Page 458 - ISC PROCEEDINGS 21.4

indicate varying levels of influence among the constructs. According to Hair (2019), f²
values of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represent small, medium, and large effects, respectively.
The results show that GCC has a moderate effect on GBA (f² = 0.206) and GPB (f² = 0.189),
while GM also exerts a moderate effect on GBA (f² = 0.190). In contrast, GBA has a small
effect on GPB (f² = 0.039) and GM has a small effect on GPB (f² = 0.031). Overall, these
results suggest that some constructs exert moderate explanatory power, while others
contribute smaller but still meaningful effects within the research model.
4.3. Assessment of the structural model direct relationship testing
To examine the direct relationships proposed in the research model, the study
employed the bootstrapping procedure in the structural model assessment. Specifically, a
bootstrapping technique with 5,000 resamples was conducted to estimate the
significance of the path coefficients. The results of the direct relationship testing are
presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Results of Direct Effects
Path
Relationship Coefficient Standard deviation t-statistics P-value
H1: GM -> GBA 0.385 0.055 7.012 0.000
H2: GCC -> GBA 0.401 0.052 7.711 0.000

H3: GM -> GPB 0.172 0.068 2.527 0.012
H4: GBA -> GPB 0.199 0.067 2.988 0.003
H5: GCC -> GPB 0.424 0.067 6.316 0.000
Source: Author’s calculation using SmartPLS 4 software.
The results of the structural model analysis are presented in Table 4, and the
significance of the hypothesized relationships was assessed using bootstrapping. The
findings show that H1 is supported, as green marketing (GM) positively influences green
brand awareness (GBA) (β = 0.385, t = 7.012, p < 0.001). Similarly, H2 is supported,
indicating that green consumption culture (GCC) has a positive and significant effect on
GBA (β = 0.401, t = 7.711, p < 0.001). Regarding green purchase behavior (GPB), the
results confirm that H3 is supported, as GM positively affects GPB (β = 0.172, t = 2.527, p
= 0.012). In addition, H4 is supported, showing that GBA has a significant positive impact
on GPB (β = 0.199, t = 2.988, p = 0.003). Finally, H5 is also supported, as GCC positively
influences GPB (β = 0.424, t = 6.316, p < 0.001). Overall, the results indicate that all
proposed hypotheses are statistically supported.
Mediation Relationship Testing
Table 5. Results of indirect effects
Original Standard
Relationship sample deviation T statistics P values

H6: GM -> GBA -> GPB 0.077 0.029 2.669 0.008
H7: GCC -> GBA -> GPB 0.080 0.028 2.847 0.004
Source: Author’s calculation using SmartPLS 4 software.
The results of the mediation analysis are reported in Table 5, revealing that green
brand awareness (GBA) serves as a significant mediator in the relationships between the
independent variables and green purchase behavior (GPB). More specifically, the findings
provide support for H6, indicating that green marketing (GM) exerts a significant indirect
effect on GPB via GBA (β = 0.077, t = 2.669, p = 0.008). Likewise, H7 is confirmed, as green
consumption culture (GCC) is found to influence GPB indirectly through GBA (β = 0.080, t

457