Relationship Commitment and Ethical Consumer Behavior in a Retail Setting: The Case of Receiving Too Much Change at the Checkout

In this study, we conducted two experiments to examine the effect of relationship commitment on the reaction of shoppers to receiving too much change, controlling for the amount of excess change. Hypotheses based on equity theory, opportunism and guilt were set up and tested. The first study showed that, when the less committed consumer is confronted with a large excess of change, he/she is less likely to report this mistake, compared with a small excess. Conversely, consumers with a high commitment towards the retailer are more likely to tell when they receive too much change, especially when the amount is large. The second experiment provided an explanation for these findings: the less committed consumer is driven by opportunism, whereas guilt-related feelings play an important role in a high commitment relationship. These results have several implications for both retail management and future research.     

The Mediating Role of Anticipated Guilt in Consumers’ Ethical Decision-Making

In this paper, we theorize that the anticipation of guilt plays an important role in ethically questionable consumer situations. We propose an ethical decision-making framework incorporating anticipated guilt as partial mediator between consumers’ ethical beliefs (anteceded by ethical ideology) and intentions. In the first study, we compared several models using structural equation modeling and found empirical support for our research model. A second experiment was set up to illustrate how these new insights may be applied to prevent consumers from taking advantage of the seller. Results showed that enhancing the anticipation of guilt (by making the interpersonal consequences of the unethical act more salient) increased consumers’ ethical intentions, controlling for ethical beliefs. Together these two studies might have important theoretical and managerial contributions.Sarah Steenhaut is research assistant and doctoral candidate at Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Research Center for Consumer Psychology and Marketing (Belgium). Her research interests lie in the area of ethical aspects and marketing, more specifically, consumers’ ethical beliefs, attitudes and behavior. She has recently published in Journal of Business Ethics.Patrick Van Kenhove is Professor of Marketing at Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Department of Marketing (Belgium). He has recently published in Journal of Business Ethics, Psychology & Marketing, Journal of Retailing, Advances in Consumer Research, Journal of Economic Psychology, Journal of Health Communication and The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research.     

The Relationship between Consumers' Unethical Behavior and Customer Loyalty in a Retail Environment

This paper investigates the relationship between two outcomes of relationship marketing – affective commitment and behavioral loyalty – and consumers' unethical behavior. The main objective of the study is to assess whether affective commitment and behavioral loyalty to a store translate into more ethical behavior towards that store, controlling for the variables of age, gender, and ethical beliefs. The study does not rely on a single measurement tool, but is based on ten months' panel data and three different mail surveys targeted at 359 Belgian households. The results provide support for our hypothesis that affective commitment is indeed negatively correlated with consumers' unethical behavior. The same conclusion could not be drawn for the relationship between behavioral loyalty and consumers' unethical behavior. No significant relationship was detected, not even in situations where affective commitment was high. The results hold major implications for retailing practice.     

‘An Empirical Investigation of the Relationships among a Consumer’s Personal Values, Ethical Ideology and Ethical Beliefs’

This study provides an additional partial test of the Hunt–Vitell theory [1986, Journal of Macromarketing, 8, 5–16; 1993, ‘The General Theory of Marketing Ethics: A Retrospective and Revision’, in N. C. Smith and J. A. Quelch (eds.), Ethics in Marketing (Irwin Inc., Homewood), pp. 775–784], within the consumer ethics context. Using structural equation modeling, the relationships among an individual’s personal values (conceptualized by the typology of Schwartz [1992, ‘Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries’, in M. P. Zanna (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 25, Academic Press, Orlando), pp. 1–65] ethical ideology and ethical beliefs are investigated. The validity of the model is assessed in a two-step procedure. First, a measurement model of constructs is tested for key validity dimensions. Next, the hypothesized causal relationships are examined in several path models, comparing no mediation, partial and complete mediation of ethical ideology. The empirical results indicate that individual differences in value priorities (resultant conservation and resultant self-enhancement) directly and indirectly (through idealism) influence the judgment of ethically questionable consumer practices. These findings may significantly contribute to the theoretical understanding of ethical decision-making.