et al. [14] tested the simplified MFRL model across six countries—Denmark, Australia, Hungary, the United States, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom—demonstrating its applicability across diverse populations.

Given the growing emphasis on health and sustainability, understanding how FRL influences attitudes toward marine products is essential. FRL is shaped by cultural, social, and economic factors that drive individuals’ dietary preferences and attitudes toward food consumption [16]. Previous studies have identified key consumer characteristics, showing that marine product consumption is higher among women, older consumers, and those living in family units [4], as well as those residing near rivers [2]. Additionally, consumers tend to prefer wild-caught marine products over farmed alternatives [17] and domestically sourced products over imports due to perceived taste and health benefits [18,19].

Understanding how FRL interacts with cultural and societal factors to influence attitudes toward marine product consumption provides valuable insights into diverse dietary behaviors. Diet plays a critical role in health outcomes, particularly in relation to cardiovascular health and overall well-being. Examining the effects of FRL and social influences on attitudes toward marine product consumption can contribute to promoting healthier dietary choices. Several studies have explored different aspects of FRL among Korean consumers. Bae et al. [20] examined FRL in the context of ready-to-eat foods and identified four key dimensions: health orientation, taste orientation, convenience orientation, and tradition orientation. Kim & Yoon [21] investigated agri-food consumer competency and organic food purchase behavior, classifying Korean consumers into three FRL groups: exploratory consumers, safety-seeking consumers, and passive consumers. Their findings revealed that exploratory consumers exhibited a significantly higher willingness to pay for imported organic foods, whereas safety-seeking consumers demonstrated a stronger preference for domestically sourced organic foods. More recently, Lee et al. [22] analyzed the relationship between food-related media use and eating behavior across different FRL groups in Korea. Their study found that individuals with a strong interest in food proactively engaged with food-related content, exhibited a willingness to explore diverse culinary experiences, and carefully considered nutritional labeling when purchasing food. In contrast, individuals with lower food interest tended to overeat or favor highly stimulating foods after exposure to food-related content, often disregarding nutritional labels.

The theory of planned behavior (TPB) has been widely used to understand consumer attitudes and behaviors, demonstrating its effectiveness as a measurement tool [23]. While demand for marine products continues to rise due to growing consumer interest in healthier and more sustainable food options, research on consumer attitudes and the effects of social influence remains limited. This study focuses on Republic of Korea, a country with high marine product consumption, where marine products are deeply embedded in local customs, diets, and culinary traditions, particularly in coastal areas. The global influence of K-culture has expanded significantly, driven by the widespread popularity of Korean entertainment, fashion, and lifestyle trends. A key component of this cultural wave is K-food, which has gained international recognition, contributing to a substantial rise in Korean food exports, reaching $13 billion in 2023 [24]. Additionally, Republic of Korea attracted 16.37 million international tourists in 2023 [22]. This growing international interest in Korean cuisine, including seafood dishes, underscores the need to understand the food-related lifestyles of Korean consumers within a global context. Although research on product consumption and FRL is steadily progressing, studies examining the relationships between FRL and marine food consumption behavior remain limited.

1.1. Research Objectives

The main objectives of this study are threefold: (1) to deepen the understanding of consumer behavior related to marine product consumption, including frequency of consumption, confirmation of product origin, and preferences regarding the origin of marine products; (2) to examine differences in MFRL based on consumer behavior related to marine product consumption; and (3) to assess the effects of MFRL, social influences (including subjective norms), and information-seeking behavior on social media on consumers’ attitudes toward marine product consumption.

1.2. Research Contribution

This study contributes to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2030 Agenda by promoting responsible and sustainable marine product consumption. By examining consumer behavior, including the frequency of consumption, awareness of product origin, and preferences, this research aligns with the SDG goal of ‘Responsible Consumption and Production’. Understanding food-related lifestyles (MFRL) and social influences offers valuable insights into how consumers can be encouraged to make more sustainable choices, supporting the global challenge of fostering responsible production and consumption patterns. Additionally, by assessing the effects of these factors on consumers’ attitudes, the study contributes to the SDG ‘Good Health and Well-Being’, as promoting sustainable, healthy food choices is essential for individual and public health. Furthermore, the findings of this study have significant implications in promoting sustainable marine product consumption. By identifying Korean consumers’ marine product consumption behaviors and their FRL, the study provides valuable insights into how targeted strategies can encourage more sustainable and responsible consumption. Policymakers and industry stakeholders can leverage these results to design tailored educational campaigns that promote sustainable marine product choices, especially among consumer groups with lower consumption rates. Additionally, the study’s insights into the influence of FRL on attitudes and information-seeking behavior underscore the potential of social media as a tool for raising awareness about sustainable marine product consumption, ultimately fostering more informed and environmentally conscious consumer decisions.

2. Research Framework

2.1. Marine Product Consumption Behavior and Food-Related Lifestyle

Previous studies have highlighted that marine product consumption habits significantly influence consumer behavior [3]. For instance, consumers who frequently consume marine products and pay close attention to their country of origin tend to exhibit higher involvement in food consumption [11].

Stancu et al. [15] explored consumers’ willingness to try new aquaculture fish products based on their overall food-related lifestyle. Their findings identified six consumer segments: foodies, moderate, adventurous, responsible, conservative, and uninvolved. Within the framework of food-related lifestyle, three core dimensions—food involvement, food innovativeness, and food responsibility—were also identified. Among these segments, the ‘foodies’ group, which exhibited the highest level of food consumption, scored highest across all three MFRL dimensions (food involvement, food innovativeness, and food responsibility). Furthermore, this group, characterized by strong engagement with food, generally held a more positive attitude toward fish consumption than the other segments.

Additionally, research has shown that consumers of marine products more frequently tend to prefer locally sourced options over imported ones [11]. Based on these findings, the following three hypotheses were proposed:

H1: 

Marine product consumption frequency will significantly differ across all dimensions of food-related lifestyle.

H2: 

Checking the country of origin of marine products will significantly differ across all dimensions of food-related lifestyle.

H3: 

Preference for the origin of marine products will significantly differ across all dimensions of food-related lifestyle.

2.2. Food-Related Lifestyle and Attitudes

Previous studies have confirmed that consumers who regularly consume marine products tend to have a positive attitude toward marine product consumption [25]. Hoek et al. [26] found that, compared to meat consumers, vegetarians held more positive attitudes toward certain attributes, such as the importance of product information, health benefits, ecological considerations, novelty, and social aspects. Jungles et al. [27] also argued that an organic food-related lifestyle is positively associated with attitudes toward organic food consumption. Similarly, Weinrich and Elshiewy [13] suggested that consumers who frequently purchase organic food and prioritize healthy and organic options exhibit a more favorable attitude toward microalgae as food. Saba et al. [28] found that individuals with strong positive attitudes toward healthy diets were more receptive to high food quality and more engaged in seeking food information compared to those with weaker attitudes. Additionally, research has demonstrated that environmental concerns positively influence green consumer behavior [29,30] and that the availability of environmentally friendly fish options significantly impacts consumers’ choices of fish products [31].

Based on this literature, the following three hypotheses were proposed:

H4: 

Food involvement will have a positive effect on attitudes towards marine product consumption.

H5: 

Food innovativeness will have a positive effect on attitudes towards marine product consumption.

H6: 

Food responsibility will have a positive effect on attitudes towards marine product consumption.

2.3. Subjective Norms, Information-Seeking Behavior on Social Media, and Attitudes Toward Marine Product Consumption

The literature has established a positive relationship between subjective norms and attitude [32,33]. Tarkiainen and Sundqvist [33] applied the Theory of Planned Behavior to examine consumers’ intentions to buy organic food, confirming that consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing organic food are influenced by their acquaintances. More recently, Aslan [32] investigated the relationship between halal awareness, subjective norms, attitude, and trust in the intention to purchase culinary products. The study found that subjective norms were a strong predictor of attitudes toward culinary products among Muslim consumers. Consumers frequently use social media to acquire information and share their experiences with products. In this process, their attitudes toward certain objects have been shown to be influenced by social media [34,35]. Building on these findings, the hypotheses outlined in Figure 1 were formulated.

H7: 

Subjective norms will have a positive effect on attitudes towards marine product consumption.

H8: 

Information-seeking behavior on social media will have a positive effect on attitudes towards marine product consumption.

Figure 1

Hypothesized model.

[Figure omitted. See PDF]

3. Methodology

3.1. Data Collection

The questionnaire was initially drafted in English and then translated into Korean by a researcher fluent in both languages. To ensure linguistic accuracy, the translated questionnaire was reviewed by graduate students and professors who are native Korean speakers. Revisions were made based on their feedback, and a pilot test was conducted with 15 adults living in Korea to assess the questionnaire’s clarity and ease of response. After making minor adjustments, the final version was completed, and data collection commenced to test the proposed research model (see Figure 1). The study targeted Korean consumers aged 18 and older residing in Republic of Korea. Data were collected through an online survey platform, Dooit Survey, using respondents from the platform’s panel. The initial page of the questionnaire provided information about the study’s purpose and obtained informed consent from participants. The survey was conducted from 1–8 September 2023, yielding 362 completed responses. During data screening, 13 responses were excluded due to the presence of outliers. Consequently, 349 valid responses were retained for further analysis. A commonly accepted guideline for determining sample size suggests using 5 to 20 times the number of parameters to be estimated, with a minimum of 150 cases required for structural equation modeling [36]. Based on this criterion, the sample size of 349 was deemed sufficient for further analysis.

3.2. Construct Measurement

The questionnaire for this study consisted of four sections. The first section included questions about marine product consumption experiences, such as consumption frequency, types of marine products consumed, places of consumption, and confirmation of product origin. The second section contained 15 items measuring MFRL within the three dimensions of ‘food involvement, ‘food innovativeness’, and ‘food responsibility’, newly developed by Brunsø et al. [14]. The MFRL measurement scale used in this study builds upon the Food-Related Lifestyle (FRL) framework but incorporates a newly developed set of items that reflect contemporary food-related behaviors, such as environmentally sustainable behaviors. While the traditional FRL scale includes five dimensions (i.e., ways of shopping, quality aspects, cooking methods, consumption situations, and purchasing motives), the present study specifically adopts the newly developed MFRL measurement scale proposed by Brunsø et al. [14], which integrates elements from the original FRL instrument while also introducing new constructs to reflect contemporary food-related lifestyles. Representative items include ‘Food and drink are important parts of my life’, ‘I look for ways to prepare unusual meals’, and ‘It is important to understand the environmental impact of our eating habits’. The third section focused on attitudes toward marine product consumption, subjective norms, and information-seeking behavior on social media.

Consumers’ attitudes toward marine product consumption were measured using five items (e.g., “Eating marine products is a happy thing”, “I am positive about eating marine products”), while subjective norms were assessed using six items (e.g., “My family is positive about my marine product consumption”, “My friends are positive about my marine product consumption”), adapted from previous studies [37,38,39]. Information-seeking behavior on social media was measured using four items adapted from a prior study (e.g., “Check other people’s posts about marine product consumption”, “Search for radioactivity tests and procedures”) [40]. All measurement items were assessed using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The final section included questions about respondents’ demographic characteristics.

3.3. Data Analysis

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 27 was used for the analysis. Specifically, frequency analysis was conducted to identify respondents’ profiles. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was then performed to test the reliability and validity of the measurement model. T-tests, ANOVA, and structural equation modeling (SEM) were conducted using both SPSS and AMOS 27 to test the research hypotheses.

4. Results

4.1. Profile of Respondents

The analysis confirmed that the gender distribution in this study was nearly equal, with female respondents slightly outnumbering males (53%) (See Table 1). In terms of age, 28.1% of respondents were in their 30s, followed by 25.8% in their 40s. Among the respondents, 35.2% reported having four family members, while 28.7% reported having three. Regarding education, the majority held a bachelor’s degree (71.1%), and nearly half of the respondents were office workers (47%). Approximately 30% of respondents reported a monthly income between USD 40,000 and 60,000, and 51% were single. Regarding the frequency of marine product consumption, 45.6% of respondents consumed marine products four times per month, while 37.2% consumed them once or twice a week. When asked about the types of marine products they consumed, 35% reported consuming fish, followed by mollusks (33%). Most respondents consumed marine products at home (71.1%), and more than half (66.8%) checked the country of origin before consumption.

Additionally, the majority (70.2%) preferred domestically sourced marine products.

4.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

In order to evaluate the validity and reliability of the measurement constructs, CFA was conducted. Through CFA, the standardized factor loadings of items were examined, and any factor loadings below 0.50 were removed. This led to the removal of four items (one item from each of the food-related lifestyle dimensions of food involvement, food innovativeness, and food responsibility, as well as one from information-seeking behavior on social media) that were below the 0.50 threshold. Table 2 shows the results of CFA and indicates the retained factor loadings for all items (ranging from 0.64 to 0.89) that were significant at the p < 0.001 level. Values for composite reliability (CR) were in the 0.82 to 0.92 range, and the values for average variance extracted (AVE) ranged from 0.53 to 0.71, exceeding the suggested analytical values of 0.70 for CR and 0.50 for AVE [36]. Since the square root of the AVEs was greater than the correlations, as shown in Table 3 discriminant validity was acceptable [41]. The results of CFA showed acceptable model fit: χ² (301) = 548.39, p < 0.05, CFI = 0.96, NFI = 0.91, GFI = 0.90, IFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.95, and RMR = 0.04. The final measurement model based on these estimates demonstrated a good model fit to the data.

4.3. Testing of Hypotheses

4.3.1. Differences Between Marine Product Consumption Patterns and Food-Related Lifestyle

A one-way ANOVA with Scheffé’s post hoc test was conducted to examine differences in food-related lifestyle (FRL) based on the frequency of marine product consumption. The results, presented in Table 4, indicate a significant difference in MFRL between individuals who consume marine products more than five times per week and those who do not consume them at all. Specifically, individuals with higher marine product consumption demonstrated greater food involvement, a stronger tendency to try new foods, and a heightened concern for the sustainability of their marine product consumption. Additionally, respondents with lower marine product consumption exhibited lower levels across all three dimensions of MFRL. More specifically, significant differences in the food involvement dimension were observed among the groups consuming more than five times per week, less than four times per month, and never. Similarly, significant differences in the food innovativeness dimension were found between the groups consuming one to two times per week and less than four times per month. Furthermore, significant differences in the food responsibility dimension were confirmed among the groups consuming more than five times per week, three to four times per week, and never. These findings confirm that FRL varies significantly based on marine product consumption frequency, thereby providing statistical support for Hypothesis 1.

To examine differences in the three dimensions of MFRL based on consumers’ behavior of checking the country of origin of marine products, an independent sample t-test was conducted.

As shown in Table 5, consumers who check the country of origin of marine products exhibited a significantly higher level of MFRL. More specifically, these respondents demonstrated the highest level of food involvement, a difference that was statistically significant. Similarly, they also exhibited a significantly higher level of food responsibility. Given these findings, Hypothesis 2 was partially supported.

Additionally, a one-way ANOVA was performed to determine whether differences in MFRL existed based on consumers’ preferences for the origin of marine products. The results, presented in Table 6, indicate that respondents with higher food involvement tended to prefer domestically sourced marine products, whereas those with higher food innovativeness showed a preference for imported marine products. In contrast, respondents with higher food responsibility were found to be less concerned with the origin of marine products. These differences were statistically significant, providing support for Hypothesis 3.

4.3.2. Structural Model Testing

SEM was performed to test the research hypotheses regarding the effect of MFRL, information-seeking behavior on social media, and subjective norms on consumers’ attitudes toward marine product consumption. The model revealed strong overall model fit: χ² = 503.82, df = 282, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.96, GFI = 0.90, IFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.95, NFI = 0.91, and RMR = 0.06. Results from testing the structural model showed that food involvement had a positive effect on attitudes (β = 0.14, t = 2.81), whereas food innovativeness had no effect on attitudes (β = 0.05, t = 0.83). The last dimension of MFRL, namely food responsibility, had a positive effect on attitude (β = 0.19, t = 3.03). Regarding the relationships of subjective norms and information-seeking behavior on social media on attitudes, a strong positive relationship between subjective norms and attitudes was confirmed (β = 0.71, t = 10.91), while information-seeking behavior on social media had no effect on attitudes (β = −0.06, t = −1.16). Thus, Hypothesis 4, Hypothesis 6, and Hypothesis 7 were supported, whereas Hypothesis 5 and Hypothesis 8 were not supported. Table 7 below shows the measured effects of all structural relationships.

5. Discussion

This study examines consumer behavior regarding marine product consumption and the influence of social factors on attitudes. It was hypothesized that MFRL would differ based on consumption frequency. As shown in Table 4, significant differences in MFRL were observed between those who consume marine products more than five times a week and those who do not consume them at all. Frequent consumers exhibited greater food involvement, a higher tendency to experiment with recipes, and stronger concerns about sustainability. These findings align with prior research indicating that frequent consumers invest more time and seek out more information when cooking and preparing marine products than non-consumers [11,15]. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported.

The study also found that consumers emphasizing MFRL were more likely to check the country of origin when purchasing marine products. Specifically, they placed greater importance on food consumption and environmental sustainability. However, no significant difference was found in food innovativeness, suggesting that consumers experimenting with international recipes may prioritize affordability over origin. This may be due to the reliance on imported marine products for international dishes. These results, consistent with previous findings [11,15], provide partial support for Hypothesis 2.

Regarding consumer preference for domestic versus imported marine products, those with higher food involvement favored domestic products, likely due to perceptions of better hygiene, familiarity, and distribution control. However, food innovators showed no significant preference, as they focus on new experiences rather than product origin. Previous research confirms a general preference for domestic marine products due to taste and health benefits [18,19]. However, when preparing international dishes, consumers may be more flexible about origin due to limited availability of domestic options. These findings support Hypothesis 3, showing that while frequent consumers prefer local products, non-consumers exhibit weaker preferences [11].

Structural model results indicate that food involvement positively affects attitudes (β = 0.14, t = 2.81), while food innovativeness does not (β = 0.05, t = 0.83). Food responsibility also positively influences attitudes (β = 0.19, t = 3.03). This suggests that consumers who frequently consume marine products view them more favorably. Previous studies confirm that regular consumers have more positive attitudes toward fish consumption [15,25], with older and female consumers showing stronger preferences [4,25]. Additionally, consumers concerned about environmental sustainability tend to have more positive attitudes, reinforcing findings that eco-conscious behaviors influence food choices [31,42]. These results support Hypotheses 4 and 6 but not Hypothesis 5. The lack of a significant effect of food innovativeness on attitudes toward marine products may stem from familiarity. Unlike trendy or novel foods, marine products, particularly in traditional forms, may not be perceived as innovative. Consequently, even highly innovative consumers may favor familiar options. This suggests that attitudes toward marine products are shaped more by involvement and sustainability concerns than by novelty.

Regarding the relationship between social influence factors (such as subjective norms and information-seeking behavior on social media) and attitude, a strong positive relationship was found between subjective norms and attitude (β = 0.71, t = 10.91). This finding aligns with previous studies [32,33], which suggest that consumers’ attitudes are heavily influenced by individuals in their social circle, such as family and friends. Consequently, Hypothesis 7 was supported. However, information-seeking behavior on social media had no significant effect on attitude (β = −0.06, t = −1.16). These results contradict previous findings that highlight social media’s role in consumer decision-making [34,35]. This discrepancy could be due to two factors. First, Korean consumers may place limited trust in information obtained from social media, relying more on acquaintances for decision making regarding marine product consumption. Second, unlike other consumer choices, marine product consumption is often considered a necessity rather than an option, meaning that negative views on social media may not significantly influence purchasing decisions. Consequently, Hypothesis 8 was not supported.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

Firstly, while marine products are recognized as essential food in our lives, environmental issues such as ship oil outflow, pollution caused by marine waste, and discharge of treated water from Fukushima continue to be raised. This study aimed to examine the consumption patterns of marine products by consumers in the current context, where safety concerns regarding fishery product intake are highlighted.

Secondly, this study holds theoretical significance as it validated the recently developed Modular Food-Related Lifestyles (MFRL) scale. This scale consists of core dimensions, including food involvement, food innovativeness, and food responsibility, which account for the heightened interest in the ethics and sustainability of food in recent times. Our study confirmed that the MFRL scale effectively explains the life values associated with consumers’ food-related behaviors. It is interesting to note that consumers utilize food as a means to engage in various activities, showing a high level of interest in environmental sustainability. This reflects the increasing concern among consumers regarding environmental issues such as climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, and ocean pollution resulting from plastics and marine waste. Consumers are actively seeking ways to protect the environment and promote sustainable marine product consumption.

Thirdly, this study aimed to deepen the understanding of consumers’ attitudes toward marine product consumption by investigating the impact of social influences such as subjective norms and information seeking behavior on social media. Interestingly, while subjective norms significantly affected consumers’ attitudes, information seeking behavior on social media had no discernible impact on their attitudes toward marine product consumption. This suggests that the influence of subjective norms, particularly from acquaintances such as family and friends, is greater than that of social media in shaping consumers’ attitudes toward marine product consumption. In other words, if consumers’ families and friends have a positive perception of marine product consumption or encourage them to consume marine products, this has a more significant impact on shaping their attitudes than the information obtained through social media.

5.2. Practical Implications

Firstly, consumers who are highly interested in eating are a group that attaches great importance to food and is highly concerned about the environment as well as their health. When consuming marine products, they tend to check the origin of the products. Additionally, the results of the current study revealed that the higher the consumption of marine products, the greater involvement in the marine product consumed. Therefore, it is necessary for consumers to be provided with more accurate and detailed information regarding the freshness and origin of the marine products to alleviate food safety concerns when consuming them.

Secondly, it was confirmed that the higher the consumer’s involvement in marine products, the more positive their attitude toward marine product consumption. This requires consumers to explore ways to enhance their engagement in food-related activities. Modern eating habits are evolving towards prioritizing the functionality of convenient, simple, and fast cooking in a fast-paced and complex competitive society. For consumers who value convenience and functionality, raw marine products such as fish and seafood, which are relatively difficult to prepare and cook, can pose a barrier to their engagement in food activities involving marine products. According to a recent study conducted by An et al. [43], about 70 percent of Korean respondents indicated that they consume marine products at home, suggesting that they should be provided in a form that is easy to clean, enabling consumers to cook such products conveniently at home. The growth of the meal kit industry was accelerated during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, with global sales reaching USD 13 billion in 2022 and expected to grow to USD 24 billion by 2027. The size of the Korean meal kit market was USD 300 million in 2023 and is projected to increase to USD 688 million by 2029 [44]. Therefore, considering the growth of the meal kit market, if marine products are commercialized and provided in meal kit form, allowing for the development of simple fish and seafood dishes that can be easily prepared, consumers will be able to cook more conveniently, thereby increasing their engagement in food-related activities. Lastly, considering the positive impact of food responsibility on consumers’ attitudes toward marine product consumption, it is imperative to pay special attention to how marine products are supplied. Consumers are increasingly prioritizing environmental preservation and pursuing healthier and sustainable lifestyles [45,46], with a growing emphasis on the importance of health through social channels [47]. Consequently, they tend to prefer food that is produced and provided in a healthy manner [13,15]. Therefore, when offering marine products in the form of meal kits for convenient consumption or selling such products at markets, efforts from both society and the government are required to develop containers using more environmentally-friendly materials than the currently utilized Styrofoam or plastic containers.

5.3. Study Limitations and Future Research

Like any research endeavor, this study has its own set of constraints and shortcomings. Firstly, in terms of methodology, since this study employed an online survey, it was limited to respondents registered with the survey platform, excluding those who were not registered as a panel member. Therefore, in future research, the sample scope should be expanded to include opinions from respondents across various regions and age groups. Secondly, while numerous studies on consumer lifestyles have been examined, it was challenging to compare the results of this study with previous ones due to the limited number of recent studies focusing on MFRL with core dimensions. Thus, current study could serve as a milestone for further research on MFRL with core dimensions.

6. Conclusions

This study aimed to understand Korean consumers’ marine product consumption behavior and examine the effects of food-related lifestyle (FRL) on social factors—such as information-seeking behavior on social media and subjective norms—and their influence on attitudes toward marine product consumption. The findings confirmed that Korean consumers who consume marine products more frequently tend to exhibit greater food involvement, a higher tendency to experiment with recipes, and stronger concerns about sustainability. Additionally, those with higher food involvement showed a preference for domestic products, likely due to perceptions of better hygiene, familiarity, and distribution control. However, food innovators did not display a significant preference, as they prioritize new experiences over product origin.

This study also confirmed the structural relationships among key variables. Food involvement and food responsibility positively influenced attitudes, while food innovativeness did not. Furthermore, consumers with greater concerns about environmental sustainability demonstrated more positive attitudes toward marine product consumption. Regarding social influence factors, a strong positive relationship was found between subjective norms and attitudes, indicating that Korean consumers’ attitudes are heavily shaped by their social circles, including family and friends. The findings of this study provide essential data for understanding consumer behavior related to marine product consumption and offer valuable insights for developing policies that promote more sustainable consumption by identifying consumers’ food-related lifestyles and attitudes.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.A.; Software, S.A.; Investigation, J.C.; Data curation, S.A.; Writing–original draft, S.A. and J.C.; Writing–review & editing, S.A.; Supervision, J.C.; Project administration, J.C.; Funding acquisition, J.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Pukyong National University (1041386-202309-HR-100-02).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Tables

Table 1

Profile of respondents.

Variables	Item	N	%
Gender	Male	164	47.0
	Female	185	53.0
Marriage status	Single	178	51.0
	Married	171	49.0
Age	20s	77	22.1
	30s	98	28.1
	40s	90	25.8
	50s	61	17.5
	Over 60s	23	6.6
Number of family members (including the respondent)	1	46	13.2
	2	53	15.2
	3	100	28.7
	4	123	35.2
	Over 5	27	7.7
Monthly household income (USD)	2000	33	9.5
	2001–4000	92	26.4
	4001–6000	107	30.7
	6001–8000	67	19.2
	Over 8001	50	14.3
Employment	Office worker	164	47.0
	Self-employed	36	10.3
	Professional	28	8.0
	House wife	34	9.7
	Civil servant	15	4.3
	Student	20	5.7
	Not employed	39	11.2
	Other	13	3.7
Education	Completed high school	70	20.1
	Completed University	248	71.1
	Completed graduate school	31	8.9
Frequency of marine product consumption	Never	35	10.0
	Less than four times per month	159	45.6
	1–2 times per week	130	37.2
	3–4 times per week	19	5.4
	More than 5 times per week	6	1.7
Types of marine product consumed	Fish	122	35.0
	Shellfish	18	5.2
	Crustaceans	58	16.6
	Mollusks	115	33.0
	Seaweeds	18	5.2
	Dried fish	18	5.2
Places of marine product consumption	Home	248	71.1
	Restaurant	71	20.3
	Cafeteria/canteen	22	6.3
	At friend’s/family	7	2.0
	Other	1	0.3
Checking the country of origin	Yes	233	66.8
	No	116	33.2
Preferences for the origin of marine products	Domestic	245	70.2
	Imported	14	4.0
	Does not matter	90	25.8
Total		349	100

Table 2

Confirmatory factor analysis.

Factors and Items	Standardized Loading	S.E.	Skew.	Kurt.	C.R.
Food involvement (CR = 0.85, AVE = 0.58)
Food and drink is an important part of my life	0.77	N/A	−0.620	0.215	N/A
Eating and drinking are a continuous source of joy	0.68	0.06	−0.471	0.027	12.65
Decisions on what to eat and drink are important	0.85	0.07	−0.569	−0.006	15.40
Eating and food is an important part of my social life	0.73	0.07	−0.269	−0.370	13.13
Food innovativeness (CR = 0.91, AVE = 0.69)
I look for ways to prepare unusual meals	0.84	N/A	0.030	−0.607	N/A
Recipes and articles on food from other culinary traditions encourage me to experiment in the kitchen	0.87	0.06	0.339	−0.555	18.78
I like to try new foods that I have never tasted before	0.79	0.06	0.319	−0.688	16.05
I love to try recipes from different countries	0.83	0.06	0.264	−0.841	17.13
Food responsibility (CR = 0.82, AVE = 0.53)
Try to choose food that is produced in a sustainable way	0.77	N/A	−0.506	−0.369	N/A
Try to buy organically produced foods	0.79	0.07	−0.089	0.411	13.61
Try to choose food produced with minimal impact on the environment	0.66	0.07	−0.029	−0.226	11.71
Important to understand the environmental impact of our eating habits	0.67	0.07	−0.489	−0.382	11.64
Attitudes (CR = 0.89, AVE = 0.62)			-
… like to eat marine products	0.64	N/A	−0.489	−0.208	N/A
Eating marine products is a happy thing	0.74	0.06	−0.350	−0.151	17.81
I am positive about eating marine products	0.78	0.08	−0.287	−0.263	13.85
Eating marine products is worthwhile	0.87	0.09	−0.180	−0.091	13.28
Marine product consumption brings me good results	0.89	0.09	−0.175	−0.162	13.34
Subjective norms (CR = 0.92, AVE = 0.66)
My family is positive about my marine product consumption	0.80	N/A	−0.561	0.425	N/A
My friends are positive about my marine product consumption	0.84	0.05	−0.167	0.302	18.28
My acquaintances are positive about my marine product consumption	0.84	0.05	−0.215	0.296	18.74
My family would want me to eat marine products	0.84	0.06	−0.080	−0.390	17.89
My friends would want me to eat marine products	0.78	0.05	−0.059	−0.025	16.80
My acquaintances would want me to eat marine products	0.78	0.06	−0.002	0.015	16.59
Information-seeking behavior on social media (CR = 0.91, AVE = 0.71)
Check other people’s posts about marine product consumption	0.82	N/A	−0.295	−0.555	N/A
Search for information on discharging treated water	0.87	0.05	−0.293	−0.538	18.98
Search for radioactivity tests and procedures	0.83	0.05	−0.250	−0.538	17.66
Check other people’s opinions on marine product consumption	0.85	0.05	−0.446	−0.164	18.85

Note: p < 0.001. N/A: In AMOS, one loading, the first item of each construct had to be fixed to 1, thus the C.R. and S.E. could not be calculated for that item. Goodness-of-fit statistics: χ² = 548.39, df = 301, χ²/df = 1.822, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.96, GFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.95, IFI = 0.96, and RMR = 0.04.

Table 3

Validity assessment criteria and inter-factor correlations.

Measures	FRLI	FRLII	FRLIII	ATT	SN	IS
FRLI	0.7 7
FRLII	0.24	0. 83
FRLIII	0.33	0.59	0. 73
ATT	0.28	0.32	0.30	0. 79
SN	0.17	0.27	0.14	0.66	0. 81
IS	0.23	0.30	0.40	0.15	0.14	0. 84

Note: 1. The bold diagonal elements are the square root of the AVE. 2. Off-diagonal elements are the inter-factor correlations. 3. FRLI: Food involvement, FRLII: Food innovativeness, FRLIII: Food responsibility, ATT: Attitudes, SN: Social norms, SM: Information seeking behavior on social media.

Table 4

Frequency of marine product consumption (N = 349).

Dimensions	Frequency	Mean	SD	F/p	Post Hoc Tests
Food involvement	Never (a)	3.627	0.654	4.869/0.001 **	e > b > a
	Less than 4 times per month (b)	3.658	0.780
	1~2 times per week (c)	3.888	0.577
	3~4 times per week (d)	3.789	0.731
	More than 5 times per week (e)	4.520	0.363
Food innovativeness	Never (a)	2.594	0.888	7.466/0.000 ***	c > b
	Less than 4 times per month (b)	2.508	0.802
	1~2 times per week (c)	3.003	0.874
	3~4 times per week (d)	3.105	0.948
	More than 5 times per week (e)	3.240	1.089
Food responsibility	Never (a)	3.029	0.607	6.637/0.000 ***	e > d > a
	Less than 4 times per month (b)	3.166	0.640
	1~2 times per week (c)	3.392	0.613
	3~4 times per week (d)	3.631	0.900
	More than 5 times per week (e)	4.040	0.498

Note: ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

Table 5

T-test results for checking the country of origin of marine products (N = 349).

	Mean		SD		t	p
Dimensions	Yes	No	Yes	No
Food involvement	3.823	3.600	0.606	0.731	2.598	0.010 *
Food innovativeness	2.790	2.654	0.878	0.887	1.360	0.174
Food responsibility	3.403	3.014	0.634	0.648	5.274	0.000 ***

Note: * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001.

Table 6

Preferences for the origin of marine products (N = 349).

Dimensions	Preferences	Mean	SD	F/p	Post Hoc Tests
Food involvement	Domestic (a)	3.829	0.602	5.721/0.004 **	a > c > b
	Imported (b)	3.389	0.486
	Does not matter (c)	3.622	0.780
Food innovativeness	Domestic (a)	2.767	0.892	4.704/0.010 *	b > a > c
	Imported (b)	3.400	0.661
	Does not matter (c)	2.620	0.923
Food responsibility	Domestic (a)	3.029	0.646	15.422/0.000 ***	c > b > a
	Imported (b)	3.166	0.504
	Does not matter (c)	3.392	0.745

Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

Table 7

Standardized parameter estimates for the structural model.

Hypothesized Path	Standardized Estimates	T	R 2	TestResult
H4: Food involvement → Attitudes	0.141	2.809 **	0.299	Yes
H5: Food innovativeness → Attitudes	0.048	0.826	0.261	No
H6: Food responsibility → Attitudes	0.188	3.034 **	0.234	Yes
H7: Subjective norms → Attitudes	0.714	10.908 ***	0.597	Yes
H8: Information-seeking behavior on social media → Attitudes	−0.060	−1.159	0.180	No

Note: ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Goodness-of-fit statistics: χ² = 503.82; df = 282; χ²/df = 1.787; p < 0.001; CFI = 0.96; GFI = 0.90; TLI = 0.95; IFI = 0.96; NFI = 0.91; RMR = 0.06.

References

1. Arenas-Gaitán, J.; Peral-Peral, B.; Reina-Arroyo, J. Food-Related Lifestyles across Generations. Br. Food J.; 2022; 124, pp. 1485-1501.

2. Baptista, R.C.; Rodrigues, H.; Sant’Ana, A.S. Consumption, Knowledge, and Food Safety Practices of Brazilian Marine Products Consumers. Food Res. Int.; 2020; 132, 109084.

3. Carlucci, D.; Nocella, G.; De Devitiis, B.; Viscecchia, R.; Bimbo, F.; Nardone, G. Consumer Purchasing Behaviour towards Marine Products: Patterns and Insights from a Sample of International Studies. Appetite; 2015; 84, pp. 212-227. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25453592]

4. Thong, N.T.; Solgaard, H.S. Consumer’s Food Motives and Marine Products Consumption. Food Qual. Prefer.; 2017; 56, pp. 181-188.

5. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2024; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2024; Available online: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/66538eba-9c85-4504-8438-c1cf0a0a3903/content/sofia/2024/fisheries-aquaculture-projections.html (accessed on 2 March 2025).

6. Chung, S.; Hwang, J.T.; Joung, H.; Shin, S. Associations of Meat and Fish/Marine Products Intake with All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality from Three Prospective Cohort Studies in Korea. Mol. Nutr. Food Res.; 2023; 67, 2200900. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.202200900]

7. Yun, Y.; Kim, E. An Analysis of the Impact of Japan’s Treated Wastewater Release from Nuclear Power Plant on Korean Consumption of Marine Products-Focused on Survey Results. J. Fish. Bus. Adm.; 2022; 53, pp. 58-72.

8. Korea Rural Economic Institute. 2022 Food Balance Sheet; Korea Rural Economic Institute: Seoul, Korea, 2023; Available online: https://www.nkis.re.kr/subject_view1.do?otpId=OTP_0000000000013791 (accessed on 6 March 2025).

9. Haps, S. New Data Shows Koreans Eat More Seafood Than Rice. Haps Magazine Korea, 17 October 2022. Available online: https://www.hapskorea.com/new-data-shows-koreans-eat-more-seafood-than-rice/ (accessed on 6 March 2025).

10. Murray, G.; Wolff, K.; Patterson, M. Why Eat Fish? Factors Influencing Marine Products Consumer Choices in British Columbia, Canada. Ocean Coast. Manag.; 2017; 144, pp. 16-22.

11. Marinac Pupavac, S.; Kenđel Jovanović, G.; Linšak, Ž.; Glad, M.; Traven, L.; Pavičić Žeželj, S. The Influence on Marine Products Consumption, and the Attitudes and Reasons for Its Consumption in the Croatian Population. Front. Sustain. Food Syst.; 2022; 6, 945186.

12. Brunsø, K.; Scholderer, J.; Grunert, K.G. Testing Relationships between Values and Food-Related Lifestyle: Results from Two European Countries. Appetite; 2004; 43, pp. 195-205.

13. Weinrich, R.; Elshiewy, O. A Cross-Country Analysis of How Food-Related Lifestyles Impact Consumers’ Attitudes Towards Microalgae Consumption. Algal Res.; 2023; 70, 102999.

14. Brunsø, K.; Birch, D.; Memery, J.; Temesi, Á.; Lakner, Z.; Lang, M.; Grunert, K.G. Core Dimensions of Food-Related Lifestyle: A New Instrument for Measuring Food Involvement, Innovativeness and Responsibility. Food Qual. Prefer.; 2021; 91, 104192.

15. Stancu, V.; Brunsø, K.; Krystallis, A.; Guerrero, L.; Santa Cruz, E.; Peral, I. European Consumer Segments with a High Potential for Accepting New Innovative Fish Products Based on Their Food-Related Lifestyle. Food Qual. Prefer.; 2022; 99, 104560.

16. Carrus, G.; Cini, F.; Caddeo, P.; Pirchio, S.; Nenci, A.M. The Role of Ethnicity in Shaping Dietary Patterns: A Review on the Social and Psychological Correlates of Food Consumption. Nutr. Diet.Suppl.Nutr. Cost Anal. Versus Clin. Benefits; 2011; 75, pp. 75-87.

17. Pulcini, D.; Franceschini, S.; Buttazzoni, L.; Giannetti, C.; Capoccioni, F. Consumer Preferences for Farmed Seafood: An Italian Case Study. J. Aquat. Food Prod. Technol.; 2020; 29, pp. 445-460.

18. Garlock, T.; Nguyen, L.; Anderson, J.; Musumba, M. Market Potential for Gulf of Mexico Farm-Raised Fin-Fish. Aquac. Econ. Manag.; 2020; 24, pp. 128-142.

19. Onozaka, Y.; Honkanen, P.; Altintzoglou, T. Sustainability, Perceived Quality and Country of Origin of Farmed Salmon: Impact on Consumer Choices in the USA, France and Japan. Food Policy; 2023; 117, 102452.

20. Bae, H.J.; Chae, M.J.; Ryu, K. Consumer Behaviors towards Ready-to-Eat Foods Based on Food-Related Lifestyles in Korea. Nutr. Res. Pract.; 2010; 4, pp. 332-338.

21. Kim, K.; Yoon, J. Analysis of Eco-Friendly Food, HMR Purchases, and Eating-Out Behavior by the Level of Agri-Food Consumer Competency—Based on Food Consumption Behavior Survey for Food 2022 Data. Korean Soc. Food Nutr.; 2023; 36, pp. 588-604.

22. Lee, H. Korea Targets to Welcome 18.5 Million Foreign Visitors in 2025, Up 13% from 2024. Korea Times; Available online: https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/culture/2025/02/135_391613.html (accessed on 7 February 2025).

23. Lim, H.R.; An, S. Intention to purchase wellbeing food among Korean consumers: An application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Food Qual. Prefer.; 2021; 88, 104101.

24. Choi, J. K-Food Exports Hit Record $13.03 Billion in 2024, Led by Ramen and Processed Rice Products. BusinessKorea; Available online: https://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=233171 (accessed on 7 January 2025).

25. Birch, D.; Lawley, M. The Role of Habit, Childhood Consumption, Familiarity, and Attitudes Across Marine Products Consumption Segments in Australia. J. Food Prod. Mark.; 2014; 20, pp. 98-113.

26. Hoek, A.C.; Luning, P.A.; Stafleu, A.; De Graaf, C. Food-Related Lifestyle and Health Attitudes of Dutch Vegetarians, Non-Vegetarian Consumers of Meat Substitutes, and Meat Consumers. Appetite; 2004; 42, pp. 265-272. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15183917]

27. Jungles, B.F.; Garcia, S.F.A.; de Carvalho, D.T.; Junior, S.S.B.; Da Silva, D. Effect of Organic Food-Related Lifestyle Towards Attitude and Purchase Intention of Organic Food: Evidence from Brazil. ReMark-Rev. Bras. Mark.; 2021; 20, pp. 267-299.

28. Saba, A.; Sinesio, F.; Moneta, E.; Dinnella, C.; Laureati, M.; Torri, L.; Spinelli, S. Measuring Consumers’ Attitudes towards Health and Taste and Their Association with Food-Related Lifestyles and Preferences. Food Qual. Prefer.; 2019; 73, pp. 25-37.

29. Huang, H.C.; Lin, T.H.; Lai, M.C.; Lin, T.L. Environmental Consciousness and Green Customer Behavior: An Examination of Motivation Crowding Effect. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2014; 40, pp. 139-149.

30. Tan, B.C.; Lau, T.C.; Sarwar, A.; Khan, N. The Effects of Consumer Consciousness, Food Safety Concern, and Healthy Lifestyle on Attitudes toward Eating “Green”. Br. Food J.; 2022; 124, pp. 1187-1203.

31. Jaffry, S.; Pickering, H.; Ghulam, Y.; Whitmarsh, D.; Wattage, P. Consumer Choices for Quality and Sustainability Labelled Marine Products in the UK. Food Policy; 2004; 29, pp. 215-228.

32. Aslan, H. The Influence of Halal Awareness, Halal Certificate, Subjective Norms, Perceived Behavioral Control, Attitude, and Trust on Purchase Intention of Culinary Products among Muslim Customers in Turkey. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci.; 2023; 32, 100726.

33. Tarkiainen, A.; Sundqvist, S. Subjective Norms, Attitudes, and Intentions of Finnish Consumers in Buying Organic Food. Br. Food J.; 2005; 107, pp. 808-822.

34. Folkvord, F.; Roes, E.; Bevelander, K. Promoting Healthy Foods in the New Digital Era on Instagram: An Experimental Study on the Effect of a Popular Real versus Fictitious Fit Influencer on Brand Attitude and Purchase Intentions. BMC Public Health; 2020; 20, 1677.

35. Kim Dang, A.; Xuan Tran, B.; Tat Nguyen, C.; Thi Le, H.; Thi Do, H.; Duc Nguyen, H.; Ho, R.C. Consumer Preference and Attitude Regarding Online Food Products in Hanoi, Vietnam. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2018; 15, 981. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15050981]

36. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychol. Bull.; 1988; 103, pp. 411-423. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411]

37. Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process.; 1991; 50, pp. 179-211. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T]

38. Ajzen, I.; Driver, B.L. Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to Leisure Choice. J. Leis. Res.; 1992; 24, pp. 207-224. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1992.11969889]

39. Seong, B.H.; Choi, Y.; Kim, H. Influential Factors for Sustainable Intention to Visit a National Park during COVID-19: The Extended Theory of Planned Behavior with Perception of Risk and Coping Behavior. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2021; 18, 12968. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182412968]

40. Amaro, S.; Duarte, P. An Integrative Model of Consumers’ Intentions to Purchase Travel Online. Tour. Manag.; 2015; 46, pp. 64-79. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.06.006]

41. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis; 8th ed. Cengage Learning: Boston, MA, USA, 2019.

42. Brécard, D.; Hlaimi, B.; Lucas, S.; Perraudeau, Y.; Salladarré, F. Determinants of Demand for Green Products: An Application to Eco-Label Demand for Fish in Europe. Ecol. Econ.; 2009; 69, pp. 115-125. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.07.017]

43. An, S.; Eck, T.; Choi, J. Perceived Risk and Risk Reduction Behaviors in Marine Products Consumption. Front. Sustain. Food Syst.; 2024; 8, 1412041. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1412041]

44. Rha, J.Y.; Lee, H.; Kim, S.; Nam, Y. A Study on the Relationship between Purchases of Meal Kits and Home Meal Replacements. Nutr. Res. Pract.; 2024; 18, pp. 425-435. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4162/nrp.2024.18.3.425]

45. Ghvanidze, S.; Velikova, N.; Dodd, T.H.; Oldewage-Theron, W. Consumers’ Environmental and Ethical Consciousness and the Use of the Related Food Products Information: The Role of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness. Appetite; 2016; 107, pp. 311-322. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.08.097]

46. Lubowiecki-Vikuk, A.; Dąbrowska, A.; Machnik, A. Responsible Consumer and Lifestyle: Sustainability Insights. Sustain. Prod. Consum.; 2021; 25, pp. 91-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.08.007]

47. Oh, S.H.; Lee, S.Y.; Han, C. The Effects of Social Media Use on Preventive Behaviors during Infectious Disease Outbreaks: The Mediating Role of Self-Relevant Emotions and Public Risk Perception. Health Commun.; 2021; 36, pp. 972-981. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1724639]