Double Standards: The Role of Techniques of Neutralization

Despite the growing number of studies examining consumers?? perceptions of unethical corporate and consumer practices, research examining the apparent double standard existing between what consumers perceive as acceptable corporate behaviour and what they believe are acceptable consumer practices remains scarce. Contradictory, double standards are often quoted by other researchers as a major stream in ethical literature. The few studies dealing with this topic as well as this study indicate that people rate corporate unethical actions as less admissible compared to similar consumer misactions. However, little is known about the processes underlying these double standards. This research investigates whether the techniques of neutralization could provide a meaningful way of approaching this phenomenon. Findings indicate that the higher the extent to which people agree with arguments explaining away the misbehaviour instigated by consumers or business, the more they tolerate these questionable consumer and corporate practices. Furthermore and more importantly, these techniques give an answer on the question why people judge business (representatives) more harshly than consumers. More specifically, results show that the same respondents who justify questionable consumer actions to a certain degree, condone the same misbehaviours instigated by business (representatives) to a much lesser extent. In this way, the techniques of neutralization concern a process explaining the double standard phenomenon.     

The Role of Moral Emotions and Consumer Values and Traits in the Decision to Support Nonprofits

We investigate the mediating role of moral emotions and their contingency on individual characteristics between perceptions of corporate ethical/unethical actions and consumer support for nonprofits. We conducted two between-subjects experiments to test our hypotheses on a sample of adult consumers. The results show that social justice values moderate elicitation of gratitude upon exposure to corporate ethical actions, which subsequently impacts consumer support for nonprofits. Furthermore, important individual characteristics (social justice values, moral identity) moderate the elicitation of negative moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) upon perception of corporate unethical actions, which then leads to consumer support for nonprofits. Our study adds to extant research on prosocial behavior by investigating how actions by for-profit companies impact individual helping and by examining a new psychological mechanism (i.e., moral emotional processes and their contingencies) underlying consumer support for nonprofits.     

‘Consumers’ Evaluation of Unethical Marketing Behaviors: The Role of Customer Commitment’

While there is a significant amount of research investigating managerial ethical judgments, a limited amount examines consumer judgments of unethical corporate behavior and its impact on the marketplace. This study examines how consumers’ commitment to a company impacts not only their ethical judgment of corporate behavior but also the outcomes of that judgment. The authors test hypotheses with data from 334 consumers and find that consumers’ level of commitment attenuates the level of perceived fairness. More specifically, highly committed consumers may forgive companies for behaviors when perceived harm is low, but become progressively dissatisfied as the level of perceived harm increases. Results of the study point to the importance of considering ethical behavior from a consumer perspective. If corporate actions are perceived as unethical, the company stands to lose favor with their most committed customers. Considering that more time, effort and investment is required to gain a new customer as to retain an old, this study shows that engaging in behavior perceived as unethical by consumers risks alienating the most committed customers.     

Emotions and dissonance in ‘ethical’ consumption choices

Abstract

This paper investigates the role of emotions and the prevalence of dissonant/incongruent choice behaviour within the context of ethical consumption. Based on 31 in-depth interviews with British consumers, the findings demonstrate that consumers consciously indulge in ‘ethical’ and ‘unethical’ behaviour (as defined by respondents themselves), often within short time frames, and that they often compensate for unethical choices by making ethical choices later on (and vice versa). The study provides evidence that positive and negative emotions are a key driver of this dissonant behaviour. Guilt is the most salient emotion, and a taxonomy of guilt in this context is derived from the data. Consumers are found to employ guilt-management strategies in order to sustain contradictory behaviour and manage cognitive dissonance. A conceptual framework is derived in order to summarise the observed role of emotions in ethical consumer choice. The paper also provides additional explanations of the manifestation of the attitude–behaviour gap.     

Anger punishes,compassion forgives: How discrete emotions mitigate double standards in consumer ethical judgment

Prior research has identified that consumers may judge similar unethical behaviors differently depending on the actor in such behaviors; a phenomenon called double standards. While some studies have examined why consumer double standards may occur, it is less clear how to mitigate their occurrence. The present study examines the role of different, discrete emotions – anger and compassion – in mitigating double standards using two experimental studies, involving a total of 562 participants from Indonesia. The results indicate the existence of double standards, in that consumers were harsher in their judgment of unethical conduct by prosperous (vs. non-prosperous) companies. More importantly, the findings establish that anger and compassion can diminish double standards in consumer ethical judgments. Furthermore, these emotion effects are explained by two distinct mechanisms. Specifically, anger reduces repurchase likelihood when mediated by perceived justice, while compassion mediated by forgiveness increases repurchase likelihood. The research limitations and implications are also discussed.     

Exploring consumer ethics in Ghana,West Africa

Consumer ethics is a growing area of research that focused almost exclusively on consumers in the United States and, to a lesser degree, Europe and Asia. In this paper, we introduce an African element to the consumer ethics discourse by drawing on survey responses from over 300 Ghanaian consumers to explore their ethical beliefs and judgements. We analysed these data using regression techniques. Our findings show that Ghanaian consumers exhibit lower levels of ethics compared with their America counterparts, especially when the unethical actions facilitate the achievement of their goals. While Ghanaian consumers recognize the value of moral rules, they are prone to suspending their ethical positions as they deem necessary in a particular context. Implications for marketing strategy and future research are discussed.     

Consumers' Punishment and Rewarding Process via Purchasing Behavior

While there have been many studies of the ethical behavior ofmanagers, little research investigated the ethical beliefs andideologies of consumers. Moreover, even less is known about therelationship between consumer beliefs and ideology and purchasingbehavior. The present study investigates the extent to whichconsumers punish or reward what they perceive as either a firm'sethical or unethical behavior. The research model was tested onsamples of Israeli and Turkish respondents. The results indicatethat personal economic benefit, ideology (idealism versusrelativism), economic cost to others and locus of control explainconsumer reaction to ethical, purchasing dilemmas. Moralexpectations did not influence whether a consumer would purchasein a store offering an unethical proposition. Apparently,material gain, if large enough, outweighs one's moralpredisposition. Idealists were found to be less likely topurchase in an unethical store situation. The Turkish respondentswere more concerned with economic cost to others than the Israelirespondents, apparently owing to cultural differences between thetwo groups. Finally, those respondents having higher internallocus of control were found to be more ethical.     

Ethical Decision-Making by Consumers: The Roles of Product Harm and Consumer Vulnerability

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the effects of perceptions of product harm and consumer vulnerability on ethical evaluations of target marketing strategies. We first established whether subjects are able to accurately judge the harmfulness of a product through labeling alone, and whether they could differentiate consumers who were more or less vulnerable. The results suggest that without the presence of a prime, subjects who depended on implicit memory or guess were able to detect differences in “sin” and “non-sin” products and consumer vulnerability, but were far less likely to be able to distinguish among high and low levels of product harm and consumer vulnerability. The inability to accurately identify high and low levels of product harm and consumer vulnerability impacted their perceptions of the ethicality of target marketing strategies, such that only four out of 18 target marketing strategies were judged as unethical. Thus, our findings contradict previous research that found subjects judged many more of the integrated strategies as unethical [Smith and Cooper-Martin, J Market 61(1997) 1]. Our results suggest that assessing ethical evaluations of strategies varying in product harm, and consumer vulnerability may only be relevant if consumers can accurately identify product harm.     

The impact of corporate behavior on perceived product value

This research examines how ethical and unethical corporate behavior influence the perceived value of a firm's products, operationalized as the price consumers are willing to pay for that product relative to the competition. We propose that if consumers expect companies to conduct business ethically, then ethical behavior will not be rewarded but unethical behavior will be punished. The results of the first study confirm this expectation. The second study explored ways a firm can improve the perceived value of its products after an unethical act has been committed. Our results indicate that after a firm has committed an unethical act, consumer's perceptions of that company and its products were positively influenced by ethical behavior, corporate philanthropy, and cause-related marketing. However, our analyses revealed that these different strategies varied in their effectiveness. The third study used a choice task, rather than a judgment task, to confirm the finding that corporate behavior does influence perceived product value and is therefore likely to influence market choices. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Consumer Reactions to Unethical Service Recovery

Ethical business practices have been widely prescribed, but why? Consumer’s views on unethical business practices have been studied, but possibly more important to marketers and researchers are consumer actions and reactions to unethical business practices and the businesses themselves. Do consumers react negatively, or in such a way as to "punish" the unethical business? If so, what is the nature and extent of the punishment? This research seeks answers to these questions by examining consumer reactions, such as complaining and switching, to instances of unethical business practices. Using equity theory, this research proposes that consumers should be willing to tolerate some unethical behavior as long as they feel their investments and outcomes remain proportionately equal. Consumers who perceive that their outcome/investment ratio is proportionately unequal to their comparison other will respond by switching or complaining. In this research consumers were exposed to two types of service failures with different levels of service recovery in vignettes. Costs incurred by the consumer during the service transaction were also manipulated in the vignettes. Significant differences were found for complaint behavior in the failure recovery vignettes tested. Specifically, voice complaint was higher in the high cost service encounters in both types of services tested. The recovery attempt used (ethical, unethical, or none) led to significance differences in the variables of complaint, voice complaint, satisfaction, and quality. Higher satisfaction and quality ratings were found for the ethical recovery attempt and higher intentions to use complaint and voice complaint in the unethical recovery attempts. One significant interaction between cost and recovery attempt was found. Intentions to use voice complaint were higher in the high cost situations of ethical and unethical recovery, while approaching equality at the no recovery attempt.     

Ethical Context, Organizational Commitment, and Person-Organization Fit

The purpose of this study was to assess the relationships among ethical context, organizational commitment, and person-organization fit using a sample of 304 young working adults. Results indicated that corporate ethical values signifying different cultural aspects of an ethical context were positively related to both organizational commitment and person-organization fit. Organizational commitment was also positively related to person-organization fit. The findings suggest that the development and promotion of an ethical context might enhance employees' workplace experiences, and companies should consider adopting ethical policies that support principled conduct, punish unethical actions, and increase individual perceptions of an ethical company environment.     

Ethical Judgment of Food Fraud. Effects on Consumer Behavior

This study brings important insights for the food industry by addressing how consumers ethically judge or evaluate unethical firm behavior, in specific reference to food fraud, and if and to what extent that judgment affects the consumer–brand relationship and consumer behavior. it is an empirical investigation of the unethical intentional mislabeling in the U. S food industry. The paper analysis if there are statistically significant associations between brand attachment, ethical judgment, brand commitment, and purchase intention. Quantitative data (151) was collected about three different leading manufacturing food brands (three studies). Correlation and regression analyses were conducted. Findings reveal the important relation between all the constructs. Significant effects on how consumers ethically judged this brand transgression. Thus, it was found that as consumers judged this action as more unethical, the intentions to both stay committed to and purchase the brand were considerably damaged.     

Towards an understanding of consumer recycling from an ethical perspective

Recycling is a post‐purchase consumer activity where the consumer usually considers not only individual but also social goals, ideas and ideologies. Accordingly, ethics is an inherent part of recycling; however, very few studies have explored this behaviour from an ethical point of view. The purpose of this paper is to explain consumer recycling by taking a multifaceted ethical approach. The conceptual model builds on theoretical underpinnings related to ethical consumption by exploring the extensions of the theory of planned behaviour, Jones' ethical decision‐making model and Holbrook's conceptualization of ethical consumption. Thus, the attitude‐intention framework incorporates three ethics‐related concepts: (1) moral obligation, i.e. the level of guilt to perform the behaviour, (2) moral intensity, i.e. the moral issue characteristics, and (3) collectivism, i.e. an individual‐level value orientation. The data were collected from a sample of Slovenian consumers, using an online consumer panel. The sample reflected the Slovenian population in terms of gender and age. The proposed conceptual model was tested using structural equation modelling. The results suggest the proposed ethical concepts play a significant role in the attitude‐intention framework. The more collectivistic individuals have more positive attitudes towards recycling. Moreover, the more consumers perceive recycling as morally intense, the more favourable their attitudes are. In turn, attitudes positively affect intentions to recycle. In addition, higher levels of moral obligation positively influence intentions to recycle. The only hypothesis that is not supported in this study refers to the influence of moral intensity on intentions to recycle. The implications for public policymakers and social marketers stem from a complex interplay of the antecedents of recycling behaviour. Future studies could go in several directions by extending the model to other moral issues, conducting a study in a cross‐cultural setting or taking a longitudinal approach.     

Financial service providers: Does it matter if banks don't behave ethically?

The ethical consumer literature predominantly concentrates on fast‐moving consuming goods and thus, neglects insights to consumer behaviour within ethical services. As the financial services sector continues to grow in the UK, this paper addresses this anomaly by providing further insight into consumers and their ethical banking practices. More specifically, it examines their motivations as well as the trade‐offs and barriers which prevent greater uptake. Using a combination of in‐depth interviews and projective techniques, the research draws on Freestone and McGoldrick's model to reveal a lack of awareness towards ethical financial service providers and sheds light on various perceptions regarding what constitutes an ethical financial service. Additionally, numerous underlying personal benefits of ethical financial services became apparent alongside consumer expectations of customer care. In conclusion, our findings help to create a revised model which identifies more precisely the stages of ethical awareness, motivation and behaviour of ethical consumers both in the context of ethical financial services but also ethical consumption practices in general.     

Investigating the impact of guilt and shame proneness on consumer ethics: a cross national study

Studies show that emotions of guilt and shame significantly influence how people live their daily lives when it comes to making ethical decisions. Nonetheless, individuals’ proneness toward guilt and shame has received limited attention in consumer behaviour literature. The study focuses on the impact of anticipated emotions (i.e. guilt and shame) on various consumers’ ethical and unethical behaviours. Using a combination of a panel data sample and a university sample, the overall results between the two countries (i.e. Australia and Indonesia) reveal more similarities than differences. Consumers with high guilt‐proneness are less likely to agree on those unethical behaviours. This study has important theoretical implications for understanding the similarities and differences between both nations and the impact of guilt and shame proneness on consumer ethics.     

Unethical behaviour in procurement: A perspective on causes and solutions

Enterprise management often encourages their marketing personnel to offer gifts to purchasers of clients but won't allow the purchasers of the company to accept gifts. This double standards create an atmosphere of dishonesty in the company.When considering that purchasers fulfilling the procurement function for a company are the major spenders of company funds, and that purchasers are frequently tempted to accept gifts and prevailing double standards within the company, it is no wonder that they sometimes succumb to unethical behaviour. The purchasing environment thus creates an atmosphere conductive to unethical behaviour.However, the cause of unethical behaviour is not necessarily the individual's lack of moral standards. Research has shown that the actions of managers, the ethical climate in the enterprise and the absence of a company policy on the matter are all contributing factors towards unethical behaviour. Unethical behaviour of purchasers and other personnel involved in procurement can therefore be prevented or limited by implementing certain measures.This article focuses on ethics, procurement or purchasing ethics, and unethical behaviour among purchasers in general, as well as more specifically on the situation in South Africa, and makes recommendations for establishing codes of conduct, other procedures and policies for improving the situation of the purchaser in the enterprise.Dr Badenhorst is presently associate-professor, in Purchasing and Materials Management at the University of South Africa. She made contributions to a wide range of journals regarding marketing, management, development and public administration. She also presented scientific papers at various international and national conferences. She was also instrumental in starting (and manages) the first (and only) Certificate in Purchasing Management course in South Africa.     

Consumer Ethics: Determinants of Ethical Beliefs of African Americans

This study explores the ethical ideol-ogies and ethical beliefs of African American consumers using the Forsyth ethical position questionnaire (EPQ) and the Muncy-Vitell consumer ethics questionnaire (MVQ). The two dimensions of the EPQ (i.e., idealism and relativism) were the independent constructs and the four dimensions of the MVQ (i.e., illegal, active, passive and no harm) were the dependent variables. In addition, this paper explores the consumer ethics of African Americans across four demographic factors (i.e., age, education, gender, and marital status). A sample of 315 African American consumers was used to explore these relationships. Results confirmed that consumers who score high on the idealism scale are more likely to reject questionable consumer activities, but there was no relationship between relativism and consumers' rejection of questionable activities. Older, more educated and married consumers rejected questionable activities more than younger, less educated and single consumers. Gender did not have any significant relationship to consumers' ethical orientation.     

Consumers' Attitudes Toward Labelling of Ethical Products: The Case of Organic and Fair Trade Products

This article aims to investigate the factors that influence consumer attitudes to use labelling information in purchasing organic and Fair Trade products and to verify if labelling is a valid tool of direct shopping aid to consumers, with a view to derive inferences that may contribute to better strategic and tactical marketing decisions. A quantitative survey with a sample of 300 consumers living in south Italy was conducted to explore consumers' knowledge and attitudes toward labelling of organic and fair trade products. Data generated in this way were submitted to exploratory and segmentation analysis. The results indicate significant differences in consumer attitudes and behavior for ethical products and show the importance of new variables, other than demographics characteristics, that can influence the purchasing behavior and label information use.     

“What’s the Harm in Being Unethical? These Strangers are Rich Anyway!” Exploring Underlying Factors of Double Standards

Previous studies show evidence of double standards in terms of individuals being more tolerant of questionable consumer practices than of similar business practices. However, whether these double standards are necessarily due to the fact that one party is a business company while the other is a consumer was not addressed. The results of our two experimental studies, conducted among 277 (Study 1) and 264 (Study 2) participants from a Western European country by means of an anonymous self-administered online survey, demonstrate that the respondents were not only harsher in their judgments of unethical business (vs. consumer) behavior, but also harsher in their judgments of unethical behavior by prosperous (vs. non-prosperous) consumers and prosperous (vs. non-prosperous) business companies (Study 1). Further, they were also less tolerant of unethical behavior by consumers (vs. one’s best friend) and business companies with which they have a less than good (vs. a good) relationship (Study 2). These results indicate that double standards are due to differences in perceived wealth between subjects and in the individual’s relationship with subjects. These two factors imply that double standards are not strictly reserved to consumer–business relations, but might also be used in business–business and consumer–consumer relations. Further, these results indicate that companies need to be aware of the fact that good financial figures may backfire as they might lead individuals to be more critical of a company’s deceptive practices. Moreover, these findings point to the importance of businesses investing resources—and to keep investing resources—in developing a good relationship with stakeholders as these good relationships lead to stakeholders being less prone to make moral condemnations.