Revista Criterio Libre

Impulse buying in the fast-fashion: the role of self-control, marketing stimuli, and motivation^*

Compra impulsiva en la moda rápida: el papel del autocontrol, los estímulos de marketing y la motivación

Laura Camila Cristancho Lara**

Yezid Alfonso Cancino Gómez***

Gerson Jaquin Cristancho Triana****

^*Artículo de investigación derivado de un trabajo de grado relacionado con la conducta del consumidor impulsivo en la industria de la moda. El proyecto no contó con soporte financiero institucional

^**Profesional en Mercadeo y Publicidad Universidad ECCI. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2918-5100 Correo electrónico: laurac.cristanchol@ecci.edu.co

^***Profesional en Publicidad Fundación Universitaria San Martín, Bogotá Colombia. Maestría en Mercadeo. Universidad Internacional Iberoamericana, Puerto Rico. Docente Universidad Colegio Mayor de Cundinamarca, Bogotá, Colombia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1961-9052 Correo electrónico: ycancino@universidadmayor.edu.co

^****Ingeniero de Mercados, Corporación Universidad Piloto De Colombia, Bogotá Colombia. Especialista en Psicología del Consumidor, Fundacion Universitaria Konrad Lorenz, Bogotá, Colombia, Maestría en Gestión de las Organizaciones, Universidad Central, Bogotá, Colombia. Docente investigador Universidad ECCI, Bogotá, Colombia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1961-9052 Correo electrónico: gcristanchot@ecci.edu.co

Abstract

The dual-system model suggests that self-control and impulsivity coexist and regulate decision-making; however, this relationship has been scarcely studied in the context of consumer behavior in fast-fashion. In this regard, the present study investigates the role of self-control in impulsive buying, as well as the influence of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and marketing actions in fast-fashion purchases. This study employed a descriptive, cross-sectional, and quantitative approach with a sample of 388 participants between 18 and 35 years of age. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and the bootstrapping technique, were used to process the data and evaluate the proposed model. The results confirm that self-control acts as a regulatory mechanism between marketing stimuli, motivations, and impulsive behavior; nevertheless, its effect is partial and vulnerable to intense external stimuli. Likewise, the relationship between self-control and impulsive buying shows that, although consumers attempt to self-regulate, the fast-fashion environment encourages unplanned purchases. Finally, it is considered necessary to continue investigating the role of self-control in different contexts of impulsive buying and across diverse populations.

Keywords

Mindful consumption, Self-control, Self-regulation, Fast-fashion consumption, Impulsive buying.

Resumen

El modelo de sistema dual sugiere que el autocontrol y la impulsividad coexisten y regulan la toma de decisiones; sin embargo, esta relación ha sido poco estudiado en el contexto del comportamiento de consumo en la moda rápida. En este sentido, el presente estudio investiga el papel del autocontrol en la compra impulsiva, así como la influencia de la motivación intrínseca, la motivación extrínseca y las acciones de marketing en las compras de moda rápida. Este estudio empleó un enfoque descriptivo, transversal y cuantitativo con una muestra de 388 participantes entre los 18 y 35 años de edad. Para el procesamiento de los datos se emplearon análisis factorial exploratorio y confirmatorio, además de la técnica de bootstrapping, con el fin de evaluar el modelo propuesto. Los resultados confirman que el autocontrol actúa como un mecanismo regulador entre los estímulos de marketing, las motivaciones y el comportamiento impulsivo; no obstante, su efecto resulta parcial y vulnerable frente a estímulos externos intensos. Asimismo, la relación entre el autocontrol y la compra impulsiva evidencia que, aunque los consumidores intentan autorregularse, el entorno de la moda rápida favorece la realización de compras no planificadas. Finalmente, se considera necesario continuar investigando el papel del autocontrol en distintos contextos de compra impulsiva y en diferentes poblaciones.

Palabras clave

Consumo consciente, Autocontrol, Autorregulación, Consumo de moda rápida, Compra impulsiva.

Resumo

O modelo de sistema dual sugere que o autocontrolo e a impulsividade coexistem e regulam a tomada de decisões; no entanto, essa relação tem sido pouco estudada no contexto do comportamento do consumidor na moda rápida.. Nesse sentido, o presente estudo investiga o papel do autocontrole na compra impulsiva, bem como a influência da motivação intrínseca, da motivação extrínseca e das ações de marketing nas compras de moda rápida. Este estudo utilizou uma abordagem descritiva, transversal e quantitativa, com uma amostra de 388 participantes entre 18 e 35 anos de idade. Para o processamento dos dados, foram empregadas análises fatoriais exploratória e confirmatória, além da técnica de bootstrapping, com o objetivo de avaliar o modelo proposto. Os resultados confirmam que o autocontrole atua como um mecanismo regulador entre os estímulos de marketing, as motivações e o comportamento impulsivo; contudo, seu efeito é parcial e vulnerável a estímulos externos intensos. Da mesma forma, a relação entre o autocontrole e a compra impulsiva evidencia que, embora os consumidores tentem se autorregular, o ambiente da moda rápida favorece a realização de compras não planejadas. Finalmente, considera-se necessário continuar investigando o papel do autocontrole em diferentes contextos de compra impulsiva e em diferentes populações.

Palavras-chave

Consumo consciente, autocontrolo, autorregulação, consumo de moda rápida, compras impulsivas.

1. Introducción

The fashion market has experienced significant growth in recent decades. Women currently own approximately four times more clothing than they did in the 1980s (Sapper, 2018), while the fashion industry has nearly doubled its production capacity due to an annual demand growth rate of around 2% (Niinimäki et al., 2020). This increase in production has generated negative economic, social, and environmental impacts (Buzzo & Abreu, 2019; Reichart & Drew, 2019; Roozen & Raedts, 2020; Yoon et al., 2020; Bailey et al., 2022; Centobelli et al., 2022; Long & Nasiry, 2022), directly involving manufacturers, marketers, and consumers.

Consumers have increased their purchases of clothing, accessories, and textiles in response to marketing stimuli and social influences. This behavior is driven by marketing strategies (Chen, 2021; Kaczorowska-Spychalska, 2018; Zhang & Fong, 2020), including pricing tactics, rapid collection turnover, and advertising, as well as by cultural influences (Sari & Hanifah, 2018), social environments (Pop et al., 2023; Shao & Lassleben, 2021), and family contexts (Zhang et al., 2021). Additional factors such as fashion trends, lifestyles, self-concept, and aspirational goals also contribute to social and affiliative pressures that encourage consumption.

The growth of apparel production and the increasing tendency to purchase more garments have drawn attention to the fast-fashion industry and, specifically, to impulse buying. Impulse buying is a complex form of purchasing behavior (Wu et al., 2020) driven by stimuli that lead to spontaneous decisions, which are commonly observed in clothing purchases (Xiao et al., 2023). Fast fashion has been strongly associated with impulsive purchasing behavior (Gawior et al., 2022), particularly in online shopping environments, and is also related to consumers’ attitudes toward fast-fashion retailers (Cook & Yurchisin, 2017).

Nevertheless, consumers should not be viewed simply as agents who respond automatically to stimuli and increase their spending on clothing products. Purchasing behavior also involves awareness (Rahman et al., 2021), motivations (Kumar & Sadarangani, 2018), and self-control mechanisms (Efendi et al., 2019; Kaur & Singh, 2018), which enable individuals to assess their needs and regulate their purchasing decisions.

Awareness of the environmental and labour-related impacts of the fast-fashion industry can reduce positive consumer attitudes toward this sector (Roozen & Raedts, 2020). Concerns regarding the consequences of fashion consumption have encouraged the emergence of new approaches aimed at producing and consuming fashion with lower environmental and social impacts (Buzzo & Abreu, 2019). Consequently, companies have increasingly promoted sustainable fashion while simultaneously encouraging consumption, thereby creating an ambiguous discourse that fosters awareness of ethical consumption (Binet et al., 2019). However, such awareness does not always translate into actual purchasing behavior beyond a preference for natural and durable products (Zhang et al., 2021), since consumers are often driven by desire and personal satisfaction (Sapper, 2018).

Impulsive buying behavior and self-control are therefore fundamental variables for understanding the complexity of consumer behavior. Both are influenced by lifestyles (Dhewi & Azzahra, 2023), psychological factors, motivations, available resources, and marketing stimuli (Iyer et al., 2020). Consumers do not make purchasing decisions entirely without control; rather, they evaluate their decisions regarding apparel consumption. In this context, self-control refers to the ability to reduce or postpone purchasing desires (Horváth et al., 2015). It reflects the capacity to suppress undesirable desires or behaviors (Siswanti & Halida, 2020) and acts as a mediating factor between impulsivity and impulsive buying behavior (Dhewi & Azzahra, 2023; Iyer et al., 2020). Consequently, impulse buying tends to occur when self-control is weakened or insufficient (Victoria et al., 2021).

Previous research on consumer behavior has primarily focused on the food industry and financial decision-making (Francke & Carrete, 2023), with comparatively less attention given to the clothing sector (Iyer et al., 2020), and even less to the fast-fashion industry specifically. This gap has prompted further inquiries into the role of self-control in relation to variables such as price, advertising, personal selling, public relations (Francke & Carrete, 2023), and social media influence (Redine et al., 2023).

Considering demographic differences in consumer behavior, the importance of studying self-control in developing economies has been highlighted (Redine et al., 2023). Moreover, expanding research to include general consumers has been recommended, as many studies rely primarily on student samples (Francke & Carrete, 2023). Previous research has shown that self-control moderates fast-fashion purchasing behavior and influences the relationship between impulsivity and purchasing decisions (Xiao et al., 2023). However, the functioning of the dual-system model—which describes the coexistence of self-control and impulsive processes that regulate purchasing decisions in fast-fashion contexts—remains insufficiently understood.

Accordingly, the research question guiding this study is: How does consumer self-control mediate between stimuli and motivations in impulse clothing purchases? This research aims to address a gap in the existing literature on purchasing behavior in the fast-fashion industry, particularly regarding the role of self-control in impulse buying.

Therefore, the objective of this research is to describe how consumer self-regulation operates simultaneously with impulsive behavior in fast-fashion purchasing decisions.

Investigating the regulatory effect of consumer self-control in this purchasing process will contribute to the theoretical understanding of this phenomenon and provide practical insights for key stakeholders in the fashion industry, while also encouraging more conscious and sustainable consumption practices that benefit consumers.

2. Literature review and development of hypotheses

The fast-fashion strategy is characterized by the frequent renewal of clothing collections offered at relatively affordable prices (Centobelli et al., 2022). This accelerated production-and-sales process has evolved into the ultra-fast-fashion model, in which production cycles can be completed within only a few days (Camargo et al., 2020). These shortened cycles are driven by constant changes in trends, consumer tastes, and personal needs related to self-presentation within social environments. Such dynamics are further influenced by marketing stimuli motivated by a search for self-expression, confidence, and concern for personal image (Nunes & Silveria, 2016).

Fast-fashion purchasing behavior is commonly associated with impulsive buying, where emotions, sensations, hedonic value, consumer involvement, and promotional strategies play a significant role (Ngyen & Ha, 2021). However, some consumers have shifted from purchasing low-quality trend-based fashion toward seeking products with greater quality and durability (Gupta & Gentry, 2018). In addition, demographic factors such as age, monthly household income, and family size significantly influence expenditure on fast-fashion clothing consumption (Bishnoi & Guru, 2023).

The store environment also affects consumer perceptions (Taşkın & Bozbay, 2023). Stimuli can trigger impulse buying (Gupta & Gentry, 2018; Hashmi et al., 2020), while store design and layout are linked to loyalty (Anggara et al., 2023). Similarly, perceptions of store clutter and human crowding lead to perceptions of scarcity and competition (Ballantine et al., 2015; Coskun et al., 2020). Likewise, impulsive buying behavior and fast-fashion purchasing have been observed in online environments (Al Mutanafisa, 2021; Boardman et al., 2023; Fares et al., 2023; Luo et al., 2018).

At first glance, it may appear contradictory that consumers simultaneously exhibit self-control practices within fast-fashion purchasing contexts. Consumers may intentionally delay their purchases, waiting for promotional periods or more favorable purchase conditions (Jin et al., 2012). This behavior supports the notion that impulsive buying tends to occur when cognitive reflection is diminished, since failures in the self-control system can lead to impulsive actions (Müller et al., 2015).

However, the dual system theory suggests that self-control functions as a moderating variable between reactive and reflective processes (Moayery et al., 2019b). This perspective indicates that impulsive buying behavior and self-control coexist across a broad range of consumer behaviors (Sun et al., 2024), such as cell phones (Ding et al., 2022), internet addiction (Li et al., 2021a), financial management (Goyal et al., 2022), as well as online impulsive purchases of fashionable clothing items (Xiao et al., 2023). Despite these advances, research examining the role of self-control in fast-fashion consumption remains limited. Existing evidence is largely restricted to identifying a weak correlation between self-control and fast-fashion purchasing behavior (Syahidah & Suryawati, 2023).

2.1 Marketing stimuli, self-control, and impulse buying

Impulse buying has received considerable attention in consumer behavior research (Al Mutanafisa & Retnaningsih, 2021; Rodrigues et al., 2021). Consumers are frequently attracted by advertising and persuasive marketing messages, which are reflected in their purchasing behavior and intentions (Kollat & Willett, 2023). Advertising influences impulse buying behavior by generating stimuli that trigger immediate desires and needs (Iyer et al., 2020; Mittal et al., 2015). These stimuli may include offering discounts or promotions, creating a sense of urgency or scarcity, presenting products attractively, or using testimonials and positive recommendations (Gong & Jiang, 2023). Personal identity also motivates individuals to stay updated with the latest fashion trends and overspend (Rana & Malik, 2023).

Understanding consumer behavior and decision-making processes is essential for developing effective strategies capable of influencing consumer choices, particularly when self-control mechanisms mediate purchasing decisions (Xu et al., 2020). Marketing stimuli can significantly affect consumers' self-control and their tendency toward impulsive buying (Zheng & Alba, 2021). Sales promotions and advertising messages may stimulate impulsive purchasing behavior while simultaneously weakening self-control mechanisms (Moser, 2020). Marketing stimuli can also deplete self-control mechanisms and inhibit the generation of counterarguments, thereby contributing to a negative relationship between self-control and impulse buying (Sun et al., 2024).

However, self-control also moderates the relationship between marketing stimuli and the impulsive response system (Xu et al., 2020). The impulsive system is automatic and reactive, whereas the reflective system is controlled and inhibitory (Goschke & Job, 2023). Both systems operate in parallel (De Neys, 2021; Li et al., 2021b), with self-regulation moderating the influence of impulsive and reflective determinants on impulse buying. Nevertheless, the reflective system requires greater self-regulatory resources to function effectively (Moayery et al., 2019b).

Hypotheses:

• H1: Marketing stimuli influences impulse buying behavior.
• H2: Marketing stimuli influences self-control.

2.2 The link between motivations, self-control, and impulse buying

According to self-determination theory, intrinsic motivation and autonomous forms of self-regulation are closely associated (Ryan & Deci, 2020). Intrinsic motivation refers to the internal drive derived from satisfaction obtained through engaging in an activity itself, whereas self-control refers to the ability to regulate and manage one's own thoughts, emotions, and actions. These mechanisms operate interdependently due to their close conceptual and behavioral relationship.

Impulse buying is a common consumer behavior that represents a substantial volume of goods and services across different product categories and geographical contexts (Iyer et al., 2019; Moayery et al., 2019a). It refers to the act of making unplanned purchases (Sohn & Ko, 2021), driven more by emotions, feelings, and attitudes than by rational decision-making (Ahmad et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2023; Santini et al., 2019). Motivation plays a significant role in impulse buying behavior (Erdem et al., 2021), and intrinsic motivation specifically influences this behavior (Lee, 2018; Sritanakorn & Nuangjamnong, 2021) through consumers' negative emotions (Luo et al., 2018).

Intrinsic motivation refers to the internal pleasure or satisfaction individuals experience when engaging in a particular activity without the need for external rewards or incentives (Hsu, 2022; Rheinberg & Engeser, 2018). In the context of impulse buying, consumers with high levels of intrinsic motivation are more likely to engage in impulsive purchasing behavior (Lavuri et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2021).

• H3: Intrinsic motivation influences self-control.
• H4: Intrinsic motivation influences impulse buying behavior.

Extrinsic motivation refers to the influence of external factors on consumer behavior and decision-making processes (Fariana et al., 2021). These motivations encompass rewards, social pressures, and cultural norms (Aguiar, 2020). Such external factors may influence compulsive buying behavior through the moderation of self-control (Luo et al., 2018), potentially undermining an individual's ability to resist temptations or impulses to purchase unwanted or unnecessary products (Otero-López & Villardefrancos, 2015). Impulsive purchases may be triggered by both internal and external stimuli; however, self-control negatively moderates the relationship between these stimuli and impulsive buying behavior (Sun et al., 2024).

Extrinsic motivation is associated with behavioral adaptation in response to external pressure (Halfmann, 2021), thus representing self-control behavior. Previous studies have demonstrated that external stimuli can affect consistently or inconsistently planned impulse buying behaviors (Melati et al., 2024). Consumers with higher levels of self-control generally exhibit greater self-discipline, as they are more capable of regulating their thoughts and actions (Farmer et al., 2017). Such consumers are also more likely to delay gratification (Watson & Milfont, 2017; Yu et al., 2024) and adapt their purchasing habits by strengthening self-control in response to external influences (Gordon, 2021). However, they can also display impulsive buying behavior when self-control is low (Burton et al., 2018).

• H5: Extrinsic motivation influences self-control.
• H6: Extrinsic motivation influences impulsive buying behavior.
• H7: Self-control influences impulsive buying behavior.

Figure 1. Proposed theoretical model.

3. Methodology

This study adopts a descriptive, cross-sectional, and quantitative approach to examine how intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and marketing actions influence self-control and impulse buying. The target population consisted of men and women between 18 and 35 years of age residing in Bogotá. According to the National Department of Statistics (DANE), the population of Bogotá exceeds seven million inhabitants. However, for sampling purposes, the study considered a representative population framework.

The sample size was calculated using a 95% confidence level, a 5% margin of error, and a population proportion of 50% (p = 0.5), resulting in a minimum required sample of 384 participants. A non-probability convenience sampling method was employed, and a total of 388 respondents participated in the study.

Data were collected through a questionnaire distributed digitally via online channels, with voluntary participation. The instrument consisted of six sections. The socio-demographic section included nominal variables, whereas the sections related to impulse buying, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, marketing stimuli, and self-control contained variables measured using five-point Likert scales ranging from “completely disagree” to “completely agree,” as presented in Table 1.

For the development of the questionnaire, the researchers adapted established scales: Anand and Kaur (2018) for motivation, Malone et al. (2010) for self-control, Nakalinda (2018) for fast-fashion purchasing behavior, and Song et al. (2016) for marketing stimuli.

The data analysis process employed the statistical package SPSS Statistics version 27 for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and descriptive analyses, as well as AMOS version 24 for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modelling using the bootstrapping technique.

Data processing was based on Cronbach’s alpha, CFA, and structural equation modelling (SEM) analyses. Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess the internal consistency of the items within each factor. CFA enabled the evaluation of the fit between the observed data and the proposed theoretical structure, as well as the establishment of convergent and discriminant validity. In addition, SEM was employed to analyze the complexity of direct and indirect relationships among the study factors.

4. Results

The surveyed population was predominantly female (n = 184, 47.42%), followed by male participants (n = 161, 41.49%) and participants identifying with other gender categories (n = 43, 11.08%). Participants’ educational levels ranged from secondary education (n = 69, 17.8%) to university education (n = 183, 47.2%), university graduates (n = 122, 31.4%), and postgraduate education (n = 14, 3.6%).

Regarding income levels, the distribution was as follows: less than one Minimum Monthly Legal Wage (MLMW) (n = 60, 15.5%), between one and two MLMW (n = 145, 37.4%), between two and three MLMW (n = 140, 36.1%), between three and four MLMW (n = 29, 7.5%), and more than four MLMW (n = 14, 3.6%).

In terms of occupation, the majority indicated they were employed only (n = 218, 56.2%), followed by those studying and working (n = 115, 29.4%) and those studying only (n = 55, 14.2%).

The researchers conducted an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using the principal component extraction method with varimax rotation, yielding acceptable values (KMO = 0.846, Bartlett's test of sphericity p < 0.001, X² = 373.6, df = 175, p < 0.001). The findings indicated that the 21 items were clustered into five factors with factor loadings above 0.6, explaining 67.18% of the variance.

Based on these results, the researchers performed a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), yielding X² = 373.6, df = 175, p < 0.001, considering all factor loadings above 0.6. While some authors suggest a minimum criterion of 0.7 for factor loadings (Comrey & Lee, 1992; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007; Yana et al., 2015), it is deemed acceptable in this type of study to have factor loadings starting from 0.6. The CFA results are displayed in Table 1.

Table 1. actor Loadings and Cronbach's Alpha

Note. Own elaboration.

Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. All constructs achieved values above the recommended threshold of 0.70, except for the self-control (SC) construct, which obtained an alpha of 0.645. This value can nevertheless be considered acceptable given the limited number of items comprising the construct.

Furthermore, alpha values ranging between 0.50 and 0.70 are considered moderate but acceptable in exploratory research, particularly when inter-item correlations exceed 0.30 (Hinton et al., 2004; Said, 2018; Wim et al., 2008). In this study, the SC construct demonstrated an average inter-item correlation of 0.48, supporting its internal consistency. Therefore, the reliability of the construct falls within an acceptable range (Hajjar, 2018; Nawi et al., 2020).

Regarding the composite reliability index (CR), values greater than 0.7 were obtained, excluding the SC construct, which showed a value of 0.657, considered acceptable according to the criteria proposed by Fornell & Larcker (1981) and Bagozzi & Yi (1988).

Similarly, the average variance extracted (AVE) showed values greater than 0.5. However, the intrinsic motivation (IM) and impulse buying (IB) constructs presented slightly lower values. Despite this, the criteria established by Fornell and Larcker (1981) and Henseler (2015) were satisfied.

To assess discriminant validity, the square root of the AVE was used as a reference, which proved to be greater than the correlations between each construct (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Additionally, the values of the CFA results can be observed in Table 2.

Table 2. Convergent and Discriminant Validity of CFA

Note. ***= p < 0.001 Source: Own elaboration.

4.1 Descriptive analysis

Regarding the goodness-of-fit indices, the absolute fit measures were assessed using the chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio (CMIN/DF = 2.135), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA = 0.054), along with the goodness-of-fit index (GFI = 0.916).

For the incremental fit measures, the analysis included the normed fit index (NFI = 0.906), non-normed fit index (TLI = 0.937), and comparative fit index (CFI = 0.947).

Lastly, the parsimony fit measures included the general parsimony goodness-of-fit index (PGFI = 0.694), normed parsimony fit index (PNFI = 0.755), and parsimonious comparative fit index (PCFI = 0.789), all yielding acceptable results according to the criteria outlined by Hu and Bentler (1999).

The researchers developed the causal model using structural equation modeling (SEM) with the bootstrapping technique for hypothesis testing, employing 2,000 sub-samples and a confidence level adjusted to 95%.

The path coefficients and significance levels indicate that hypotheses H1, H2, H4, H5, and H7 were supported, whereas hypothesis H3 was rejected, indicating that intrinsic motivation (IM) does not influence self-control (SC). Similarly, H6 was rejected, suggesting that extrinsic motivation (EM) does not influence impulse buying (IB). These findings are presented in Table 3.

However, the analysis of indirect effects revealed partial moderation in the relationship between marketing stimuli (MS) and impulse buying (IB) when self-control (SC) acts as the moderator (Direct effect = 0.502***, indirect effect = 0.045*).

Similarly, partial moderation is observed in the relationship between intrinsic motivation (IM) and impulse buying (IB) when self-control (SC) is the moderator (Direct effect = 0.279***, indirect effect = -0.18).

Conversely, moderation is absent in the relationship between extrinsic motivation (EM) and impulse buying (IB) when self-control (SC) is the moderator (Direct effect = 0.079, indirect effect = 0.026).

Table 3. Hypothesis Testing

Note: * = p < 0.05, *** = p < 0.001. Source: Own elaboration.

5. Discussion

This research contributes to understanding the operation of the dual-system model, where impulsive behaviors and self-control coexist. Although previous studies have examined this relationship (Iyer et al., 2020; Redine et al., 2023), there is still limited empirical evidence within specific sectors such as fast fashion using representative population samples (Francke & Carrete, 2023), except for Syahidah and Suryawati (2023), who reported a low relationship between these elements.

The findings confirm that marketing exerts a strong direct effect on impulsive purchasing (H1). The high statistical significance indicates that promotions, social media advertising, and seasonal campaigns stimulate fast-fashion consumption. Similar findings are consistent with Iyer et al. (2020), Gong & Jiang (2023), and Melati et al. (2024).

Despite the direct influence of marketing stimuli on purchasing behavior, such stimuli can also activate self-control mechanisms (H2). This relationship explains that marketing stimuli interact with the consumer's reflective system (Zheng & Alba, 2021), which requires self-regulation resources to inhibit automatic responses (Goschke & Job, 2023). Consequently, practices such as limiting purchases to a predetermined budget or restricting purchases to explicit needs may reduce the impact of promotional activities on purchasing behavior.

Although previous studies have demonstrated that promotions and advertising messages can directly trigger impulsive purchases or weaken self-control (Moser, 2020), the present findings indicate that self-control moderates this relationship by activating reflective processes that counteract the initial impulse (Xu et al., 2020). This finding highlights that the dual-system model operates through parallel processes (De Neys, 2021; Li et al., 2021b).

Intrinsic motivations demonstrated a significant effect related to impulsive purchasing (H4), as reported by Erdem et al. (2021), Lee (2018), and Sritanakorn & Nuangjamnong (2021), who concluded that identity construction and the pursuit of authenticity influence purchasing decisions. Therefore, individuals with higher levels of intrinsic motivation may be more likely to engage in impulsive buying, particularly when products are acquired to enhance self-esteem, image, and status (Wicklund & Gollwitzer, 1982), or to remain aligned with current trends (Rana & Malik, 2023). Similar behavior has also been associated with hedonic and materialistic motivations (Lavuri, 2023).

In contrast, the absence of a relationship between intrinsic motivations and self-control (H3) demonstrates that self-expression and pleasure may hinder the activation of control mechanisms. This finding contradicts the results reported by Wang et al. (2024), who identified self-control as a mechanism linking materialism with the reduction of risk behaviors. Likewise, Roberts and Manolis (2012) suggested that consumers experiencing conflicting desires may become more susceptible to impulsive purchasing behavior.

Extrinsic motivation was found to influence self-control (H5), indicating that social factors trigger regulatory behaviors. External factors such as social pressures or cultural norms may influence a person's ability to regulate and resist impulsive buying temptations and likely affect individuals' ability to control their buying impulses (Fares et al., 2023; Nguyen & Ha, 2021).

As a result, self-control demonstrated a moderating effect on impulsive purchasing (H7); however, its impact was limited and appeared to depend on both social stimuli and personal motivations. Although self-control reduces impulsive behavior, its effect does not completely suppress such conduct, and consumers may rationalize their decisions. Similar research conducted in other contexts identifies self-control as a negative moderating variable in impulsive purchasing (Luo et al., 2018; Melati et al., 2024; Mittal et al., 2015; Pradipto et al., 2016; Ramadan et al., 2021; Roberts & Manolis, 2012). Nevertheless, although it acts negatively, fast-fashion purchasing behavior increases impulsive levels, which are difficult to resist.

Iyer et al. (2020) examined the mediating effects of self-control between impulsive buying, marketing stimuli, and both internal and external motivations through a meta-analysis. The authors found consistent results regarding the positive influence of stimuli on impulsive buying regardless of self-control mediation. However, they also identified an indirect effect between self-control and impulsive buying.

Finally, no direct evidence was found to support the hypothesis that extrinsic motivations influence impulsive behavior (H6), indicating that social and cultural pressures do not always promote the impulsive purchase of clothing. These results may appear contradictory because Amaral and Djuang (2023) identified a relationship between social aspects and purchase intention but isolated the relationship between extrinsic motivations and impulsive buying, while Chowdhury (2020) established this relationship but did not consider the mediating effect of self-control in garment purchasing.

5.1 Theoretical contributions

The main contribution of this research highlights that self-control exerts a partial mediation between marketing stimuli, motivations (both intrinsic and extrinsic), and impulsive purchasing behavior. This finding emphasizes that consumers regulate their clothing purchases in a context where impulsive buying is the predominant behavior. This dynamic demonstrates the coexistence of both intuitive and analytical behavior, suggesting that consumer behavior in this industry operates under the parameters of the dual-system model.

The acceptance that, in fast-fashion purchasing behavior, some sources of motivation are processed by the control system while others are not suggests that self-control is not an immutable trait, but rather a mechanism that can be modulated by external factors. However, its moderating effect is suppressed when behavior is driven by motives related to identity and self-expression.

Several aspects demonstrate this modulation process. On the one hand, self-control operates when individuals evaluate marketing stimuli and the social environment before deciding to purchase. On the other hand, self-control mechanisms appear to be less effective when personal motivations —such as the desire for authenticity or the pleasure associated with purchasing clothing— become predominant.

5.2 Limits and future directions

This research does not discriminate between subjects. Future research may establish relationships between gender, degrees of propensity for impulsive buying, and the effectiveness of control mechanisms to determine whether these mechanisms are triggered by the factors described above.

Although the consumer profiles included in this research extend beyond student samples, demographic, cultural, and economic limitations remain. These factors may affect the generalization of the results. Future research could therefore develop intercultural studies across different Latin American countries and compare consumer behavior between developed and developing economies to determine whether levels of self-control (high, medium, low) affect the interaction between the impulse and stimulus systems in fast fashion.

5. Conclusions

This research contributes to a deeper understanding of how self-control mediates the relationship between marketing stimuli, motivations, and impulsive purchasing behavior in the fast-fashion industry. The findings indicate that self-control is not a fixed or immutable trait, but rather a mechanism influenced and modulated by external factors. The study emphasizes the complexity of consumer behavior in fast fashion, demonstrating the ongoing interplay between impulsive and reflective processes in purchasing decisions.

The results provide further insight into the operation of the dual-system model in fast-fashion purchasing, specifically regarding the interaction between control mechanisms and impulsive behavior. The self-control system partially moderates purchasing behavior when consumers are influenced by advertising strategies or social motivations, demonstrating a reflective process. However, this moderating effect appears to weaken when clothing purchases are driven primarily by personal interests, demonstrating an impulsive process. This dynamic highlights the coexistence of both intuitive and analytical systems within consumer behavior.

Intrinsic motivations were found to directly influence impulsive behavior, suggesting that consumers with higher levels of intrinsic motivation may be less likely to exercise self-control in certain purchasing situations. Personal desires related to authenticity and pleasure correspond with impulsiveness in purchases that are not based on explicit needs. This impulsiveness is reflected in emotionally driven behaviors and openness to change, such as the need to buy something, purchasing due to seasonal changes or brand novelties, and the pursuit of immediate gratification or the desire to seize momentary opportunities.

Extrinsic motivation, such as social pressure and cultural norms, may also influence individuals' ability to control their buying impulses. However, these motivations did not have a direct relationship with impulsive buying, suggesting that social and cultural motives do not always drive impulsive clothing purchases. Nevertheless, the indirect effect between extrinsic motivation and impulsive buying, mediated by the self-control system, facilitates impulsive behavior. This highlights the need for further research on whether self-control reinforces social motivations as a pretext for acting impulsively.

Finally, the findings confirm that consumer behavior in this scenario is strongly driven by promotions, social media advertising, and seasonal campaigns, but it is moderated when consumers activate reflective processes in their purchase decisions, thereby regulating impulsive behavior. The presence of self-control affects marketing efforts and their impact on impulsive buying by diminishing such behavior, as it weakens the relationship. In the absence of such mediation, impulsive purchasing behavior tends to increase significantly.

References

Aguiar Castillo, C. L. (2020). Contribución al estudio del impacto de la gamificación en el sector turístico: promoción de comportamientos proambientales [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria].

Ahmad, M. B., Ali, H. F., Malik, M. S., Humayun, A. A., & Ahmad, S. (2019). Factors affecting impulsive buying behavior with mediating role of positive mood: An empirical study. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 8(1), 17-35.

Al Mutanafisa, T., & Retnaningsih, R. (2021). The effect of sales promotion and knowledge on impulsive buying of online platform consumers. Journal of Consumer Sciences, 6(1), 77-91. https://doi.org/10.29244/jcs.6.1.77-91

Amaral, M. A. L., & Djuang, G. (2023). Relationship Between Social Influence, Shopping Lifestyle, and Impulsive Buying on Purchase Intention of Preloved Products. KINERJA, 27(1), 91-106.

Anand, S., & Kaur, H. (2018). Fashion self-congruity: scale development and validation. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 22(2), 158-175. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-05-2017-0048

Anggara, A. K. D., Ratnasari, R. T., & Osman, I. (2023). How store attribute affects customer experience, brand love and brand loyalty. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 14(11), 2980-3006. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-01-2022-0002

Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327

Bailey, K., Basu, A., & Sharma, S. (2022). The environmental impacts of fast-fashion on water quality: a systematic review. Water, 14(7), 1073. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14071073

Ballantine, P. W., Parsons, A., & Comeskey, K. (2015). A conceptual model of the holistic effects of atmospheric cues in fashion retailing. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 43(6), 503-517. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-02-2014-0015

Binet, F., Coste-Manière, I., Decombes, C., Grasselli, Y., Ouedermi, D., & Ramchandani, M. (2019). Fast Fashion and Sustainable Consumption. En S. Muthu (Ed.), Fast Fashion, Fashion Brands and Sustainable Consumption. Textile Science and Clothing Technology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1268-7_2

Bishnoi, S. K., & Guru, R. (2023). Study on effect of consumer age, family income and family size on fast-fashion consumption pattern. Tekstilec, 148-159. https://doi.org/10.14502/tekstilec.66.2022100

Boardman, R., Parker-Strak, R., & Henninger, C. E. (2020). Fashion buying and merchandising: The fashion buyer in a digital society. Routledge.

Burton, J., Gollins, J., McNeely, L., & Walls, D. (2018). Revisiting the relationship between ad frequency and purchase intentions. Journal of Advertising Research, 59, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-2018-031

Buzzo, A., & Abreu, M. J. (2019). Fast fashion, fashion brands and sustainable consumption. En S. Muthu (Ed.), Fast Fashion, Fashion Brands and Sustainable Consumption (Textile Science and Clothing Technology series). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1268-7_1

Camargo, L. R., Pereira, S. C. F., & Scarpin, M. R. S. (2020). Fast and ultra-fast-fashion supply chain management: An exploratory research. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 48(6), 537–553. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2019-0133

Centobelli, P., Abbate, S., Nadeem, S. P., & Garza-Reyes, J. A. (2022). Slowing the fast-fashion industry: An all-round perspective. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 100684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2022.100684

Chen, H. Y. (2021). The effect of fast-fashion brand awareness on purchase intention: a study of fashion clothing. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 14(2).

Chowdhury, F. (2020). The impact of socio-cultural factors in impulse purchasing behavior of clothes in Bangladesh. Journal of Business Administration, 41, 15–28.

Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cook, S. C., & Yurchisin, J. (2017). Fast fashion environments: consumer’s heaven or retailer’s nightmare? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 45(2), 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-03-2016-0027

Coskun, M., Gupta, S., & Burnaz, S. (2020). Store disorderliness effect: shoppers' competitive behaviors in a fast-fashion retail store. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 48(7), 763-779. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-06-2019-0193

De Neys, W. (2021). On dual-and single-process models of thinking. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1412-1427. https://hal.science/hal-03025509v1

Dhewi, T. S., & Azzahra, H. F. (2023). Unlocking impulse buying: The role of self-control, shopping lifestyle, and age in purchase decisions at Miniso. En BISTIC Business Innovation Sustainability and Technology International Conference (BISTIC 2023) (pp. 78-86). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-302-3_11

Ding, Y., Wan, X., Lu, G., Huang, H., Liang, Y., Yu, J., & Chen, C. (2022). The associations between smartphone addiction and self-esteem, self-control, and social support among Chinese adolescents: a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1029323. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1029323

Efendi, R., Indartono, S., & Sukidjo, S. (2019). The mediation of economic literacy on the effect of self-control on impulsive buying behavior moderated by peers. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 9(3), 98.

Erdem, A., & Yılmaz, E. S. (2021). Investigation of hedonic shopping motivation effective in impulse buying behavior of female consumers on Instagram. Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi, 16(64), 1605-1623. https://doi.org/10.19168/jyasar.892799

Fares, N., Lloret, J., Kumar, V., & Frederico, G. F. (2023). Factors affecting omnichannel buying online and return in store: Evidence from fast-fashion retail. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 36(4), 952-978. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-01-2022-0020

Fariana, R. E., Surindra, B., & Arifin, Z. (2021). The influence of financial literacy, lifestyle and self-control on the consumption behavior of economic education students. International Journal of Research and Review, 8(8), 496-503. https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20210867

Farmer, A., Breazeale, M., Stevens, J. L., & Waites, S. F. (2017). Eat green, get lean: Promoting sustainability reduces consumption. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36(2), 299–312. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.16.087

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

Francke, A. E., & Carrete, L. (2023). Consumer self-regulation: Looking back to look forward. A systematic literature review. Journal of Business Research, 157, 113461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113461

Gawior, B., Polasik, M., & del Olmo, J. L. (2022). Credit card use, hedonic motivations, and impulse buying behavior in fast-fashion physical stores during COVID-19: The sustainability paradox. Sustainability, 14(7), 4133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074133

Gong, X., & Jiang, X. (2023). Understanding consumer impulse buying in livestreaming commerce: The product involvement perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1104349. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1104349

Gordon‐Wilson, S. (2022). Consumption practices during the COVID‐19 crisis. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 46(2), 575-588. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12701

Goschke, T., & Job, V. (2023). The willpower paradox: Possible and impossible conceptions of self-control. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(6), 1339-1367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691622114615

Goyal, K., Kumar, S., Xiao, J. J., & Colombage, S. (2022). The psychological antecedents of personal financial management behavior: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 40(7), 1413-1451. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-02-2022-0088

Gupta, S., & Gentry, J. (2018). Evaluating fast-fashion: Fast fashion and consumer behavior. En Eco-friendly and Fair (pp. 15-23).

Hajjar, S. T. (2018). Statistical analysis: Internal-consistency reliability and construct validity. International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods, 6(1), 27-38.

Halfmann, A. (2021). Digging deeper into the reasons for self-control failure: Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations to use mobile communication shape self-control processes. Mass Communication and Society, 24(6), 843-866. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2021.1968437

Hashmi, H. B. A., Shu, C., & Haider, S. W. (2020). Moderating effect of hedonism on store environment–impulse buying nexus. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 48(5), 465-483. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-09-2019-0312

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Hinton, P., Hinton, P. R., McMurray, I., & Brownlow, C. (2004). SPSS explained. Routledge.

Horváth, C., Büttner, O. B., Belei, N., & Adıgüzel, F. (2015). Balancing the balance: Self-control mechanisms and compulsive buying. Journal of Economic Psychology, 49, 120-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2015.05.004

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Hsu, C. L. (2022). Applying cognitive evaluation theory to analyze the impact of gamification mechanics on user engagement in resource recycling. Information & Management, 59(2), 103602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2022.103602

Iyer, G. R., Blut, M., Xiao, S. H., & Grewal, D. (2020). Impulse buying: A meta-analytic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48, 384-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00670-w

Jin, B., Jung, H., Matthews, D. R., & Gupta, M. (2012). Fast fashion business model: What, why and how? En T.-M. Choi (Ed.), Fashion Supply Chain Management: Industry and Business Analysis (pp. 193–211). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-756-2.ch011

Kaczorowska-Spychalska, D. (2018). Shaping consumer behavior in the fashion industry by interactive communication. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe, 26(6), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0012.1307

Kaur, S., & Singh, P. (2018). Compulsive buying behavior in relation to self-control and generalized self-efficacy among young professionals. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 8(3), 404-416.

Kollat, D. T., & Willett, R. P. (1967). Customer impulse purchasing behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 4(1), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243767004001

Kumar, S., & Sadarangani, P. H. (2018). Study of shopping motivation and buying behavior among generation Y in India. En 11th Global Business Conference, Manila.

Lavuri, R., Jaiswal, D., & Thaichon, P. (2022). Extrinsic and intrinsic motives: Panic buying and impulsive buying during a pandemic. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 51(2), 190-204. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-01-2022-0010

Lavuri, R. (2023). Intrinsic factors affecting online impulsive shopping during the COVID-19 in emerging markets. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 18(4), 958–977. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-12-2020-1530

Lee, H. (2018). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations affecting impulse-buying tendency in mobile shopping. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46(4), 683-694. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6693

Lee, J. I., Ren, T., & Park, J. (2021). Investigating travelers’ multi-impulse buying behavior in airport duty-free shopping for Chinese travelers: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Journal of Air Transport Management, 92, 102023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102023

Lee, Y. Y., Gan, C. L., & Liew, T. W. (2023). Rationality and impulse buying: Is your emotion a part of the equation? Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 12, 100337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2023.100337

Li, S., Ren, P., Chiu, M. M., Wang, C., & Lei, H. (2021). The relationship between self-control and internet addiction among students: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 735755. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.735755

Li, X., Zhou, Y., Wong, Y. D., Wang, X., & Yuen, K. F. (2021). What influences panic buying behavior? A model based on dual-system theory and stimulus-organism-response framework. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 64, 102484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102484

Long, X., & Nasiry, J. (2022). Sustainability in the fast-fashion industry. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 24(3), 1276-1293. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2021.1054

Luo, S., Gu, B., Wang, X., & Zhou, Z. (2018, April). Online compulsive buying behavior: The mediating role of self-control and negative emotions. En Proceedings of the 2018 1st International Conference on Internet and e-Business (pp. 65-69). https://doi.org/10.1145/3230348.3230397

Malone, K., Stewart, S. D., Wilson, J., & Korsching, P. F. (2010). Perceptions of financial well-being among American women in diverse families. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 31, 63-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-009-9176-5

Melati, I., Purwanto, B. M., Rizqiyati, M., Widyaningsih, Y. A., & Sutikno, B. (2024). The difference between consistent and inconsistent planned impulse buying based on external stimulus and virtual cart use. Binus Business Review, 15(3), 287-302. https://doi.org/10.21512/bbr.v15i3.11031

Otero-López, J. M., & Villardefrancos, E. (2015). Compulsive buying and life aspirations: An analysis of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 166-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.013

Mittal, S., Sondhi, N., & Chawla, D. (2015). Impulse buying behavior: An emerging market perspective. International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, 11(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJICBM.2015.070246

Moayery, M., Narvaiza Cantín, L., & Gibaja Martíns, J. J. (2019a). Reflective and impulsive predictors of unhealthy snack impulse buying. Review of Marketing Science, 16(1), 49-84. https://doi.org/10.1515/roms-2018-0038

Moayery, M., Cantín, L. N., & Martíns, J. J. G. (2019b). How does self-control operate? A focus on impulse buying. Papeles del Psicólogo, 40(2), 149-156. https://doi.org/10.23923/pap.psicol2019.2893

Moser, C. (2020). Impulse buying: Designing for self-control with e-commerce [Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan].

Müller, A., Mitchell, J. E., & de Zwaan, M. (2015). Compulsive buying. The American Journal on Addictions, 24(2), 132-137. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajad.12111

Nakalinda, A. (2018). Factors influencing consumer buying behavior of fast fashion in the UK. SSRN, 3791377. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3791377

Nawi, F. A. M., Tambi, A. M. A., Samat, M. F., & Mustapha, W. M. W. (2020). A review on the internal consistency of a scale: The empirical example of the influence of human capital investment on Malcolm Baldrige quality principles in TVET institutions. Asian People Journal (APJ), 3(1), 19-29. https://doi.org/10.37231/apj.2020.3.1.121

Nguyen, S., & Ha, T. (2021). Predictors of fast-fashion-oriented impulse buying: The case of Vietnamese millennials. Management Science Letters, 11(7), 2187–2196. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2021.3.007

Niinimäki, K., Peters, G., Dahlbo, H., Perry, P., Rissanen, T., & Gwilt, A. (2020). The environmental price of fast fashion. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 1(4), 189-200. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0054-x

Nunes, M. P., & da Silveira, G. A. (2016). Análise das motivações do consumidor de fast fashion. Revista de Administração IMED, 6(1), 56-71. https://doi.org/10.18256/2237-7956/raimed.v6n1p56-71

Pop, R. A., Hlédik, E., & Dabija, D. C. (2023). Predicting consumers' purchase intention through fast-fashion mobile apps: The mediating role of attitude and the moderating role of COVID-19. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 186, 122111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122111

Pradipto, Y. D., Winata, C., Murti, K., & Azizah, A. (2016). Think again before you buy: The relationship between self-regulation and impulsive buying behaviors among Jakarta young adults. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 222, 177-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.209

Rahman, M. S., Hossain, M. A., Hoque, M. T., Rushan, M. R. I., & Rahman, M. I. (2021). Millennials’ purchasing behavior toward fashion clothing brands: Influence of brand awareness and brand schematicity. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 25(1), 153-183. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-07-2019-0137

Ramadan, Z., Farah, M. F., & Bou Saada, R. (2021). Fooled in the relationship: How Amazon Prime members' sense of self-control counter-intuitively reinforces impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 20(6), 1497-1507. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1960

Rana, M. I., & Malik, S. Z. (2023). Determinants of compulsive buying behavior: Psychosomatic-social analysis of maladaptive spending. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 7(1), 204-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.10.004

Redine, A., Deshpande, S., Jebarajakirthy, C., & Surachartkumtonkun, J. (2023). Impulse buying: A systematic literature review and future research directions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 47(1), 3-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12862

Reichart, E., & Drew, D. (2019). By the numbers: The economic, social and environmental impacts of fast fashion.

Rheinberg, F., & Engeser, S. (2018). Intrinsic motivation and flow. En Motivation and Action (pp. 579-622). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65094-4_14

Roberts, J. A., & Manolis, C. (2012). Cooking up a recipe for self-control: The three ingredients of self-control and its impact on impulse buying. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 20(2), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679200204

Rodrigues, R. I., Lopes, P., & Varela, M. (2021). Factors affecting impulse buying behavior of consumers. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 697080. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.697080

Roozen, I., & Raedts, M. (2020). The power of negative publicity on the fast-fashion industry. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 11(4), 380-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1798802

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

Said, T. (2018). Statistical analysis: Internal-consistency reliability and construct validity. European Centre for Research Training and Development UK, 6(1), 27-38.

Santini, F. D. O., Ladeira, W. J., Vieira, V. A., Araujo, C. F., & Sampaio, C. H. (2019). Antecedents and consequences of impulse buying: A meta-analytic study. RAUSP Management Journal, 54, 178-204. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-07-2018-0037

Sapper, S. L. (2018). Consumo: An engrenagem do fast fashion. DAPesquisa, 6(8), 687-703. https://doi.org/10.5965/1808312906082011687

Sari, E. J., & Hanifah, H. (2018). Factors affecting consumers behavior of Coventry University students towards fast-fashion industry. En First Padang International Conference on Economics Education, Economics, Business and Management, Accounting and Entrepreneurship (PICEEBA 2018) (pp. 449-457). Atlantis Press.

Shao, P., & Lassleben, H. (2021). Determinants of consumers’ willingness to participate in fast-fashion brands’ used clothes recycling plans in an omnichannel retail environment. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(7), 3340-3355. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16070181

Siswanti, I., & Halida, A. M. (2020). Financial knowledge, financial attitude, and financial management behavior: Self-control as mediating. The International Journal of Accounting and Business Society, 28(1), 105-132.

Sohn, Y. S., & Ko, M. T. (2021). The impact of planned vs. unplanned purchases on subsequent purchase decision making in sequential buying situations. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 59, 102419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102419

Song, B. L., Safari, M., & Mansori, S. (2016). The marketing stimuli factors influencing consumers’ attitudes to purchase organic food. International Journal of Business and Management, 11(10).

Sritanakorn, M., & Nuangjamnong, C. (2021). The factors affecting consumer traits, online marketing tools in impulsive buying behavior of online fashion stores, Bangkok, Thailand. AU-GSB e-Journal, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14456/augsbejr.2021.1

Sun, J., Li, T., & Sun, S. (2024). Factors affecting users' impulse purchases in online group buying: Online consumer reviews, countdowns and self-control. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 36(1), 224-240. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-07-2022-0560

Syahidah, I. N., & Suryawati, S. (2023). Hubungan perilaku self-control karyawan dengan keputusan pembelian produk fast fashion. Practice of Fashion and Textile Education Journal, 3(1), 31-39.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Pearson Education Inc.

Taşkın, E., & Bozbay, Z. (2023). The role of store environment cues on store personality and store image. Market-Tržište, 35(1), 23-40. https://doi.org/10.22598/mt/2023.35.1.23

Victoria, C., Diets, J. T., Kalyana, V., & Manaf, P. A. (2021). The effect of sales promotion, self-control, and hedonism on impulsive buying in e-commerce platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic. En 2021 International Conference on Informatics, Multimedia, Cyber and Information System (ICIMCIS) (pp. 330–336). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIMCIS53775.2021.969931

Wang, M., Xu, Q., He, N., Zhang, L., & Zhang, X. (2024). Materialism and problematic social network sites use among Chinese adolescents: The mediating role of self-esteem and self-control. Psychological Reports, 127(2), 668-687. https://doi.org/10.1177/003329412211302

Watson, S. J., & Milfont, T. L. (2017). A short-term longitudinal examination of the associations between self-control, delay of gratification and temporal considerations. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 57-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.023

Wicklund, R. A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2013). Symbolic self completion. Routledge.

Wim, J., Katrien, W., Patrick, D. P., & Patrick, V. K. (2008). Marketing research with SPSS. Prentice Hall; Pearson Education.

Wu, L., Chiu, M. L., & Chen, K. W. (2020). Defining the determinants of online impulse buying through a shopping process integrating perceived risk, expectation-confirmation model, and flow theory issues. International Journal of Information Management, 52, 102099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102099

Xiao, Y., Liu, M., & Wu, B. (2023). The effect of social appearance anxiety on the online impulse purchases of fashionable outfits among female college students during pandemic periods: The mediating role of self-control and the moderating role of subjective socioeconomic status. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 303-318. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S392414

Xu, H., Zhang, K. Z., & Zhao, S. J. (2020). A dual systems model of online impulse buying. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(5), 845-861. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-04-2019-0214

Yana, A. G. A., Rusdhi, H. A., & Wibowo, M. A. (2015). Analysis of factors affecting design changes in construction projects with Partial Least Square (PLS). Procedia Engineering, 125, 40-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.11.007

Yoon, N., Lee, H. K., & Choo, H. J. (2020). Fast fashion avoidance beliefs and anti-consumption behaviors: The cases of Korea and Spain. Sustainability, 12(17), 6907. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176907

Yu, L., Gao, J., Kong, Y., & Huang, L. (2024). Impact of perceived scarcity on delay of gratification: Mediation effects of self-efficacy and self-control. Current Psychology, 43(3), 2899-2907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04455-x

Zhang, X., & Dong, F. (2020). Why do consumers make green purchase decisions? Insights from a systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6607. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186607

Zhang, B., Zhang, Y., & Zhou, P. (2021). Consumer attitude towards sustainability of fast-fashion products in the UK. Sustainability, 13(4), 1646. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041646

Zheng, Y., & Alba, J. W. (2021). Consumer self-control and the biological sciences: Implications for marketing stakeholders. Journal of Marketing, 85(4), 105-122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920983271

Este artículo se publica bajo los términos de la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-No Comercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).