“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.     

Gender Differences in Double Standards

The purpose of the present study is to investigate gender differences in the use of double standards in ethical judgements of questionable conduct instigated by business or consumers. We investigate if consumers are more critical towards unethical corporate versus consumer actions and if these double standards depend on the gender of the respondent. In the first study, we compared evaluations of four specific unethical actions [cfr. DePaulo, 1987, in: J. Saegert (ed.) Proceedings of the Division of Consumer Psychology (American Psychological Association, Washington DC)] instigated by either the consumer or the corporation. In a second study, we investigated the perception of some general consumer and corporate (un)ethical actions in addition to DePaulo’s unethical scenarios. Both researches show that females are less likely to use double standards when it comes to their own (un)ethical behaviour compared to corporate (un)ethical actions. Furthermore, gender differences in the use of double standards depend on the type of unethical behaviour. Limitations and suggestions for further research are discussed.     

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.     

The effects of age cues on preferences for organic food: The moderating role of message claim

Organic food, a form of green consumption, is a growing industry, with consumers purchasing for both altruistic and egoistical motives. However, there is limited research into how marketers can develop advertising strategies to promote organic food. The present research examines how age cues influence consumer preferences for organic food. Across two experimental studies, this research demonstrates that consumers exposed to a younger cue show higher preferences for organic fruits when evaluating an altruistic claim. More importantly, this research draws upon psychological reactance theory to test the opposite effect, such that consumers exposed to a younger cue show lower preferences for organic fruits when evaluating an egoistic claim. Further, the emotions of compassion and anger are established as the mediators of the interactive effect between age cue and message claim on consumer preferences for organic food. These findings thus offer theoretical and managerial implications for the use of age cues and motivational claims, specifically in promoting organic food.     

Customer satisfaction and customer behavior: The differential role of brand and category expectations

Previous research has suggested that consumers use multiple strands to evaluate their satisfaction with a product and to establish postpurchase behavioral intention. However, prior empirical research has focused on which individual standard best predicts satisfaction. In contrast, this article develops and tests a model of consumer satisfaction and postpurchase behavioral intention in which consumers simultaneously use multiple standards—perceptions of performance, brand expectations, and category expectations. The results of an experiment for a simulated service encounter provide support for the proposition that consumers use multiple standards and that these standards have differential effects on such postpurchase outcomes as satisfaction, repurchase intention, and willingness to recommend. Brand expectations are shown to be better predictors of affective outcomes (such as satisfaction), while category expectations are shown to be better predictors of behavioral outcomes (repurchase and recommendation). Consistent with prior research, perceived performance is shown to have a strong effect on both satisfaction and behavioral intention.     

Embedding Ethics: Dialogic Partnerships and Communitarian Business Ethics

Although emotion has become one of the most popular research areas within organizational scholarship, few studies have considered its connection with unethical behavior. Using dual-process theory, we expand on the rationalist perspective within the field of behavioral ethics by considering the process through which two discrete emotions, anger and guilt, influence unethical behavior. Across two studies using different methodologies, we found that anger increases unethical behavior whereas guilt reduces unethical behavior. These effects were mediated by impulsive and deliberative processing. Overall, our results shed light on distinct mechanisms through which emotions can influence unethical behavior. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Anger Strays,Fear Refrains: The Differential Effect of Negative Emotions on Consumers’ Ethical Judgments

Although various factors have been studied for their influence on consumers’ ethical judgments, the role of incidental emotions has received relatively less attention. Recent research in consumer behavior has focused on studying the effect of specific incidental emotions on various aspects of consumer decision making. This paper investigates the effect of two negative, incidental emotional states of anger and fear on ethical judgment in a consumer context using a passive unethical behavior scenario (i.e., too much change received). The paper presents two experimental studies. Study 1 focuses on the interaction of moral intensity (amount of change) and incidental emotion state in predicting the ethical judgment while study 2 investigates the underlying causal mechanism behind the process, using a mediation analysis. The results reveal a significant interaction between moral intensity and incidental emotion. Specifically, individuals in the state of incidental fear exhibit higher levels of ethical judgment as the moral intensity increases as compared to individuals in the state of incidental anger. Further, perceived control is found to mediate the relationship between emotional state and ethical judgment under higher moral intensity condition.     

Affective responses to service failure: Anger, regret, and retaliatory versus conciliatory responses

After a service failure, consumers make appraisals or assessments about the characteristics of this failure. These appraisals, in turn, affect how a consumer responds emotionally and behaviorally. Using an appraisal-tendency framework, we predict that two negatively valenced emotions (anger and regret) underlie or mediate the effects of consumers’ appraisals about service failure on post-purchase behaviors. Consistent with the predictions, in a laboratory study, we find that anger plays a powerful role in explaining retaliatory behaviors, and that both anger and regret account for the effect of appraisals on conciliatory behaviors. We extend the same appraisal-tendency framework to predict how changes in emotions underlie the effects of recovery efforts on post-purchase behaviors. Again consistent with predictions, in the laboratory study and in a web-based study, we find that recovery efforts that reduce anger decrease retaliatory behaviors. However, both studies provide less clear-cut evidence about the emotional mediators between recovery efforts and conciliatory behaviors. Because conciliatory behaviors are important behaviors for businesses to promote, future research should explore what other emotions explain recovery effort effects on conciliatory behaviors.     

Consumer rights or unethical behaviors: Exploring the impacts of retailer return policies

While a product return guarantee plays an important role in reducing perceived risk, a liberal product return policy may generate a moral crisis in consumers and induce unethical post-consumption behaviors. Situational questionnaires with two return policies, liberal and rigorous, are used to investigate how such policies influence consumers' moral reasoning and fraudulent return activities. This study finds that a return policy with different attributes results in differing consumer moral recognition, moral judgment, moral intensity, and intentions toward fraudulent return. Among these constructs, evidence of a strong correlation between moral judgment and unethical returning behaviors was found. Social consensus has a greater impact on moral recognition, moral judgment, and fraudulent return intention than on the magnitude of consequences and probability of effect. These findings from consumers' moral perspectives address gaps in the literature in which most studies take the retailer point of view in examining the effects of return policy. Understanding consumers’ moral decision-making is helpful for retailers who seek to avoid consumer abuse of return policies.     

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.     

The relationship between anomie and unethical retail disposition

Despite potential competitive and customer service advantages of liberal return policies, retailers have tightened policies in response to fraudulent consumer behavior. This article suggests that changes in consumer behavior/retail return policies may be the result of a larger social phenomenon: consumer anomie. This research explores consumer anomie within the context of retailing. Two studies assess the relationships between anomie, materialism, rationalization techniques, and fraudulent marketplace behaviors. Factor analysis corroborates previous research indicating that modern‐day anomie is essentially cynicism. Consumers high in cynicism are more materialistic and more likely than other consumers to employ rationalization techniques in order to justify engaging in unethical retail disposition. Consumers high in cynicism are also found to hold more favorable views toward engaging in fraudulent marketplace behaviors that permit them to benefit at the seller's expense. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Every ending is a new beginning: Poignancy increases consumer preferences for self-made products

Retailers and brands such as IKEA, Home Depot, and Build-a-Bear encourage consumers to ‘make’ their products rather than be passive recipients. While a growing literature explores ‘why’ consumers purchase self-made products, it is less understood ‘how’ marketers can develop effective advertising and marketing communications to promote such products. Building on the functionalist framework of emotion, the present research explores the potential of a mixed emotional appeal – poignancy – that may be useful in enhancing consumer preferences for self-made products. Notably, this effect is mediated by a fresh start mindset and openness to learning. The effect is also attenuated among consumers with a low personal control. In addition to having substantive practical implications to marketers in developing effective communication strategies, this research offers a novel perspective on the effect of poignancy on consumer decision making.     

Product standardisation in the food service industry: post-purchase attitudes and repurchase intentions of non-Muslims after consuming halal food

In order to satisfy the Muslim market segment, many restaurant and fast food companies in Western countries have standardised their products by switching to halal. The purpose of this research is to discover the extent to which non-Muslim consumers in non-Muslim countries experience cognitive dissonance when they think about restaurants and fast food outlets having likely served them halal-produced food, and the extent to which these consumers intend to repurchase halal food. Data came from a total sample of 1097 non-Muslim consumers in Canada, Spain and the United Kingdom. The full model, with religious identity, ethnic identification and interest in animal welfare as antecedents of cognitive dissonance, explained 35% of the variance in consumers’ repurchase intentions. Our findings suggest that many non-Muslims do not have a particular issue with consuming halal food, but they may react negatively if they unintentionally consume halal food and perceive that they have been deprived of information, or worse still, deliberately deceived. The research makes a number of contributions to marketing knowledge with regard to the negative spillover effects that can result from faith-based product standardisation, and the influences of consumer interest in animal welfare and deprivation of product information on consumer behaviour.     

Being “in Control” May Make You Lose Control: The Role of Self-Regulation in Unethical Leadership Behavior

In the present article, we argue that the constant pressure that leaders face may limit the willpower required to behave according to ethical norms and standards and may therefore lead to unethical behavior. Drawing upon the ego depletion and moral self-regulation literatures, we examined whether self-regulatory depletion that is contingent upon the moral identity of leaders may promote unethical leadership behavior. A laboratory experiment and a multisource field study revealed that regulatory resource depletion promotes unethical leader behaviors among leaders who are low in moral identity. No such effect was found among leaders with a high moral identity. This study extends our knowledge on why organizational leaders do not always conform to organizational goals. Specifically, we argue that the hectic and fragmented workdays of leaders may increase the likelihood that they violate ethical norms. This highlights the necessity to carefully schedule tasks that may have ethical implications. Similarly, organizations should be aware that overloading their managers with work may increase the likelihood of their leaders transgressing ethical norms.     

Consumer intentions to falsify personal information online: unethical or justifiable?

ABSTRACT

Companies routinely analyse the online activities of consumers to understand shopping habits and buying patterns. As the amount of personal information available online has grown, so has the potential for its misuse. When consumers believe that their personal information is being used for an unstated purpose, they may consider the firm to be acting unethically. They may then falsify their personal information online as a reaction to apparent ethical violations by companies or as an opportunistic unethical act of their own. The purpose of the present research is to propose a framework that could be used to understand consumer intentions to falsify personal information online. The research is important from both a theoretical and business perspective. From a theoretical standpoint, they add to the literature on the dark side of marketing by examining ethically questionable behaviour by consumers. The research is relevant for firms because when consumers falsify personal information their ability to target consumers with personalised offers is diminished. The research is also relevant for policymakers as they evaluate existing regulatory safeguards intended to protect consumer information online.     

Seize the Day: How Online Retailers Should Respond to Positive Reviews

Research on online retailer–customer interactions has extensively focused on how to turn negative reviews into marketing wins. By contrast, few prior studies have investigated how retailers should best respond to positive reviews. The current study aims to fill this gap. Drawing on interpersonal relationship research into capitalizing on positive experience, together with reinforcement effect theory and automatic behavioral priming theory, this study explores how retailers should respond to positive reviews to drive consumer repurchase intention. Two laboratory experiments reveal that an active–constructive response in a friendly communication style increases consumer repurchase intention, and consumer positive affect mediates this process. Our findings provide new theoretical insights and useful guidance for retailers on designing effective online communication strategies for consumers.     

Perceived Ethicality of Insurance Claim Fraud: Do Higher Deductibles Lead to Lower Ethical Standards?

Insurance claim fraud costs insurance companies, policymakers, and taxpayers billions of dollars every year and has been described as the second largest white collar crime. The most common insurance fraud activity and one that contributes a significant portion of dollar losses is the practice of padding claim amounts in the event of a loss. One of the largest issues insurance companies face is that policyholders often do not perceive insurance claim padding as an unethical behavior. However, very little research has examined the factors that contribute to such perceptions. Considering how consumers often attempt to justify fraudulent behavior from a fairness perspective, the present work examines how the amount of the deductible in an insurance claim situation can influence feelings of fairness and ethicality. The results of an experimental study show that higher deductible amounts result in stronger perceptions that insurance claim padding is fair to the insurance company, weaker perceptions that the behavior is unethical, and higher proposed claim award amounts. The study also shows, however, that the deductible amount effects are attenuated for consumers who display higher ethical standards as reflected by their scores on the consumer ethics scale. Implications are discussed with respect to the insurance industry, deviant consumer behavior, and general business ethics theory.