SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2

The Effect of Multiple Intelligences on Entrepreneurial Intention: The Mediating Role of Green Purchasing Behavior in Turkish Higher Education

Çoklu Zekâların Girişimcilik Niyeti Üzerindeki Etkisi: Türkiye Yükseköğretim Bağlamında Yeşil Satın Alma Davranışının Aracılık Rolü

Egehan Özkan Alakaş(OSTIM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-6450-3892
Qais Nabi(OSTIM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY)0009-0006-1346-1705
Seray Kağıtcı(OSTIM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-4998-789X
Zeynep Baysal(OSTIM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-5787-9106
Mustafa Polat(OSTIM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-2187-2820
Pages
377–394
Publication Date
2026-08-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall, the results highlight the multidimensional role of cognitive and social competencies in fostering sustainable consumption and entrepreneurship, offering important implications for sustainability-oriented education and entrepreneurship policy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study uses the theory of multiple intelligences and the theory of planned behavior to look at how college students’ smarts affect their green buying and plans for starting businesses.
📊
Key Findings & Data:With help from survey results from 416 students across various schools, the team ran analyses using PLS-SEM to build a full model.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the results highlight the multidimensional role of cognitive and social competencies in fostering sustainable consumption and entrepreneurship, offering important implications for sustainability-oriented education and entrepreneurship policy.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Girişimcilik · Girişimcilik Niyeti · Çoklu Zekâlar

Abstract

This study uses the theory of multiple intelligences and the theory of planned behavior to look at how college students’ smarts affect their green buying and plans for starting businesses. Researchers think that going green when shopping depends on thoughts, feelings, and norms, while intentions to be an entrepreneur are pushed by views, personal control, and skills. But there aren’t many realworld tests that link up all these ideas. With help from survey results from 416 students across various schools, the team ran analyses using PLS-SEM to build a full model. They found that each type of intelligence checked had a good, direct link to both eco-friendly purchasing and business startup intentions. Naturalistic intelligence emerges as the strongest predictor of green purchasing behavior, while interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence show the strongest effects on entrepreneurial intention. Moreover, green purchasing behavior has a significant positive effect on entrepreneurial intention and partially mediates the relationship between certain intelligence types and entrepreneurial intention. Overall, the results highlight the multidimensional role of cognitive and social competencies in fostering sustainable consumption and entrepreneurship, offering important implications for sustainability-oriented education and entrepreneurship policy. The structural model was tested with PLS-SEM, yielding R²=0.273 for green purchasing behavior and R²=0.334 for entrepreneurial intention. The strongest direct effects were observed on the NI→GPB (β=0.471) and INRI→EI (β=0.478) paths, and green purchasing behavior carried significant indirect effects on the relationship between NI, BKI, VSI, MI and RI and entrepreneurial intention. By integrating multiple intelligences theory, the theory of planned behavior and the sustainable entrepreneurship literature, this study provides a focused contribution by specifying how cognitive–social competencies translate into sustainable entrepreneurial outcomes in the Turkish higher education context.

Özet

Bu çalışma, çoklu zekâ kuramı ve planlı davranış teorisinden hareketle, üniversite öğrencilerinin çoklu zekâ profillerinin yeşil satın alma davranışı ve girişimcilik niyeti üzerindeki etkisini; ayrıca çevreye duyarlı tüketim ile girişimcilik niyeti arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektedir. Literatür, yeşil satın alma davranışının bilişsel, duyuşsal ve normatif faktörler tarafından şekillendiğini; girişimcilik niyetinin ise büyük ölçüde tutumlar, algılanan davranışsal kontrol ve bireysel yeterlilikler tarafından belirlendiğini göstermektedir. Ancak bu yapıları çoklu zekâ boyutlarıyla bütünleştiren ampirik çalışmalar sınırlıdır. Farklı fakültelerden 416 üniversite öğrencisinden toplanan anket verileriyle, kapsamlı bir yapısal model PLS-SEM yöntemi kullanılarak test edilmiştir. Bulgular, tüm çoklu zekâ boyutlarının hem yeşil satın alma davranışı hem de girişimcilik niyeti üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve pozitif doğrudan etkilere sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Doğacı (naturalistik) zekâ yeşil satın alma davranışının en güçlü yordayıcısı olarak öne çıkarken; kişilerarası (interpersonal) ve içsel (intrapersonal) zekâ girişimcilik niyeti üzerinde en güçlü etkilere sahiptir. Ayrıca yeşil satın alma davranışı, girişimcilik niyeti üzerinde anlamlı ve pozitif bir etki göstermekte ve bazı zekâ türleri (doğacı, görsel, matematiksel ve ritmik) ile girişimcilik niyeti arasındaki ilişkide kısmi aracılık rolü üstlenmektedir. Genel olarak sonuçlar, bilişsel ve sosyal yetkinliklerin sürdürülebilir tüketim ve girişimciliği teşvik etmedeki çok boyutlu rolünü ortaya koymakta; sürdürülebilirlik odaklı eğitim ile girişimcilik politikaları açısından önemli çıkarımlar sunmaktadır. Yapısal model PLS-SEM ile test edilmiş; yeşil satın alma davranışı için R²=0,273 ve girişimcilik niyeti için R²=0,334 elde edilmiştir. En güçlü doğrudan etkiler NI→GPB (β=0,471) ve INRI→EI (β=0,478) yollarında gözlenmiş; yeşil satın alma davranışı NI, BKI, VSI, MI ve RI ile girişimcilik niyeti arasındaki ilişkide anlamlı dolaylı etkiler taşımaktadır. Bu çalışma; çoklu zekâ kuramı, planlı davranış teorisi ve sürdürülebilir girişimcilik yazınını bütünleştirerek Türkiye yükseköğretim bağlamında bilişsel-sosyal yetkinlikler ile sürdürülebilir girişimci sonuçlar arasındaki bağı somutlaştırmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Alakaş, E. Ö., Nabi, Q., Kağıtcı, S., Baysal, Z., Polat, M. (2026). The Effect of Multiple Intelligences on Entrepreneurial Intention: The Mediating Role of Green Purchasing Behavior in Turkish Higher Education. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2, 377–394. https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1897565

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (77)

  1. Ahmad, S., Mustafa, Y., & Mohammad, S. (2014). Types of multiple intelligences among undergraduate students at Yarmouk University. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(11), 1–8.
  2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  3. Akkuş, Y., & Menteş, S. A. (2017). Uygulamalı girişimcilik eğitimi katılımcılarının girişimcilik eğilimleri: Trakya örneği. Girişimcilik ve Kalkınma Dergisi, 12(1), 7–14.
  4. Albayrak, T., Aksoy, Ş., & Caber, M. (2013). The effect of environmental concern and scepticism on green purchase behaviour. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 31(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634501311292902
  5. Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471–499. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164939
  6. Armstrong, T. (2003). Multiple intelligences of reading and writing. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  7. Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002
  8. Barba-Sánchez, V., Mitre-Aranda, M., & del Brío-González, J. (2022). The entrepreneurial intention of university students: An environmental perspective. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 28(2), 100184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2021.100184
  9. Baş, G. (2016). The effect of multiple intelligences theory-based education on academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16(6), 1833–1864. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.6.0015
  10. Becker, J. M., Klein, K., & Wetzels, M. (2012). Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Planning, 45(5-6), 359–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2012.10.001
  11. Cai, B., Chen, Y., & Ayub, A. (2023). Green mindfulness and spiritual intelligence on green entrepreneurial intention. Sustainability, 15(5), 3895. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15053895
  12. Cardoso, A., et al. (2025). Sustainable consumption intentions among Portuguese university students. Sustainability, 17(17), 7569. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17177569
  13. Chavarría-Garza, W. X., et al. (2022). Assessment of multiple intelligences in first-year engineering students. Sustainability, 14(8), 4631. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084631
  14. Chen, J.-Q. (2004). Theory of multiple intelligences: Is it a scientific theory? Teachers College Record, 106(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00313.x
  15. Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, C.-H. (2012). Enhance green purchase intentions: The roles of green perceived value, green perceived risk, and green trust. Management Decision, 50(3), 502–520. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211216250
  16. Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  17. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  18. Çolakoğlu, N., & Gözükara, İ. (2016). A comparison study on personality traits and entrepreneurial intention of Turkish and Iranian university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.122
  19. Davis, K., Christodoulou, J., Seider, S., & Gardner, H. (2011). The theory of multiple intelligences. In R. J. Sternberg & S. B. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 485–503). Cambridge University Press.
  20. Dijkstra, T. K., & Henseler, J. (2015). Consistent partial least squares path modeling. MIS Quarterly, 39(2), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02
  21. Ding, D., Ma, S., Zhao, L., & Zhang, L. (2019). What influences an individual’s pro-environmental behavior? A literature review. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 146, 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.024
  22. Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. Harper & Row.
  23. Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176
  24. Egeland, J. (2022). Theories of independent intelligences as a Lakatosian research program. Philosophia, 50(5), 2487–2503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-022-00565-1
  25. Ellen, P. S., Wiener, J. L., & Cobb-Walgren, C. (1991). The role of perceived consumer effectiveness in motivating environmentally conscious behaviors. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10(2), 102–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/074391569101000206
  26. 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
  27. Franke, G., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Research, 29(3), 430–447. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515
  28. Furnham, A. (2009). The validity of a new self-report measure of multiple intelligence. Current Psychology, 28(4), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-009-9064-z
  29. Garcia Hernandez, Y., et al. (2025). Green skills and sustainable entrepreneurial intentions. Sustainability, 17(20), 9306. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17209306
  30. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books.
  31. Gardner, H., & Moran, S. (2006). The science of multiple intelligences theory: A response to Waterhouse. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 227–232. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4104_2
  32. Gleim, M. R., Smith, J. S., Andrews, D., & Cronin, J. J., Jr. (2013). Against the green: A multi-method examination of the barriers to green consumption. Journal of Retailing, 89(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.10.001
  33. Hair, J. F., Jr., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128
  34. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage.
  35. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
  36. Hair, J., & Alamer, A. (2022). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(3), 100027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027
  37. Han, H. (2020). Theory of green purchase behavior (TGPB): A new theory for sustainable hospitality operations. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(6), 2815–2828. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2545
  38. Han, H., & Kim, Y. (2010). An investigation of green hotel customers’ decision formation: Developing an extended model of the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(4), 659–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.01.001
  39. Harms, G. D. (1998). Self-perceptions of multiple intelligences among selected third-, seventh- and eleventh-grade students in South Dakota (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Dakota). University of South Dakota.
  40. 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(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  41. Joshi, Y., & Rahman, Z. (2015). Factors affecting green purchase behaviour and future research directions. International Strategic Management Review, 3(1–2), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ism.2015.04.001
  42. Kamalanon, P., Chen, J.-S., & Le, T.-T.-Y. (2022). Why do we buy green products? An extended theory of planned behavior model for green product purchase behavior. Sustainability, 14(2), 689. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020689
  43. Klein, P. D. (1997). Multiplying the problems of intelligence by eight. Canadian Journal of Education, 22(4), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.2307/1585790
  44. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
  45. Kock, N., & Mayfield, M. (2015). PLS-based SEM algorithms: The good neighbor assumption, collinearity, and nonlinearity. Information Management and Business Review, 7(2), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v7i2.1146
  46. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308
  47. Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0
  48. Kuckertz, A., & Wagner, M. (2010). The influence of sustainability orientation on entrepreneurial intentions—Investigating the role of business experience. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), 524–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.001
  49. Lee, K. (2008). Opportunities for green marketing: Young consumers. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26(6), 573–586. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500810902839
  50. Lee, K. (2011). The green purchase behavior of Hong Kong young consumers: The role of peer influence, local environmental involvement and concrete environmental knowledge. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(1), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2011.524575
  51. Lin, S.-T., & Niu, H.-J. (2018). Green consumption: Environmental knowledge, environmental consciousness, social norms and purchasing behavior. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1679–1688. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2233
  52. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y.-W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x
  53. Liobikienė, G., Mandravickaitė, J., & Bernatonienė, J. (2016). Theory of planned behavior approach to understand the green purchasing behavior in the EU: A cross-cultural study. Ecological Economics, 125, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.02.008
  54. Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K. T. (2020). Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 25(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000224
  55. Moafian, F., & Ebrahimi, M. (2015). Multiple intelligences and language learning self-efficacy among TEFL students. International Journal of Language Testing, 5(1), 66–83. https://doi.org/10.30466/IJLTR.2015.20400
  56. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  57. OECD. (2018). Entrepreneurship education and training programmes around the world: Dimensions for success. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264303321-en
  58. Oral, B. (2001). Branşlarına göre üniversite öğrencilerinin zeka alanlarının incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 26(122), 19–31.
  59. Park, S., & Gupta, S. (2012). Handling endogenous regressors by joint estimation using copulas. Marketing Science, 31(4), 567–586. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1120.0718
  60. Paul, J., Modi, A., & Patel, J. (2016). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.006
  61. Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2001). The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviours: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(1), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164704
  62. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  63. Romero Hernández, M. A. (2022). Hacia una refutación rigurosa de la teoría de las inteligencias múltiples. Pensamiento y Teoría, 1(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.63526/pt.v1i3.161
  64. Schlaegel, C., & Koenig, M. (2014). Determinants of entrepreneurial intent: A meta-analytic test and integration of competing models. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), 291–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12087
  65. Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J. H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
  66. Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004
  67. Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175
  68. Tirri, K., Nokelainen, P., & Komulainen, E. (2013). Multiple intelligences: Can they be measured? Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 55(4), 438–461.
  69. Visser, B. A., Ashton, M. C., & Vernon, P. A. (2006). Beyond g: Putting multiple intelligences theory to the test. Intelligence, 34(5), 487–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.02.004
  70. Wang, J., Wang, J., & Gao, J. (2020). Effect of green consumption value on consumption intention in a pro-environmental setting: The mediating role of approach and avoidance motivation. SAGE Open, 10(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020902074
  71. Waterhouse, L. (2006). Multiple intelligences, the Mozart effect and emotional intelligence: A critical review. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 207–225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4104_1
  72. Waterhouse, L. (2023). Why multiple intelligences theory is a neuromyth. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1217288. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1217288
  73. Welsch, H., & Kühling, J. (2010). Pro-environmental behavior and rational consumer choice: Evidence from surveys of life satisfaction. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(3), 405–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2010.01.009
  74. White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919825649
  75. Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., & Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equation models: An evaluation of power, bias and solution propriety. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(6), 913–934. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164413495237
  76. Yadav, R., & Pathak, G. S. (2017). Determinants of consumers’ green purchase behavior in a developing nation: Applying and extending the theory of planned behavior. Ecological Economics, 134, 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.019
  77. Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1265–1272. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1265