The Market Disruption Path of Green-Oriented Trajectory-Transformed Technology Innovation: A Study of Consumer Lifestyles during the “Chasm” in China’s Electric Vehicle Market

Abstract

Green-oriented trajectory-transformed technology (GTTT) innovation is a strategic path that leads simultaneously to a comprehensive green transformation of national economic and social development and a disruption of corporate competition. However, this type of innovation is nonmarket-oriented and naturally results in a deeper and wider “chasm” more than any market-oriented innovation between the early market and the mass market, which is difficult to bridge; this leads to theoretical and practical difficulties with respect to the formulation of market strategies. To bridge such a “chasm”, this paper explores the paths that facilitate a market launch strategy that is capable of bridging the market “chasm”. The paper identifies electric vehicles as an example of a GTTT product, based on the hierarchical characteristic model, investigates the impact of lifestyle on consumers’ purchase intention, examines the mediating effect of interpersonal influence susceptibilities, uses data collected via consumer questionnaires to test the research model, and thereby identifies the various consumer groups that are present during the “chasm” period and the characteristics they exhibit. The results show that fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, environmental consciousness, and informational interpersonal influence are the market strategy paths that lead to market disruption, and fashion leaders and price-conscious environmentalists are the key consumer groups during the “chasm” period.

1. Introduction

The term green-oriented trajectory-transformed technology (GTTT) innovation products refers to new products that offer a new technological trajectory aimed at enhancing social utility more than consumer utility, for example, by encouraging an ecology-minded society and sustainable development [1]. These new products overlap with a technological trajectory transformation from the industry’s original technology track to a new technology track that features significantly different core technologies, changes in market trajectory with respect to the industry’s market paradigm, mainstream market demand and mainstream consumer behavior, and a product utility-oriented trajectory shift from a focus on the enhancement of consumer utility to an emphasis on the improvement of social utility over consumer utility (often referred to as a social or green orientation) [1]. As a result of this trio of track changes, GTTT can allow multiple strategic goals to be achieved simultaneously. Such goals include the comprehensive green transformation of national economic and social development, high-quality development, industrial transformation, upgrading and green transformation, and the competitive disruption of enterprises. However, compared to new market-dominant products, GTTT products suffer from competitive disadvantages caused by declining consumer utility before they can subvert the competitive position of new market-dominant products. Accordingly, GTTT products are nonmarket-oriented rather than market-oriented and are thus unpopular with the mainstream market; this leads to conflicts with mainstream marketing theory, which emphasizes a market orientation as its theoretical foundation. As such, GTTT products present theoretical dilemmas and practical difficulties with respect to the formulation of market strategies, and they face tremendous risks in the market [2]. However, few studies have explored the ways in which GTTT products can disrupt the competitive position of market-dominant products.

Moore [3] noted that for discontinuous technology innovation products, a “deep and wide chasm” emerges between early adopters and the early public [4], and many new products are withdrawn from the market because they cannot successfully cross this “chasm”. The “chasm” period refers specifically to the transition period during which the early market for a new product diffuses into the mainstream market [5]. This transition period takes a long time to cross because of the significant differences in the motivation of consumers in early and mainstream markets to adopt the innovation [5]. GTTT products are nonmarket-oriented discontinuous products, and the “chasm” is more pronounced and more difficult to cross in this case than in the case of market-oriented discontinuous technology innovations. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the determinants of consumers’ purchase intention during the “chasm” period and to reveal the mechanisms by which these determinants influence purchase intention to provide a basis for formulating early-market strategies for GTTT products.

Purchase intention refers to a consumer’s motivation to engage in purchase behavior [6]. The literature has shown that purchase intention is the most reliable tool for measuring purchasing behavior and that it can effectively predict consumer demand, serving as the foundation for the development of market strategies [7]. To date, for the study of factors influencing consumers’ purchase intention regarding new products, the rational person model, which is based on the economic perspective, and the attitude behavior model, which is based on the social psychology perspective, have been widely influential [8,9,10]. However, these models involve only individual consumer factors and ignore the key situational fact that people have a social nature; as such, these models rarely consider the influence of other people in society on consumers [11,12]. In contrast, studies from the sociological perspective focus on the influence of other people on consumer behavior during social interactions, in addition to individual factors [13]. Because the complex characteristics of GTTT products—technological change of track, market change of track, and nonmarket-oriented—have received insufficient academic attention, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the mechanisms of positive purchase intention formation. Thus, the formation of positive purchase intention may be more influenced by interpersonal interaction processes than other types of new products. Therefore, this paper attempts to investigate the issue of purchase intention with regard to GTTT products from a sociological perspective.

Despite the important influence of lifestyle on consumer purchase decisions from a sociological perspective, and despite the fact that the influence of lifestyle on purchase intentions regarding market-oriented technological innovation products has been frequently studied in academia [14,15,16,17], few studies have examined the influence of lifestyle on the nonmarket-oriented influences on purchase intention regarding products related to technological innovation. Lifestyle, which encompasses individual activities, interests, and attitudes, is a multidimensional construct that can provide additional information to help us understand the complex process by which consumers make purchase decisions [14,18,19], and it can explain the heterogeneity among consumers’ purchasing motives resulting from different preferences and different self-identities on the part of consumers [20]. Since GTTT is a nonmarket-oriented discontinuous technology innovation product, it leads to a more complex process of decision-making and often inconsistent purchase motives for consumers compared to continuous technology innovation products. GTTT products also offer new performance-related characteristics, resulting in technological track changes that market-dominant new products do not have. Thus, GTTT products have multiple characteristics that are closely related to consumers’ self-identities. Therefore, by highlighting the influence of different lifestyle dimensions on purchase intention regarding GTTT products, this study has the potential to reveal the path by which GTTT products subvert the competitive position of new market-dominant products and to provide a theoretical basis for the formulation of market strategies for GTTT products.

Axsen et al. [20] argued that the lifestyles, self-identities, and consumption behaviors of individuals interact via the process of social interaction. Meanwhile, it has been noted in the literature that interpersonal influence is the most prevalent form of social interaction, and it includes the two types of normative and informational interpersonal influences. Consumers’ sensitivity to these two types of influence affects their final consumption decision [21,22,23]. Since lifestyle represents consumers’ self-identity—which can be continuously reflected, constructed, and maintained—little research has investigated whether and how different dimensions of consumers’ lifestyles can reflect, construct, or maintain consumers’ self-identity by influencing both types of interpersonal influence susceptibility and thus new GTTT product purchase intention. Moreover, since GTTT products are novel in the market, and since consumers lack a frame of reference for such products, it is worth exploring target consumer groups and the typical characteristics of GTTT products, based on consumers’ performance on different lifestyle dimensions, to provide a basis for decision-making regarding targeted marketing strategies.

Accordingly, this paper examines the influence of different lifestyle dimensions on consumers’ purchase intention during the “chasm” period associated with GTTT products as well as the mediating roles of normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility in the relationship between different dimensions of consumers’ lifestyles and their purchase intentions regarding GTTT products; identifies the target consumers of GTTT products and their typical characteristics; and provides a theoretical basis for formulating a market launch strategy that is not only conducive to market launch but also to bridging the “chasm” and thereby achieving market disruption. The contributions of this paper are mainly in the following five areas.

First, this paper proposes a strategic path to achieve the competitive position of GTTT products disrupting the dominant products in the market from the perspective of consumer lifestyles, which not only facilitates the understanding of the formation of positive purchase intentions for GTTT products from multiple dimensions of consumer lifestyles but also explains that consumers have multiple complex motives in purchasing GTTT products [20]. Second, this paper contributes to the study of consumer lifestyles. Few previous studies have used consumer lifestyles in the study of GTTT products [15,16,18,19,24], and this paper contributes by enriching the understanding of consumer lifestyles in the consumer behavior field. Third, this paper identifies the mechanisms by which different dimensions of consumer lifestyles influence the formation of GTTT new product purchase intention, which helps us to understand how different dimensions of consumer lifestyles influence the formation of new GTTT product purchase intention. Fourth, this paper expands the research context of interpersonal influence susceptibility. The previous studies have mainly used interpersonal influence susceptibility in contexts such as online shopping [25,26] and impulse buying contexts [27], etc. This paper applies the hierarchical characteristics model to investigate the important role of interpersonal influence susceptibility in the new GTTT product context, thereby expanding the application context of interpersonal influence susceptibility. Fifth, this paper contributes to the segmentation of the target market for the GTTT products. Through cluster analysis, this paper finds that fashion leaders and price-conscious environmentalists are the most likely target consumer groups to achieve market launch for the GTTT products.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the literature review and the process of developing the hypotheses tested, and it ultimately presents our research model. Section 3 presents the research methodology followed by this paper, including the selection of the case sample, the data collection process, the measurement of variables, and the basic characteristics of the data. Section 4 presents the results of the data analysis. Section 5 analyzes the characteristics of consumers during the “chasm” period. Section 6 presents our discussion of the study’s results. Section 7 presents our conclusion.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses

2.1. Underpinning Theory (the Hierarchical Trait Model)

According to Joachimsthaler and Lastovicka’s [28] explanation of the theoretical content of the hierarchical trait model, the stable traits of individuals first influence the traits of individuals who are prone to change with the context and then further influence the specific behaviors of individuals in some specific contexts. The theory focuses on the fact that the different characteristics of individuals are hierarchical. Many studies have shown that the hierarchical trait model theory can be used to explain the different consumption behaviors of individuals. For example, in the field of consumer behavior, Batra et al. [29] analyzed the influence of different types of individual values on the importance of different attributes of products and concluded that values are more stable individual characteristics of individuals, that consumers’ susceptibility to normative interpersonal influences is a characteristic that tends to change with context, and that values will first influence individuals’ susceptibility to normative interpersonal influences and then influence individuals’ perceptions of the importance of different attributes of products. In the field of investment transactions, Hoffmann and Broekhuizen [22] analyzed the effects of individuals’ level of knowledge in the investment field, the level of psychosocial risk, and the degree of social need on the frequency of investment transactions, and they concluded that when individuals lack relevant investment knowledge, when they perceive investment as a risky activity, and when they have a strong social need, they increase their knowledge of information access and thus increase the frequency of transactions.

From the above studies, it is clear that there is a hierarchy of different consumer characteristics. According to existing studies, consumers’ lifestyles are more stable characteristics [17,18], and consumers’ susceptibility to normative interpersonal influences and susceptibility to informational interpersonal influences are characteristics that easily change with context [30,31,32]. Therefore, based on the hierarchical trait theory model, this paper attempts to analyze the relationship between consumers’ lifestyles and GTTT product purchase intention, and the mediating role of consumers’ susceptibility to two types of interpersonal influences.

2.2. Different Lifestyle Dimensions

Due to the rich connotations of the notion of lifestyle, scholars believe that, in conducting research, appropriate lifestyle dimensions must be selected in different contexts. Given that academics have not yet been able to propose lifestyle dimensions that are suitable for the new GTTT product scenario, academic research concerning novel green products and new technology-based products [14,15,19,20] can provide clues that allow us to propose lifestyle dimensions that are suitable for the GTTT products referenced by this study, since GTTT products are nonmarket-oriented discontinuous technological innovation products. In the research concerning novel green products and new technology-based products, scholars have researched and proposed dimensions, such as fashion consciousness, entertainment and leisure consciousness, network preference, leadership consciousness, technology orientation, price consciousness, nostalgia consciousness, and environmental consciousness (as shown in

Table 1. Literature related to different lifestyle dimensions.

Author & Year	Products	Dimension Content
Leung (1998) [33]	Technology new products	2: fashion consciousness, entertainment consciousness
Kaynak & Kara (2001) [34]	General new products	6: fashion consciousness, adventure consciousness, perfectionism, family orientation, collectivism orientation, price consciousness
Haanpää (2007) [35]	General new products	1: environmental awareness
Kucukemiroglu et al. (2007) [36]	General new products	4: pragmatism, fashion consciousness, self-awareness, collectivism
Lee et al. (2009) [14]	Electronic high-tech products	4: fashion consciousness, entertainment orientation, internet involvement, and e-shopping preference
Chen (2011) [15]	New electronic products	4: fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, price consciousness, and nostalgia consciousness
Chen & Dong (2014) [24]	Home appliances	6: leadership and challenge, health and leisure, family orientation, face and being recognized, conservative negativity and price concern
Sheng & Gao (2016) [16]	Energy-efficient refrigerators	4: fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, price consciousness and development consciousness
Axsen et al. (2018) [20]	Electric vehicles	2: technology orientation, environmental orientation
Kropfeld et al. (2018) [37]	New green products	2: frugal consciousness, environmental consciousness
Li et al. (2019) [17]	New green products	1: frugal consciousness
Lee (2021) [18]	New green products	1: anti-consumption lifestyle
Caggiano et al. (2021) [19]	New green products	1: environmental awareness

). Since GTTT products are novelties in the market, and they exhibit the characteristics of being significantly green—contrary to mainstream demand—and high in cost, the factors that are likely to be the explanatory lifestyle dimensions in the GTTT scenario should be fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, price consciousness, and environmental consciousness. Entertainment and leisure consciousness and network preference are not connected to GTTT innovation, and they cannot be instrumental dimensions of GTTT innovation management; therefore, these notions should be excluded from this study. Nostalgia and fashion consciousness are contradictory dimensions, so nostalgia should not be chosen if fashion consciousness is chosen. Although technology orientation may also seem to be an explanatory dimension, such an orientation does not play such a role in the GTTT scenario because the strategic orientation of GTTT products does not pertain to technological novelty and sophistication but rather focuses on changing consumer behavior and enhancing social utility. Thus, this paper identifies fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, price consciousness, and environmental consciousness as explanatory dimensions of the lifestyle paradigm to explore the mechanisms and paths leading to a competitive position in which GTTT products subvert the dominant products in the market from the lifestyle perspective.

2.3. Hypotheses and Research Framework Development

2.3.1. The Influence of Different Lifestyle Dimensions on Purchase Intentions Regarding GTTT Products

Fashion consciousness refers to the extent to which individuals are fashion-conscious [38]. It is an important factor in consumers’ lifestyles that influences their consumption decisions with respect to new products [24]. Consumers who are more fashion-conscious are likely to be more innovative, more willing to take risks, and more interested in being noticed by others [14]. Studies have shown that highly fashion-conscious consumers tend to purchase sustainable products to allow them to express themselves [39]. Highly fashion-conscious consumers have a positive purchase intention with respect to high-technology products due to their perceived usefulness and ease of use [14]. GTTT products employ a core technology that is fundamentally different from the current dominant core technology in the industry, thereby changing key performance features that are generally accepted in the market for dominant products, while providing market performance-related features that the dominant new product does not offer, thus potentially meeting the needs of more fashion-conscious consumers. Therefore, consumers with high fashion consciousness are more likely to be the target consumer group for GTTT products.

Leadership consciousness refers to an individual’s sense of independence and sense of influencing others’ purchasing decisions [15]. Consumers with a strong sense of leadership usually exhibit high levels of self-confidence and the personal ability to make decisions independently. They seek to influence others’ purchase decisions via communication and tend to engage in purchase behavior that differs from the mainstream consumer group. Studies have shown that a stronger sense of leadership is conducive to consumers’ development of positive purchase intentions regarding new green products [16]. GTTT products face an imperfect consumer environment during the early stages of market entry and thus require a major shift in consumer behavior and entail higher consumption risks. Such products therefore require consumers to have a high level of self-confidence and the ability to make appropriate consumption decisions. Therefore, consumers with a strong sense of leadership are more likely to purchase GTTT products.

Price consciousness refers to the extent to which consumers are concerned about low prices [40,41]. Consumers with higher levels of price consciousness are more concerned about low prices and are thus more reluctant to purchase expensive products [42]. The research has shown that high prices are a significant influencing factor that discourages consumers from purchasing new green products [43,44]. Laroche et al. [45] found that consumers are reluctant to pay higher prices for new green products. Tran et al. [46] found that the excessive price of electric vehicles compared to fuel-based vehicles reduces early consumer purchase intentions regarding electric vehicles. GTTT products use core technologies that are fundamentally different from the currently dominant core technologies in the industry and are more expensive. Thus, these products tend to face price disadvantages early in their lifespan, thereby making price-sensitive consumers less willing to purchase GTTT products, which are more expensive.

Environmental consciousness refers to the degree to which individuals are concerned with environmental issues. It is an important antecedent variable with respect to pro-environmental behavior [47,48]. More environmentally conscious consumers usually have a stronger sense of environmentalist identity and are more likely to purchase new environmentally friendly products to demonstrate their environmentalist identity to others [49]. Research has shown that the importance of electric vehicles as a symbol of environmentalist self-identity is stronger among consumers who are concerned about climate change, thereby increasing the intention of these consumers to purchase electric vehicles [50]. GTTT products are typically novel green products that are designed to increase external environmental utility [51] more significantly than consumer utility. Therefore, environmentally conscious consumers tend to exhibit positive purchase intentions regarding GTTT products. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed.

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

Fashion consciousness positively influences purchase intention regarding GTTT products.

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

Leadership consciousness positively influences purchase intention regarding GTTT products.

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

Price consciousness negatively influences purchase intention regarding GTTT products.

Hypothesis 4 (H4).

Environmental consciousness positively influences purchase intention regarding GTTT products.

2.3.2. The Mediating Role of Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence

Interpersonal influence refers to the process by which others influence individuals’ attitudes, behaviors, etc., in a social manner; this category includes both normative interpersonal influence and informational interpersonal influence [21]. Both types of interpersonal influence exhibit differences in terms of the degree to which individuals are influenced across different consumers, i.e., individuals’ susceptibility to normative interpersonal influence (SNI) and their susceptibility to informational interpersonal influence (SII). SII differs and changes depending on the scenario [22]. Consumers’ susceptibility to normative interpersonal influence refers to their need to identify or to enhance their image in front of noteworthy others by acquiring and using various products and brands (value expression function) as well as their willingness to conform to others’ expectations with respect to their purchase decisions (utilitarian function) [21,52,53]. Consumers’ susceptibility to informational interpersonal influences refers to their tendency to learn about products and services by observing others and/or seeking information from others, thereby reflecting individuals’ tendency to accept information from others as factual evidence [21,30].

As mentioned above, lifestyles represent consumers’ self-identities, and consumers’ self-identities can be continuously reflected, constructed, or maintained [20]; thus, processes of interpersonal influence may be an important way by which consumers reflect, construct, and maintain their individual self-identities. According to the core logic of the hierarchical trait model, in the context of consumption of GTTT products, individual fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, price consciousness, and environmental consciousness represent different self-identities adopted by consumers who purchase GTTT products, and these characteristics reflect different motivations of those consumers, which are generally more stable [17,18]. In the process of interacting with others, consumers reflect, construct, or maintain these self-identities by influencing changeable normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility, which further affects individuals’ purchase intention regarding GTTT products.

Specifically, consumers who are more fashion-conscious, leadership-conscious, and environmentally conscious imply a higher need to reflect, construct, or maintain a fashionable image, thereby influencing others’ decisions, and projecting an environmentally friendly self-image [50,54], which helps to increase individuals’ susceptibility to normative interpersonal influence, thereby enhancing individuals’ identification with the purchase of new products [55] and the construction of a good self-image [23], which in turn leads to positive new product purchase intentions. Although price-sensitive consumers are more concerned with the price of products, they also desire to fit in with the collective and to gain recognition from others [56]. Such consumers also have a motivational need to enhance their personal status; thus, they also contribute to individuals’ susceptibility to normative interpersonal influences, which leads to positive new product purchase intentions. GTTT products produce social utility via technological track changes and are typically novel green products on the market [51]. Thus, such products represent an orientation toward technological and product-related utility; and, as they are highly fashionable, novel, and environmentally efficacious, they can enhance the personal image and status of consumers. Therefore, in the context of the consumption of GTTT products, consumers who are more fashion-conscious, leadership-conscious, price-conscious, and environmentally conscious can form positive purchase intentions for GTTT products by increasing their susceptibility to normative interpersonal influence.

Consumers with a stronger sense of fashion, leadership, and environmental awareness have a higher desire to make correct consumption decisions to shape individual’s self-image [57], which helps to increase ‘those individuals’ susceptibility to informational interpersonal influences and helps them obtain more information about new products to reduce the risk of decision failure [58], which in turn leads to a positive new product purchase intention. Consumers who are more price conscious have a stronger search intention to pay an appropriate price [59], which also contributes to enhancing individuals’ susceptibility to informational interpersonal influence, which leads to positive new product purchase intentions. GTTT products offer performance–functional features that new market-dominant products do not have, requiring consumers to expend more effort and time to better understand their features; to ensure correct and appropriate consumption decisions, consumers want more information about GTTT products to help in decision making [56,60]. Therefore, in new GTTT product consumption contexts, consumers who are more fashion conscious, leadership conscious, price conscious, and environmentally conscious can develop positive new GTTT product purchase intentions by increasing individual susceptibility to informational interpersonal influences. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed.

Hypothesis 5 (H5).

Individuals’ normative interpersonal influence susceptibility (H5a) and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility (H5b) mediate the relationship between fashion consciousness and purchase intention with respect to GTTT products.

Hypothesis 6 (H6).

Individuals’ normative interpersonal influence susceptibility (H6a) and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility (H6b) mediate the relationship between leadership consciousness and purchase intention with respect to GTTT products.

Hypothesis 7 (H7).

Individuals’ normative interpersonal influence susceptibility (H7a) and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility (H7b) mediate the relationship between price consciousness and purchase intention with respect to GTTT products.

Hypothesis 8 (H8).

Individuals’ normative interpersonal influence susceptibility (H8a) and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility (H8b) mediate the relationship between environmental consciousness and purchase intention with respect to GTTT products.

The research framework of this study is shown below (Figure 1).

3. Research Method

3.1. Sample

The paper identifies electric vehicles as an example of a GTTT product. Our first reason for choosing electric vehicles as a case study is that electric vehicles were typical GTTT products prior to their emergence as the dominant product in the automotive market, and electric vehicles replaced fuel power drive technology with “three electric” technology (battery, motor, and electric control), thereby changing the core technology of the automotive industry—power drive technology. Electric vehicles require consumers to charge the vehicles frequently and for prolonged periods of time, which is a significantly different consumer behavior from that associated with fuel vehicles; in addition, “mileage anxiety” leads to changes in patterns of vehicle usage. These developments in technology and consumer behavior have changed the market trajectory of the entire vehicle industry.

Second, the electric vehicle market in China from 2015 to the present provides a window of opportunity to study the GTTT “chasm” crossing strategy and the GTTT market launch strategy from the perspective of the demand for “chasm” crossing. The market for electric vehicles in China was extremely limited for many years prior to 2014, and all electric vehicle manufacturers struggled to enter the market; however, the tremendous effect of Tesla’s introduction to the Chinese market in 2014 alongside the concurrent increase in new energy vehicle subsidies led to a “blowout” with respect to electric vehicle sales in China in 2015. Since that time, sales have been increasing rapidly each year, and the market launch of electric vehicles has been achieved According to Wind database statistics, the sales of electric vehicles in China from 2011–2015 were 0.56, 1.14, 1.46, 4.50, and 247,500 units, respectively. However, in 2018, when China reduced subsidies for new electric vehicle sales, sales of such vehicles in China immediately underwent a shift from high growth to negative growth, and China was forced to increase policy support in 2020. At the end of 2016, China’s Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, and Development and Reform Commission jointly issued an announcement that central and local subsidies for all types of models would be capped at 20% of the current standard in 2019 and 2020. In fact, the subsidy decline policy was implemented in 2018. Then, in April 2020, four Chinese ministries jointly issued an announcement that the subsidy decline would be smoothed out and the subsidy withdrawal time would be extended to the end of 2022. Additionally, according to Wind database statistics, the growth rate of China’s electric vehicles from 2016–2019 was 65.25%, 59.41%, 50.87% and −1.22%, respectively). Thus, from 2015 to the present, electric vehicles in China have been unable to achieve market development through the power of the market itself, which highlights the “chasm” phenomenon.

In addition, according to data released by the China Passenger Association, China’s new energy vehicle penetration rate of 14.8% in 2021 has not yet reached 16%, and it remains removed from the mainstream market. Moore divided innovation adoption groups into early market, mainstream, and laggard markets, with early market adoption consisting of innovators and early adopters at 16%, mainstream adoption consisting of early mass and late mass at 68%, and laggard adoption at 16%. Therefore, taking the end of 2015 as a reference point, the previous period of electric vehicle development in China can be regarded as the market launch period, while the post-2015 period should be regarded as the “chasm” period of China’s electric vehicle market. Electric vehicles remain in the “chasm” crossing stage. While electric vehicles have progressed through the market launch and “chasm” crossing stages, fuel vehicles have been in the stage of mass production, and they represent new market-driven products and continuous technical innovation products. Therefore, market launch and “chasm” crossing in the context of electric vehicles represents a typical scenario for market launch and “chasm” crossing with respect to GTTT products, and the post-2015 stage of the development of China’s EV market provides a window of opportunity to study the “chasm” crossing strategy and the market launch strategies used in the context of GTTT from the perspective of demand for “chasm” crossing.

3.2. Participants and Procedure

This paper selects consumers from Guangdong, Beijing, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Henan, and Jiangsu provinces in China as the survey respondents based on the criteria of geographical representativeness and sales representativeness. According to the sales of new energy vehicles in China’s provinces and cities in the first half of 2020 announced by the China Passenger Association, the provinces or cities represented by the top sales ranking in the first and second tier cities are, Beijing in the north; Guangdong in the south; Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Zhejiang in the southeast coastal region; and Henan in the central and western cities. The data are collected from the Credamo online platform using random sampling and data collection procedures of preresearch and formal research. Credamo is a data collection company in China dedicated to providing one-stop solutions for research, data collection, modeling and analysis, and commercial applications for research and education data for teachers and students in over 1800 universities worldwide.

To ensure the quality of the questionnaire, subjects who have answered more than 10 times, with credit scores greater than 70, and a historical adoption rate of 70% and above were selected for this study on the Credamo platform. The Credamo platform set 60 points or more for participants with better credit ratings, the higher the credit rating, the higher the quality of the questionnaire. A specified question was also added to the questionnaire to allow the platform to automatically reject participants who did not answer seriously and to ensure the validity of the responses [61]. This study provided a reward of 6 (CNY) per participant to motivate participants [62].

Prior to the distribution of the formal questionnaire, the researchers conducted a survey using the Credamo platform in June 2020 to ensure the reasonability of the questionnaire design and the applicability of the scale items. A total of 255 questionnaires were distributed in the prestudy, 150 valid questionnaires were collected, and an exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the prestudy data using SPSS 24.0. Items with factor loadings of less than 0.45 were removed according to the criteria suggested by [63]. Ultimately, 7 items were excluded to form a formal questionnaire featuring 28 items.

Prior to the formal research, the sample size was at least ten times the number of measurement entries, as recommended by Suki and Suki [64]. Given that there were 28 measurement entries in this study, the minimum sample size for this study was 280. Additionally, according to the formula for the minimum sample size in statistics, the minimum sample size required at a confidence level of 95%, and a sampling error of 5% was 384. Combining these two approaches, a sample size of 600 was planned for this study to ensure the quality of the study, which was conducted on the Credamo platform in July 2020. The questionnaire was formally researched. After removing the questionnaires with missing answers, improperly filled answers, and other obviously invalid questionnaires [61], the final valid sample size was 420, with a valid recall rate of 70%. The distribution of the sample characteristics of the formal research is shown in

Table 2. Distribution of sample characteristics (n = 420).

Variable	Type	Frequency	Proportion	Chinese (2020)
Gender	Male	210	50.00%	51.24%
	Female	210	50.00%	48.76%
Age	<20	14	3.33%	0–14 (17.95%)
	20–40	374	89.05%	15–64 (68.55%)
	>40	32	7.62%	≥65 (13.50%)
Education	Undergraduate or lower	73	17.38%	89.04%
	Undergraduate	287	68.33%	10.96%
	Master’s degree or higher	59	14.05%
	other	1	0.24%
Household size	≤2	111	26.43%	32.22%
	3	164	39.05%	20.99%
	4	96	22.86%	13.17%
	≥5	49	11.67%	33.62%
No. of Children	<1	188	44.76%	36.9%
	1	176	41.90%	63.1%
	≥2	56	13.33%
Household disposable income (CNY)	≤100 K	79	18.81%	58.8%
	100 K–200 K	179	42.62%
	200 K–300 K	92	21.90%	41.2%
	300 K–500 K	47	11.19%
	500 K–800 K	18	4.29%
	>800 K	5	1.19%

. The data at the overall Chinese level are also provided.

The data on gender, age, education, and household size in the last column of Table 2 were obtained from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) website in China (http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2021/indexch.htm accessed on 5 June 2022). The number of children and annual household disposable income were not available on the website of China’s National Bureau of Statistics; thus, this paper obtained data on consumers of new energy vehicles from a special consulting firm to compare with the sample in this paper (https://www.iimedia.cn/c400/84019.html accessed on 5 June 2022). As shown in Table 2, the distribution of the sample in this paper is not always consistent with the data for China as a whole, as this paper was conducted in a specific region for consumers of new energy vehicles and therefore does not affect the study.

3.3. Survey Design and Measurement

The questionnaire design consists of three parts. The first part comprises all the measured entries in this study, including the four dimensions of consumer lifestyle, interpersonal influence susceptibility, and purchase intention. The second part includes other factors related to consumption decisions, such as the degree of influence of policies. The third part covers consumers’ personal information, such as age, gender, income, and education level. In the questionnaire, consumers were asked when they purchased their electric vehicles, and those who had already purchased such vehicles prior to 2014 were removed to allow us to obtain data concerning consumers during the “chasm” period.

The scales used were based on established scales that have been used by previous studies, and scales in English were translated into Chinese using a standard “translation-back translation” procedure. After the initial scales were developed, members of the group and experts were invited to review the scales. Each scale was scored on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree, interval data). The specific measurement questions are shown in

Table 3. Measurement items.

Items	Questions	Source
Fashion consciousness	When I consider choosing a new product, design is one of the most important factors	[14]
	When I have to choose between two new products, I usually choose the one with the unique style over the one with the simple design
	I like to buy the latest new products
Leadership consciousness	I think that I have more confidence than most people	[15]
	I am more independent than most people
	I think I have pretty strong personal skills
Price consciousness	When shopping, I focus on buying bargains	[15,34,36]
	When shopping, I like to haggle
	I often pay attention to advertisements for new products at reduced prices
	Even if I buy something in a small store, I ask and check the price carefully
Environmental consciousness	The ecological balance is fragile and easily broken	[47]
	When humans interfere with nature, the consequences are often catastrophic
	Humans are seriously destroying the environment
	Plants and animals have as much right to live as humans do
	If things go on as they are, we will face a serious ecological disaster
Susceptibility to normative interpersonal influence	It is important that people like the products and brands I buy	[21]
	When I buy a product, I usually buy the brand that I think others will approve of
	If someone sees me using a product, I usually buy the brand they want me to buy
	I want to know what brands and products will make a good impression on others
	By buying the same products and brands as others, I gain a sense of belonging
	If I want to be like someone, I often try to buy the brands they buy
	I often empathize with others by buying products and brands they buy
Susceptibility to informational interpersonal influence	If I am inexperienced with a product, I will often ask my friends about the product
	I often consult others to help me choose the best alternative from a product category
	I will gather information about a new product from friends or family before I buy it
Purchase intention	When I buy my first car or another car, I plan to buy an electric car	[65]
	When I want to buy my first car or buy another car, I would like to buy an electric car
	When others are planning to buy a car, I am willing to recommend that they buy an electric car

.

Fashion consciousness: The 3-item scale developed by [14] was used, which has a reliability coefficient of 0.645.

Leadership consciousness: The 3-item scale developed by [15] was referenced, which has a reliability coefficient of 0.820.

Price consciousness: A combination of [15,34,36] was used to develop 4 items, and the reliability coefficient of this scale was 0.705.

Environmental consciousness: The 5-item scale developed by [47] was referenced, and the reliability coefficient of this scale was 0.734.

Interpersonal influence susceptibility: The 10-item scale developed by [21] was referenced to investigate normative interpersonal influence susceptibility (value expression and utilitarianism) and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility, which exhibited reliability coefficients of 0.851 and 0.713, respectively.

Purchase intention: The 3-entry scale developed by [65] was used, and the reliability coefficient of this scale was 0.848.

Control variables: In accordance with related studies [66,67], we controlled for variables such as gender, age, level of education, household size, number of children, level of income, and occupation. In addition, the presence or absence of local licensing policies, the presence or absence of local subsidy policies [68], and the sizes of the individual influence of licensing subsidies can also impact the decision of consumers in China to purchase electric vehicles [9,69]; therefore, these variables were also included as control variables in this paper.

3.4. Data Analysis

SPSS 24.0 data analysis software was used to conduct exploratory factor analysis, a common method bias test, descriptive statistical analysis, hypothesis testing, and consumer characteristics analysis; and, Mplus 8.3 data analysis software was used to conduct confirmatory factor analysis and mediation effect analysis. The hypothesis testing methods used were hierarchical regression analysis and bootstrapping mediated effects analysis, and the consumer characteristics analysis method used was cluster analysis.

4. Results

4.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis

Following the prestudy, some adjustments were made to the questionnaire, and it was necessary to conduct exploratory factor analysis on the formal questionnaire to test its suitability for use in this study. In this paper, exploratory factor analysis was conducted using principal component analysis and maximum variance rotation, and SPSS 24.0 software was used to conduct this analysis. The results showed that KMO = 0.786, approximate chi-square value = 4075.999, significance p = 0.000, which explained 64.732% of the total variance, and the data of all indicators met the relevant criteria (KMO > 0.6, p value < 0.05) [63] and were thus suitable for factor analysis. The results of the exploratory factor analysis are shown in

Table 4. Results of exploratory factor analysis.

Indicator	Components 1
	EC	SNI a	SNI b	PI	LC	PC	SII	FC
fc1	0.205	0.070	−0.003	0.057	0.168	0.046	0.005	0.659
fc2	−0.038	0.202	−0.074	0.048	0.002	−0.070	−0.048	0.797
fc3	−0.011	−0.005	0.179	0.135	0.259	−0.054	0.051	0.722
lc1	0.003	0.053	0.050	0.133	0.817	0.018	−0.044	0.264
lc2	0.080	0.002	0.030	0.113	0.817	−0.106	0.040	0.063
lc3	0.024	0.047	0.042	0.053	0.856	0.010	−0.003	0.082
pc1	0.028	0.086	0.082	−0.184	−0.220	0.643	−0.008	−0.042
pc2	0.029	0.073	0.016	−0.037	0.067	0.716	0.002	−0.044
pc3	0.030	0.009	0.072	0.004	−0.038	0.744	0.249	0.023
pc4	0.066	0.097	0.013	0.012	0.045	0.739	0.070	−0.004
ec1	0.575	0.127	−0.045	0.159	0.081	0.129	0.059	−0.187
ec2	0.741	0.011	0.056	0.092	0.003	0.138	−0.056	0.126
ec3	0.793	−0.090	0.078	−0.003	−0.024	0.063	−0.054	0.116
ec4	0.585	−0.007	−0.118	0.096	0.090	−0.019	0.290	0.106
ec5	0.745	0.080	−0.016	0.021	−0.002	−0.115	0.051	−0.016
norm1	0.006	0.773	0.092	0.085	−0.018	0.099	0.046	0.148
norm2	0.040	0.746	0.307	−0.027	−0.017	0.079	0.078	0.104
norm3	−0.040	0.601	0.506	0.009	0.022	0.166	0.037	0.128
norm4	0.137	0.671	0.155	0.078	0.158	0.028	0.293	−0.024
norm5	−0.054	0.465	0.632	0.032	0.040	0.115	0.125	−0.006
norm6	0.041	0.147	0.838	0.021	0.025	0.015	0.047	0.059
norm7	−0.023	0.230	0.854	0.065	0.078	0.051	0.087	−0.022
infor1	0.063	0.074	0.110	0.047	−0.004	0.066	0.823	0.002
infor2	0.102	0.059	0.218	0.050	−0.080	0.250	0.683	0.026
infor3	−0.002	0.210	−0.071	0.101	0.057	0.027	0.774	−0.034
pi1	0.122	0.035	0.018	0.838	0.127	−0.131	0.066	0.112
pi2	0.111	0.024	−0.031	0.878	0.082	−0.056	0.011	0.015
pi3	0.082	0.078	0.127	0.833	0.098	0.001	0.140	0.111
Explained variance (%)	9.066	8.652	8.489	8.345	8.258	8.029	7.353	6.539
Total explained variance (%)	64.732

¹ EC refers to environmental consciousness; SNI ^a refers to the utilitarian function of normative interpersonal influence susceptibility; SNI ^b refers to the value expression function of normative interpersonal influence susceptibility; PI refers to purchase intention; LC refers to leadership consciousness; PC refers to price consciousness; SII refers to informational interpersonal influence susceptibility and FC refers to leadership consciousness.

, which highlights that the measured question items for the same variable were clustered together after factor rotation, thus indicating that the scale has good structural validity.

4.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

This paper first conducted validated factor analysis on the study variables using Mplus 8.3 software to test the discriminant validity among the variables, and the results of this analysis are shown in

Table 5. Results of confirmatory factor analysis.

Measurement Models 1	χ2	df	χ2/df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR
Seven-factor: FC, LC, PC, EC, SNI, SII, PI	625.815	323	1.94	0.921	0.907	0.047	0.050
Six-factor: FC, LC, PC, EC, SNI + SII, PI	1041.626	335	3.11	0.815	0.791	0.071	0.067
Five-factor: FC, LC, PC, EC, SNI + SII + PI	1613.513	340	4.75	0.666	0.628	0.094	0.094
Four-factor: FC, LC, PC, EC + SNI + SII + PI	2029.731	344	5.90	0.557	0.514	0.108	0.109
Three-factor: FC + LC + PC + EC + SNI, SII, PI	2210.371	347	6.37	0.511	0.467	0.113	0.120
Two-factor: FC + LC + PC + EC + SNI + SII, PI	2406.463	349	6.90	0.460	0.415	0.118	0.123
One-factor: FC + LC + PC + EC + SNI + SII + PI	2915.904	350	8.33	0.326	0.273	0.132	0.132

¹ FC refers to leadership consciousness; LC refers to leadership consciousness; PC refers to price consciousness; EC refers to environmental consciousness; SNI refers to normative interpersonal influence susceptibility; SII refers to informational interpersonal influence susceptibility; and PI refers to purchase intention, same below; “+” refers to the construction of different factors as a new virtual factor.

. Compared with other models, the seven-factor model outperformed other comparative models in all fit indices (χ²/df = 1.94, CFI = 0.921, TLI = 0.907, RMSEA = 0.047, SRMR = 0.050) and met the data fit criteria (χ²/df < 3, CFI > 0.9, TLI > 0.9, RMSEA < 0.05) [63], thus indicating good discriminant validity among these variables.

The discriminant validity between the variables was then determined by examining the magnitude of the arithmetic square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) values of each variable and the correlation coefficients among the other variables; the results are shown in

Table 6. Correlation coefficients ¹.

Variables	Mean	Standard Deviation	FC	LC	PC	EC	SNI	SII	PI
FC	5.404	0.906	0.731
LC	5.248	0.934	0.336 ***	0.776
PC	4.114	1.010	−0.056	−0.078	0.615
EC	5.869	0.780	0.105 **	0.091 *	0.111 **	0.594
SNI	4.072	1.040	0.196 ***	0.125 **	0.220 ***	0.065	0.655
SII	5.112	0.939	0.020	0.015	0.254 ***	0.152 ***	0.317 ***	0.645
PI	5.394	1.034	0.220 ***	0.259 ***	−0.115 **	0.221 ***	0.134 ***	0.170 ***	0.808

¹ Numbers on the diagonal in the table indicate the arithmetic square root of the AVE value of the corresponding variable; * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01, two-tailed test.

. This table indicates that the arithmetic square root of the AVE values of all the variables under study (along the diagonal) is greater than the correlation coefficients with the other variables, once again indicating good discriminant validity with respect to the variables under study

4.3. Common Method Bias Test

The same data sources and other factors can contribute to systematic errors in the results of the study [70]. In addition to reducing the effects of common method bias by employing procedural control methods (e.g., by reducing subjects’ number of guesses on questions and anonymous responses), the effects of common method bias were examined via Harman’s one-factor method and latent variable control methods. The unrestricted factor analysis of all measured entries was first conducted using SPSS 24.0 software, and the explained variance in the maximum factor was 17.258%, which did not exceed 40%. Subsequently, validated factor analysis of the model was conducted by adding a latent variable using Mplus 8.3 software, and the results showed that the number of iterations exceeded the limit, thus indicating that the data did not fit the model. Combining the results of these two methods, the problem of common method bias was mitigated.

4.4. Descriptive Statistical Analysis

The means and standard deviations of the study variables and the correlation coefficients between the variables were analyzed, and the results are shown in Table 6. Fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness were all significantly positively correlated with new GTTT product purchase intention, with correlation coefficients of 0.220 (p < 0.01), 0.259 (p < 0.01) and 0.221 (p < 0.01), respectively, and price consciousness was significantly negatively correlated with new GTTT product purchase intention (r = −0.115, p < 0.05). Fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and price awareness were significantly positively correlated with normative interpersonal influence susceptibility, with correlation coefficients of 0.196 (p < 0.01), 0.125 (p < 0.05), and 0.220 (p < 0.01), respectively; environmental consciousness was not significantly correlated with normative interpersonal influence susceptibility (r = 0.065, p > 0.05). Price consciousness and environmental consciousness were significantly positively correlated with informational interpersonal influence, with correlation coefficients of 0.254 (p < 0.01) and 0.152 (p < 0.01), respectively; fashion consciousness and leadership consciousness were not significantly correlated with informational interpersonal influence susceptibility, with correlation coefficients of 0.020 (p > 0.1) and 0.015 (p > 0.1), respectively. Normative interpersonal influence susceptibility and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility were significantly and positively associated with new GTTT product purchase intention, with correlation coefficients of 0.134 (p < 0.01) and 0.170 (p < 0.01), respectively. These results provide preliminary evidence for hypothesis testing.

4.5. Hypothesis Test

4.5.1. Main Effects Test

To examine the influence of four dimensions of individual consumer lifestyle on purchase intention regarding GTTT products, this paper first used SPSS (24.0, IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) to conduct hierarchical regression analysis and then path analysis was performed using Mplus (8.3, Muthen & Muthen, Los Angeles, CA, USA). The results of this analysis are shown in

Table 7. Regression analysis results ¹.

Variables	Dependent Variables
	SNI		SII		PI
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6	Model 7
Constant	3.362 ***	1.091	4.660 ***	2.364 ***	3.598 ***	0.888	0.400 **
Control variables:
Gender	−0.354 ***	−0.292 ***	0.044	0.099	−0.032	0.145	0.137
Age	−0.218 **	−0.180 **	0.007	0.027	0.090	0.103	0.105
Education	0.179 **	0.186 **	0.112	0.108	0.062	0.071	0.044
Household size	0.088	0.069	−0.010	-0.010	−0.008	0.026	0.026
No. of children	0.221 **	0.200 **	−0.003	−0.039	0.318 ***	0.217 **	0.217 **
Income	0.042	0.066	−0.057	−0.021	0.139 ***	0.094 **	0.096 **
Career	−0.025	−0.006	−0.012	−0.007	0.004	0.005	0.006
Licensing policy	0.190	0.236 **	0.099	0.111	−0.088	−0.107	−0.136
Subsidy policy	0.091	0.101	0.043	0.055	0.206	0.252 *	0.238 *
Licensing impact	−0.031	−0.026	0.014	0.017	−0.064 *	−0.065 *	−0.067 *
Subsidy impact	0.097 **	0.088 **	0.002	−0.017	0.151 ***	0.122 ***	0.122 ***
Independent variables:
FC		0.178 ***		0.035		0.130 **	0.117 **
LC		0.018		0.031		0.183 ***	0.176 ***
PC		0.250 ***		0.225 ***		−0.092 *	−0.143 ***
EC		−0.020		0.154 **		0.241 ***	0.212 ***
Mediator:
SNI							0.036
SII							0.189 ***
R2	0.099	0.174	0.012	0.093	0.120	0.205	0.236
Adjusted R2	0.075	0.144	-0.014	0.059	0.097	0.175	0.204
ΔR2	0.099	0.075	0.012	0.080	0.120	0.084	0.031
ΔF	4.070 ***	9.215 ***	0.469	8.963 ***	5.077 ***	10.721 ***	8.171 ***

¹ * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01, two-tailed test.

. The control variables (gender, age, level of education, family size, number of children, level of income, career, licensing policy, subsidy policy, licensing impact, and subsidy impact) and independent variables (fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, price consciousness, and environmental consciousness) were added to Model 6 sequentially using new GTTT product purchase intention as the dependent variable, and the results showed that fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness had significant positive effects on new GTTT product purchases. The positive effects of intention were all significant, with regression coefficients of 0.130 (p < 0.05), 0.183 (p < 0.01), and 0.241 (p < 0.01), respectively, and the negative effect of price consciousness on new GTTT product purchase intention was significant (𝛽 = −0.092, p < 0.1). The results of the path analysis are shown in Figure 2; therefore, hypotheses H1, H2, H3, and H4 can be supported from the results of the hierarchical regression analysis and the path analysis.

4.5.2. Mediation Effects Test

To test the mediating role of interpersonal influence susceptibility in the effects of different dimensions of consumers’ individual lifestyles on purchase intention regarding GTTT products, this paper initially used hierarchical regression analysis to test the results shown in Table 7.

In Model 2, which features normative interpersonal influence susceptibility as the dependent variable, control variables and independent variables were added in sequence, and the results showed that the positive effects of fashion consciousness and price consciousness on normative interpersonal influence susceptibility were significant, with regression coefficients of 0.178 (p < 0.01) and 0.250 (p < 0.01), respectively, while the effects of leadership consciousness and environmental consciousness on normative interpersonal influence susceptibility were not significant, with regression coefficients of 0.018 (p > 0.1) and −0.020 (p > 0.1), respectively.

In Model 4, which features informational interpersonal influence susceptibility as the dependent variable, the control variables and the independent variables are added in sequence, and the results show that price consciousness and environmental consciousness have significant positive effects on informational interpersonal influence susceptibility, exhibiting regression coefficients of 0.225 (p < 0.01) and 0.154 (p < 0.01), respectively, while fashion consciousness and leadership consciousness have nonsignificant effects on informational interpersonal influence susceptibility, exhibiting regression coefficients of 0.035 (p > 0.1) and 0.031 (p > 0.1), respectively.

Adding control, independent and mediating variables in sequence to Model 7, which features new GTTT product purchase intention as the dependent variable, demonstrated that the effect of normative interpersonal influence susceptibility on new GTTT product purchase intention was not significant (𝛽 = 0.036, p > 0.1) and that the positive effect of informational interpersonal influence susceptibility on new GTTT product purchase intention was significant (𝛽 = 0.189, p < 0.01). Combining the regression results of Models 2, 4, and 7, it can be concluded that normative interpersonal influence susceptibility does not play a mediating role between fashion consciousness or leadership consciousness or price consciousness and environmental consciousness and purchase intention regarding GTTT products and that informational interpersonal influence susceptibility does play a partially mediating role in the relationship between price consciousness or environmental consciousness and purchase intention regarding GTTT products; therefore, H7b and H8b were supported, and H5, H6, H7a, and H8a were not supported. These results provide preliminary support for the verification of the mediating role played by informational interpersonal influence susceptibility.

To further test the mediating role of interpersonal influence susceptibility, this study also used the bootstrapping mediating effect analysis proposed by Wen and Ye [71] to test the mediating role played by interpersonal influence susceptibility, and the results of this analysis are shown in

Table 8. Results of bootstrapping mediating effect analysis.

Indirect Effect	Coefficient	Confidence Intervals
FC total indirect effect	0.009	[−0.018, 0.042]
FC→SNI→PI	0.007	[−0.014, 0.034]
FC→SII→PI	0.002	[−0.013, 0.025]
LC total indirect effect	0.006	[−0.016, 0.033]
LC→SNI→PI	0.003	[−0.004, 0.023]
LC→SII→PI	0.003	[−0.016, 0.026]
PC total indirect effect	0.050	[0.020, 0.091]
PC→SNI→PI	0.009	[−0.016, 0.036]
PC→SII→PI	0.042	[0.024, 0.081]
EC total indirect effect	0.021	[0.007, 0.061]
EC→SNI→PI	0.000	[−0.005, 0.013]
EC→SII→PI	0.021	[0.008, 0.062]

.

The indirect effect values of fashion consciousness on new GTTT product purchase intention via normative interpersonal influence susceptibility and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility were 0.007 and 0.002, and they had 95% confidence intervals of [−0.014, 0.034] and [−0.013, 0.025], respectively, both of which included 0. The indirect effect was not significant. Therefore, H5 was not supported.

The indirect effect values of leadership consciousness on new GTTT product purchase intention via normative interpersonal influence susceptibility and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility were 0.003 and 0.003, and they had 95% confidence intervals of [−0.004, 0.023] and [−0.016, 0.026], respectively, both of which included 0. This indirect effect was also not significant. Therefore, H6 was not supported.

The indirect effect value of price consciousness on new GTTT product purchase intention via normative interpersonal influence susceptibility was 0.009, with a 95% confidence interval of [−0.016, 0.036], which included 0. This indirect effect was not significant. The indirect effect value of price consciousness on new GTTT product purchase intention via informational interpersonal influence susceptibility was 0.042, with a 95% confidence interval [0.024, 0.081], which did not include 0. This indirect effect was significant. Thus, informational interpersonal influence susceptibility plays a partially mediating role in the relationship between price consciousness and new GTTT product purchase intention; H7a was not supported, and H7b was supported.

The indirect effect value of environmental consciousness on new GTTT product purchase intention via normative interpersonal influence susceptibility was 0.000, with a 95% confidence interval of [−0.015, 0.013], which included 0. This indirect effect was not significant. The indirect effect value of environmental consciousness on new GTTT product purchase intention via informational interpersonal influence susceptibility was 0.021, with a 95% confidence interval [0.008, 0.062], which did not include 0. This indirect effect was significant. Therefore, informational interpersonal influence susceptibility played a partially mediating role in the relationship between environmental consciousness and new GTTT product purchase intention; H8a was not supported, and H8b was supported.

5. Market Segmentation

According to the results of the tests discussed above, different dimensions of individual consumers’ lifestyles have different effects on purchase intention regarding GTTT products. What is the distribution of consumer characteristics across different dimensions of the “chasm” period? It is necessary to conduct a market segmentation of consumers during the “chasm” period and to identify the target consumers during the “chasm” period as well as their consumer characteristics that can be influenced by the market launch strategy to cause them to develop positive purchase intentions, ultimately with the aim of providing a foundation for the development of a market strategy for GTTT products.

The results are shown in

Table 9. Results of lifestyle cluster analysis.

No.	Segment 1	Segment 2	Segment 3	F Value	p Value
Number of People (Percentage)	146 (34.76%)	140 (33.33%)	134 (31.90%)
Name	Fashion Leaders	Price-Conscious Environmentalists	Conservatives
FC	5.84	5.69	4.64	108.002	0.000
LC	5.80	5.54	4.34	175.101	0.000
PC	3.29	5.09	4.00	251.842	0.000
EC	5.88	6.04	5.68	7.27	0.001

, which highlights the fact that fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, price consciousness, and environmental consciousness all exhibit significant differences across the three clusters, thus indicating that these four variables can divide the sample into three significant categories and that the number of observations does not differ significantly across the three categories; accordingly, the clustering effect is good. Comparing the mean scores of different lifestyle dimensions and combining the information concerning the genders, ages, levels of income, and number of children of individual consumers (

Table 10. Other information about the segments.

Segments	Fashion Leaders (146)	Price-Conscious Environmentalists (140)	Conservatives (134)
Gender	Male (89)	Male (78)	Male (43)
	Female (57)	Female (62)	Female (91)
Age	≤30 (74)	≤30 (82)	≤30 (81)
	>30 (72)	>30 (58)	>30 (53)
Household disposable income (CNY)	≤200 K (63)	≤200 K (100)	≤200 K (95)
	>200 K (83)	>200 K (40)	>200 K (39)
No. of children	<1 (48)	<1 (65)	<1 (75)
	≥1 (98)	≥1 (75)	≥1 (59)

), three major categories of the characteristics of “chasm” consumers related to GTTT products can be identified.

Segment 1: Fashion leaders. These consumers exhibit the highest mean scores for fashion consciousness and leadership consciousness, moderate mean scores for environmental consciousness, and the lowest scores for price consciousness, which indicates that these consumers pursue fashion, have a strong sense of independence and environmental consciousness, and do not value price. Therefore, the consumers included in this segment are referred to as fashion leaders. This group has the highest number of male consumers, the oldest age, the highest level of income, and the largest number of children.

Segment 2: Price-conscious environmentalists. Consumers included in this segment have moderate mean scores for fashion consciousness and leadership consciousness and the highest mean scores for price consciousness and environmental consciousness. Accordingly, those included in this segment of consumers are referred to as price-oriented environmentalists. This group includes more male consumers than female consumers and is in the middle of the three categories in terms of age, income, and number of children.

Segment 3: Conservatives. Consumers included in this segment have the lowest mean scores for fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness, moderate mean scores for price consciousness, and a generally conservative consumer consciousness. Accordingly, members of this segment of consumers are referred to as conservatives. This group mostly includes female consumers, who are more numerous than male consumers in all three groups; in addition, members of this segment are the youngest, have the lowest levels of income, and have the fewest children.

6. Discussion

For Hypothesis 1, the empirical results show that the positive effect of fashion consciousness on the purchase intention of GTTT products is significant (Table 7), and Hypothesis 1 is supported, which indicates that consumers with stronger fashion consciousness are more likely to purchase GTTT products. Fashion consciousness is one of the important factors influencing consumers to purchase new products in technology [16,24,39], and Lee et al. [14] found that fashion consciousness significantly and positively influenced purchase intention regarding new high-tech products. Thus, fashion consciousness is an important path to market disruption for GTTT products.

Further analysis of the mediating effect of normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility found that normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility did not play a mediating role in the effect of fashion consciousness on GTTT new product purchase intention, and Hypothesis 5 was not supported (Table 8), which suggests that fashion consciousness cannot influence GTTT new product purchase through normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility The reason may be that for the more fashion conscious consumers, even if their normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility is high, the formation of their behavioral intention may also depend on some contextual factors, such as the effect of some of the already purchased consumers, which can have a greater influence on the purchase decision of others and can effectively drive the purchase decision of others. Social learning theory suggests that it is possible that the modeling effect of the observed person is too small, thus the observer cannot effectively acquire certain behaviors [72]. Therefore, when the driving effect is small, the purchased person cannot effectively influence the purchase decision of consumers in the “chasm” period, and even if consumers’ normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility is high, it may not lead to positive GTTT purchase intentions, thus making fashion consciousness ineffective by influencing normative, and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility has an indirect effect on GTTT new product purchase intention.

For Hypothesis 2, the empirical results show that the positive effect of leadership consciousness on the purchase intention regarding GTTT products is significant (Table 7), and Hypothesis 2 is supported, which indicates that consumers with a stronger sense of leadership are more likely to purchase GTTT products. Leadership consciousness is one of the important factors influencing consumers’ purchase of new products [16,24], and Chen [15] found that leadership consciousness significantly and positively influenced the purchase intention regarding new green products. Thus, leadership consciousness is an important path to market disruption for GTTT products.

Further analysis of the mediating effect of normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility found that normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility did not play a mediating role in the influence of leadership consciousness on GTTT new product purchase intention, and Hypothesis 6 was not supported (Table 8), which indicates that leadership consciousness cannot influence GTTT new product purchase intention through normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility intention, probably because for consumers with a stronger sense of leadership, they usually rely more on their own level of knowledge [73], are less dependent on information provided by others, are more confident and judgmental about their purchase decisions [15,16], and therefore do not influence GTTT new product purchase intention through normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility on GTTT new product purchase intention.

For Hypothesis 3, the empirical results show that the negative effect of price consciousness on the purchase intention of GTTT products is significant (Table 7), and Hypothesis 3 is supported, which indicates that consumers with higher price consciousness are less willing to purchase GTTT products. High prices are one of the important reasons that prevent price-sensitive consumers from purchasing new green products [42,43]. Tran et al. [46] found that price consciousness significantly and negatively affects electric vehicle purchase intention.

Further analysis of the mediating effect of normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility showed that normative interpersonal influence susceptibility did not play a mediating role in the effect of price consciousness on GTTT new product purchase intention, and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility played a mediating role in the effect of price consciousness on GTTT new product purchase intention. Additionally, Hypothesis 7b was supported (Table 8), which suggests that more price-conscious consumers tend to search for relevant information to make decisions in order to pursue low prices and reduce purchase risk [59]. Therefore, it is possible to influence the purchase intention regarding GTTT products through informational interpersonal influence susceptibility. This also suggests that informational interpersonal influence susceptibility is an important way to reverse the formation regarding positive purchase intentions for GTTT products among price-conscious consumers, and it is thus a strategic path to cross the “chasm” in the market as a whole. These results are similar to those of Machová et al. [74], who found that before specific product information was provided to consumers, consumers indicated that price was the most important factor compared to the brand, ingredients, and packaging of the product. However, after specific information about the product was provided, 58.7% of consumers indicated that they were willing to pay a higher price for green products. In summary, price consciousness and information-based interpersonal influence susceptibility are important paths for GTTT products to achieve market disruption.

For Hypothesis 4, the empirical results show that the positive effect of environmental consciousness on the purchase intention of GTTT products is significant (Table 7), and Hypothesis 4 is supported, which indicates that consumers with a stronger environmental consciousness are more likely to purchase GTTT products. Environmental consciousness is one of the important factors influencing consumers to purchase new green products [47,48,49], and Zhang et al. [9] found that environmental consciousness significantly and positively influenced the purchase intention of electric vehicles.

Further analysis of the mediating effect of normative and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility found that normative interpersonal influence susceptibility did not mediate the effect of environmental awareness on GTTT new product purchase intention, and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility mediated the effect of environmental consciousness on GTTT new product purchase intention. Hypothesis 8b was supported (Table 8), which suggests that more environmentally conscious consumers, to maintain their environmentalist identity, will value informational interpersonal influence to ensure that they purchase new products that are consistent with their identity [49] and can therefore influence the purchase intention of GTTT products through informational interpersonal influence susceptibility. This also suggests that informational interpersonal influence susceptibility is an important way for environmentally conscious consumers to form positive purchase intentions for GTTT products, and it is thus a strategic path to cross the “chasm” in the marketplace as a whole. Thus, environmental consciousness and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility are important pathways to market disruption for GTTT products.

6.1. Theoretical Implications

This study deepens our understanding of the important mechanisms of positive purchase intention formation for GTTT products from a lifestyle perspective, thereby contributing to the fields of sustainability and consumer behavior. From a theoretical point of view, the following contributions are specified.

First, this paper proposes a strategic path to achieve a competitive position that allows GTTT products to subvert dominant products in the market from a consumer lifestyle perspective. This is a significant departure from existing studies, which emphasize social psychological variables such as attitudes [75,76,77], normative [78,79], and perceived behavioral control [80] on new product purchase intention. Furthermore, consumer lifestyle and interpersonal influence studies based on sociological perspectives have not been fully applied in the field of new green products [20].

Second, this paper contributes to the study of consumer lifestyles. The previous studies have mainly applied consumer lifestyles to new green products in mature markets [15,16,18,19,24], and some other technology-based new product areas [14] have not yet applied lifestyle to early market studies of GTTT products.

Third, this paper identifies the mechanisms by which different dimensions of consumers’ lifestyles influence the formation of new product purchase intention regarding GTTT. Existing studies have not sufficiently explored the mechanisms by which consumers’ lifestyles affect the formation of new product purchase intention, nor have they explored the direct influence of lifestyles on consumption behavior. In terms of indirect effects, they have explored consumers’ perceptions of new product value [18,81], perceptions of social issues [17], consumer innovativeness [16], and other mediating effect mechanisms; however, there is a paucity of research based on other perspectives. In this paper, we introduce the mediating variable of interpersonal influence susceptibility to tap into the mechanism of consumer lifestyle influencing the formation of purchase intention regarding GTTT products.

Fourth, this paper expands the research context of interpersonal influence susceptibility. While previous studies have mainly used interpersonal influence susceptibility in areas such as online shopping contexts [25,26], and impulse buying contexts [27], etc., this paper applies hierarchical feature model theory to investigate interpersonal influence susceptibility in the GTTT new product context, which both expands the application context of interpersonal influence susceptibility and enriches the application scope of hierarchical trait model theory.

Fifth, this paper contributes to the segmentation of the target market of GTTT products. Through cluster analysis, this paper finds that fashion leaders and price-oriented environmentalists are most likely to be the target consumers for achieving market launch for GTTT products, while conservatives are less likely to be the target consumers for GTTT products in the early stage.

6.2. Practical Implications

Lifestyle is a more stable psychological characteristic of consumers, and the consumer market is also more stable when segmented in accordance with different lifestyle dimensions, which can help companies select target consumer groups and develop product strategies, price strategies, and promotion strategies. The following managerial insights can be obtained from the findings of this paper.

First, the market launch strategy for GTTT products should be conducive to positive purchase intentions among fashion leaders during the “chasm” period. The findings of this paper show that high fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness as well as low price consciousness have favorable effects on purchase intention regarding GTTT products, thus, fashion leaders are consumers with strong fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness as well as low price consciousness.

With respect to this group, enterprises should focus on the following aspects when formulating market launch strategies and “chasm” crossing strategies for GTTT products.

In the context of product development and appearance design, innovative enterprises should incorporate elements suggesting fashion, trendiness and individuality that differ from those offered by the dominant products in the market, focus on developing high-end products, effectively integrate advanced technologies from other fields, and design unique brand logos alongside other measures that can allow them to satisfy the demand for fashion, design, and individuality exhibited by this group in the context of product development and appearance design.

In terms of price strategy, this consumer group is not price-sensitive, and it has a relatively established income, so higher prices can be stipulated. In terms of the promotion strategy, the characteristics of GTTT products, such as products that are fashionable, trendy, individual, and protective of the environment, should be emphasized to establish a correlation between GTTT products and self-identity, such as that of a trendy, independent, autonomous, and environmentally aware fashion leader, to prompt consumers to buy GTTT products.

Second, for the price-conscious environmentalist group, companies should develop targeted marketing strategies that take into account the important role played by informational interpersonal influence.

According to the findings of this paper, although price-sensitive consumers are reluctant to buy expensive GTTT products, after being influenced by informational interpersonal influence, price-sensitive consumers tend to reverse their perceptions and become willing to buy GTTT products. Additionally, informational interpersonal influence is an important way for environmentally conscious consumers to develop positive purchase intentions regarding GTTT products.

Therefore, for the price-conscious environmentalist group, companies should focus on the following aspects when formulating market launch strategies and “chasm” crossing strategies for GTTT products.

In terms of product development strategy, since this segment of consumers is sensitive to the price of GTTT products and since their fashion sense and leadership awareness are at moderate levels, the development of low-end products to meet the needs of this segment can be emphasized.

In terms of price strategy, innovative companies should set appropriate prices so that this segment of consumers can afford GTTT products. In terms of promotion strategy, on the one hand, companies should focus on the promotion of the functional and the environmental attributes of GTTT products to attract this segment of consumers to buy those products in light of their functional quality and environmental attributes; on the other hand, a variety of promotional incentives can be implemented to reduce the prices of new products to prompt this segment of consumers to develop positive purchase intentions. In addition, companies should also adopt a variety of approaches to create favorable conditions to encourage the important factor of information-based interpersonal influence to enhance this segment of consumers’ level of knowledge and understanding regarding GTTT products.

Third, conservatives are unlikely to be the target consumer group for GTTT products; companies should remain cautious when developing marketing strategies and avoid targeting this group.

The findings of this paper indicate that individual consumers with low fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness have a negative impact on purchase intention regarding GTTT products and that consumers with low fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness are conservatives.

Since being green is an inherent attribute of GTTT products that distinguishes them from market-leading products and since GTTT products are novel products, the cost structure of novel products usually causes difficulties with respect to such products reaching the level of market-leading products, and since this group of consumers exhibits low fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness and moderate price consciousness, the characteristic of being green does not influence the purchase decisions of this group of consumers. Simultaneously, market-leading products include various products that target different combinations of fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness and price consciousness and are therefore more likely to be encountered by the consumer group that exhibits higher price consciousness. Therefore, GTTT products that target this segment are difficult to create, and market launch strategies and strategies aimed at bridging the “chasm” should not target this segment of consumers.

6.3. Limitations and Future Research

This study faces certain limitations that must be analyzed and explored in further detail in the future.

First, this study employs a cross-sectional research design, which does not allow us to make a more rigorous judgment concerning the causal relationships among variables; future experimental design procedures can be used to test the causal relationships among variables.

Second, this paper investigates the mediating role played by interpersonal influence susceptibility and finds that normative interpersonal influence susceptibility does not positively affect new GTTT product purchase intention; however, the relationship between normative interpersonal influence susceptibility and new GTTT product purchase intention may change under specific situational conditions. For example, consumers who play the role of leader with respect to those who have already purchased GTTT products may play a moderating role in the relationship between normative interpersonal influence susceptibility and new GTTT product purchase intention. It is thus necessary to study the impact of leading consumers in greater depth in the future.

Finally, this study investigates the mechanism by which lifestyle influences new GTTT product purchase intention from the perspective of interpersonal influence, and other possible mechanisms for this influence can be explored in further detail in the future to enrich and to improve our understanding of the influence of lifestyle influence on new GTTT product purchase intention.

7. Conclusions

The existing research has not studied the strategic path of GTTT products to disrupt the competitive position of dominant products in the market from the perspective of consumers’ lifestyles, nor has it analyzed the target consumer market of GTTT products. This paper provides a new perspective for the relevant research field through empirical testing and mainly obtains the following findings. First, consumers’ fashion consciousness, leadership consciousness, and environmental consciousness have a significant positive effect on GTTT products’ purchase intention, and price consciousness has a significant negative effect on the purchase intention of GTTT products. Second, normative interpersonal influence susceptibility does not play a mediating role in the influence of different dimensions of consumers’ lifestyles on the purchase intention of GTTT products, and informational interpersonal influence susceptibility plays a mediating role in the influence of price consciousness and environmental consciousness on GTTT products. Third, fashion leaders and price-conscious environmentalists are most likely to be the target consumer groups for achieving market initiation for GTTT products.