Ethical consumption - uni-kassel.de · 4.3 Factors influencing the purchase decision ... Since the...
Transcript of Ethical consumption - uni-kassel.de · 4.3 Factors influencing the purchase decision ... Since the...
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n
Exposé
Ethical consumption:
A holistic approach towards an understanding of the
attitude-intention-behaviour gap
Submitted by Monika Maier
European Master of Business Studies
The gap between attitude, intention and behaviour:
A holistic approach towards an understanding of the
ethically minded consumer
Kassel, October 21st, 2013
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 2
Abstract
Ethical and sustainable consumption became important in the past decade and is still a present
issue. A steadily growing number of consumers seem to care more and more about what they
consume, where it comes from and how it is produced. Although it is confirmed by different studies
that people care more about ethical issues it is also widely accepted that there is gap when it comes
to the final purchase decision. This means that people behave less ethically than they originally
wanted.
As little attention has been paid to this gap and it is still poorly understood the purpose of the study
in hand is to obtain a deeper knowledge about the ethically minded consumer and the nature of this
gap. This includes a closer look on ethical consumption and influencing factors in general as well as
the ability to justify unethical decision-making.
The gap will be analysed in a differentiated manner. Therefore, a conceptual model is developed
with which eight combinations of attitude, intention and behaviour are deducted. Based on this a
mixed-research method will be applied by combining online-survey and in-depth interviews in
order to approach the different aspects in an adequate way.
A better understanding of the ethically minded consumer and the discrepancy between attitude and
behaviour is important to both researchers and marketers and shall finally provide practical
implications on how to address related products effectively.
KEY WORDS: ethical consumption, attitude-intention/intention-behaviour gap, influencing factors,
purchase decision making process, neutralization techniques
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 3
Table of content
Table of figures .................................................................................................................................... 4
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 5
2 Problem statement and justification ............................................................................................. 6
3 Purpose and research questions .................................................................................................... 7
4 Theoretical foundation ................................................................................................................. 9
4.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................... 9
4.2 Ethical consumption ............................................................................................................ 12
4.2.1 Definition and differentiation of ethical terminologies ................................................ 12
4.2.2 Ethical decision-making ............................................................................................... 13
4.2.3 Discussion about the existence of the ethical consumer .............................................. 14
4.3 Factors influencing the purchase decision ........................................................................... 15
4.4 Attitude-intention-behaviour gap ........................................................................................ 16
4.5 Neutralisation techniques: How unethical decision-making can be justified ...................... 17
5 Conceptual model to analyse the gap ......................................................................................... 18
6 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 19
7 Overview of Chapters ................................................................................................................. 20
8 Plan of Work .............................................................................................................................. 21
References .......................................................................................................................................... 22
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 4
Table of figures
Figure 1: Illustration of the attitude-intention-behaviour process, the existing gaps and the
interaction with influencing factors. .................................................................................... 7
Figure 2: Ethical decision-making process and the focus for further discussions. ............................ 13
Figure 3: Conceptual model for the derivation of eight possible AIB-combinations. ....................... 18
Figure 4: Different phases of the field research ................................................................................. 19
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 5
1 Introduction
Since the concerns about business ethics started to grow in the beginning of the 1980s great
advancement took place in this field. In the meanwhile, leading business schools have introduced
lectures in business ethics; books, articles and specialised journals are dedicated to related topics.
Moreover, especially during the past years many websites which provide corresponding
information, rankings, discussions and smart phone apps have been created (Viriyavidhayavongs &
Yothmontree, 2002).
This increasing interest becomes also evident when looking at the consumer‟s side: For instance the
development of turnover of fair trade certified products in Germany rose from 51 Mio. € in 2002 up
to 400 Mio. € in 2011 ("Absatz Fairtrade-Produkte im Einzelnen", n.d.). In 2011 there was an
increase in turnover of +18% compared to the previous year. In the first half of 2012 even a plus of
35% was recorded compared to the first half of 2011 ("Fairtrade wächst", 2012). Also the
worldwide development registers a constant increase: +12% from 2010 to 2011 ("Fairtrade
weltweit", n.d.). But not only the consumption of products which are perceived as ethically correct
is still on an upwards trend. Also the number of consumers‟ participation in product boycotts or
large-scale protests against multinational corporations is increasing (Devinney, Auger, & Eckhardt,
2010, p. 10). Boycotting products of unethically acting companies is also seen as a new and major
mode of individualised political participation (Deth, 2009, p. 5). In addition, the internet facilitates
this new form of participation, especially via social networks and the permanent access via smart
phones. These developments illustrate the already important role and the still growing interest in
ethical consumption and related fields.
In contrast to that there are also sceptical voices which questioned whether “ethics matter in
purchase behaviour” (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001) or whether “consumers really care about corporate
responsibility” (Boulstridge & Carrigan, 2000). Some current studies even did not question this
anymore but already tried to understand “why ethical consumers don‟t walk their talk” (Carrington,
Neville, & Whitwell, 2010). Devinney et al. (2010) actually considered the ethical consumers as
being not more than a myth but also admitted that they have been working already for ten years on
the question “Do consumers really care?” and they still did not find an answer (Devinney et al.,
2010, p. XV). This makes evident that ethical consumption behavior is a very complex process, not
least because of the multitude of ethical issues (Shaw & Clarke, 1999, p. 111).
Nevertheless, it is widely accepted that consumers do not always behave as they pretend or want to.
This means that there is a gap between what people say they would do and what they finally do (e.g.
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 6
(Auger & Devinney, 2007, p. 361; Hassan, Shaw, Shiu, Walsh, & Parry, 2013, p. 182; Roberts,
1996, p. 80). Due to the fact that this gap remains poorly understood (Carrington et al., 2010,
p. 141) this thesis is dedicated to a deeper analysis of this gap.
2 Problem statement and justification
As mentioned above there is a gap between what people say they would do and what they finally
do. However, as indicated before this gap is not only poorly understood up to now but also the
general question whether consumers are ethically concerned remains without answer.
The problem arising here is that many interviews and surveys approaches which are conducted to
obtain a better understanding of consumers‟ behaviour do not provide reliable results (e.g. Auger
& Devinney, 2007). This has basically two reasons: Firstly, people tend to respond as per what is
socially expected (social desirability). Secondly, models that reflect consumer behaviour and which
are applied by the researcher possibly underestimate the complexity of consumer behaviour and the
decision-making process (Devinney et al., 2010, p. 12). This lack of validity and reliability can be
seen as one reason for the contradictious results of such surveys and lead, for instance, to wrong
conclusions concerning the market volume of a new product.
Closing this gap is likely to be impossible but reducing it might be feasible and would have a
positive impact on different levels. Firstly, the quality of market research can be improved so that
sales figures can be estimated more reliable. Secondly, companies affected by a large gap between
their customers‟ attitude, intention and behaviour might increase their sales. And finally also the
consumer benefits from a reduced gap as internal conflicts, tension and feeling of guilt can be
reduced (Chatzidakis, Hibbert, & Smith, 2006, p. 697). In addition, the increasing market of and
interest in ethical products and firms‟ behaviour described in the beginning let assume that ethical
considerations will remain an evolving topic and continue to influence consumers‟ purchase
behaviour. As a consequence, it is necessary to have a sound understanding of this gap and the
influencing factors since this also leads to deeper insights into consumer behaviour in general.
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 7
3 Purpose and research questions
The purpose of this study lies on obtaining a deeper knowledge about the nature of the gap between
attitude, intention and behaviour (AIB) in order to improve the understanding of the ethically
minded consumer. Although the literature presents approaches to give reasons for the gap, the gap
itself is not sufficiently investigated (e.g. Chatzidakis et al., 2006; Hassan et al., 2013). Therefore, a
conceptual model will be developed (section 5) with which eight combinations of attitude, intention
and behaviour and thus eight potential consumer categories are deducted and examined
individually. Focusing on these eight categories the interaction with different influencing factors
shall be investigated. In addition, it is to be explored how large each of the eight categories is and
what role the different influencing factors play.
The following figure illustrates the differentiation between attitude, intention and behaviour and
shows that there are two gaps instead of only one attitude-behaviour or intention-behaviour gap as
usually mentioned in the literature (section 4.4). The interaction with the different influencing
factors is also depicted whereby it is differentiated between the influencing factors relevant in all
purchase decisions and the influencing factors which play especially in ethical purchase decisions
an essential role.
Figure 1: Illustration of the attitude-intention-behaviour process, the existing gaps and the interaction with influencing factors.
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 8
Due to the complex field of ethical consumer behaviour elaborations on certain related issues would
go beyond the purpose of this study. The limitations to be set refer to further influencing factors.
Firstly, the impact of the environment, which typically includes social, cultural, economic and
organisational factors, will not be discussed (for this see e.g. Ferrell and Gresham, 1985; Hunt and
Vitell, 1986, both cited in Jones, 1991, p. 370). Secondly, also the characteristics of the moral issue
(moral intensity) would go too far (for moral intensity see e.g. Jones, 1991).
Moreover, by taking into account the different results in the literature it is not expected to find one
sole answer. The search for the absolute truth is possible the reason why questions such as “Do
consumers really care?” (Boulstridge & Carrigan, 2000; Creyer & Ross, 1997; Devinney et al.,
2010, p. XV) remain so far unanswered. Instead, it is suggested to broaden the horizon and to
acknowledge that there is not always a clear “yes” or “no”, “right” or “wrong”, “good” or “bad” –
especially when it comes to ethical and moral issues. Therefore, the question should rather be to
what extent or under which circumstances do consumers care about ethics. This, in turn, means that
one cannot discuss the ethical consumer as an absolute appearance but in fact consider him or her as
being „selectively‟, „occasionally‟ or „part-time‟ ethical. The term “selectively ethical” was already
used by Carrigan and Attalla (2001; p. 570) as they found that consumers care only about certain
kinds of social issues.
In accordance to the purpose of gaining a better understanding of the AIB-gap different research
questions shall be raised. As it is unclear whether the ethical consumer exists or not the first
question is:
RQ1: To what extent does the ethical consumer exist?
The aim is to understand whether basically every consumer is ethically concerned but behaves only
„selectively‟, „occasionally‟ or in „part-time‟ according to this.
The second question refers to the nature of the AIB-gap and shall provide insights into the
relevance of each gap. This means that it is to be revealed how many consumers are usually
hindered to transform their attitude into intention and their intention into behaviour.
RQ2: On which level do consumers mostly exit the AIB-process?
In order to examine the possible combinations a conceptual model is created (section 5).
The third research question shall clarify how consumers justify the discrepancy between their
attitude and behaviour by using neutralisation techniques (section 4.5).
RQ3: Which of the neutralisation techniques are mostly used to justify unethical decisions?
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 9
4 Theoretical foundation
This chapter contains the review of literature that will provide the needed background for the
research in hand. In the beginning, an overview of the most relevant research papers and books is
presented. Subsequent to this each topic will be discussed and evaluated in a separate section.
Firstly, it is necessary to present the terminology used and discuss the existing knowledge
concerning ethical consumption in general. Secondly, the general factors influencing consumers‟
behaviour are introduced as they are also valid for ethical decision-making. After presenting the
current understanding of the AIB-gap the five neutralisation techniques and the impact of
uncertainty in ethical decision-making are described. Each section will be concluded by
emphasising the implications for the research that is to be developed and conducted.
4.1 Overview
The following table lists the selection of the most important research papers and books on which the
fundamental understanding and the field research will be based. Since many of these sources also
discuss related topics the classifications to the different subjects serve only as a rough orientation.
The complete references as well as additional sources for related topics are in the reference list.
A. Consumer ethics in purchase behaviour - do consumers care or not?
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 12
4.2 Ethical consumption
4.2.1 Definition and differentiation of ethical terminologies
Ethics is generally defined as a set of moral principles and values about what behaviour ought to be
(Steiner and Steiner, 1980 as cited in Vitell & Festervand, 1987, p. 111). This set is also supposed
to even guide behaviour (Sherwin, 1983 as cited in Creyer & Ross, 1997, p. 422). However, this set
of moral principles which is used as a basis for judgements is not fixed and therefore it results in
different understandings of what is ethical and unethical behaviour (Creyer & Ross, 1997, p. 422).
Since the definition of “ethics” is a rather philosophical question which leads to excessive
discussions, no further elaboration is provided here.
Also “ethical consumer behaviour” is broadly defined as “decision making, purchases and other
consumption experiences that are affected by the consumer‟s ethical concerns” (Cooper-Martin and
Holbrook, 1993, p. 113 as cited in Chatzidakis et al., 2006, p. 693). Hereby it is to differentiate
between “ethical consumerism” and “consumer ethics” (Chatzidakis et al., 2006, p. 693). The latter
refers to a misbehaviour which usually takes place in retail settings such as stealing or omitting to
declare undercharging (e.g. Vitell & Muncy, 1992). This perspective, however, is not subject of this
work. In contrast, “ethical consumerism” or “ethical consumption” is seen as an evolution of
consumerism which takes into account ethical aspects of products and firms‟ activities (e.g.
Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Carrington et al., 2010 Creyer & Ross, 1997). These ethical aspects refer
to dimensions such as employees‟ working conditions, treatment and safety of customers,
responsibility towards society, environmental impacts and animal testing (Boulstridge & Carrigan,
2000, p. 360; Viriyavidhayavongs & Yothmontree, 2002, p. 2). Although, Devinney et al. (2010;
p. 9) argued that “the label “ethical” consumerism carries mythological baggage” and therefore has
to be rejected this terminology will be used further on. Alternatives provided such as “consumer
social responsibility” (Devinney, Auger, Eckhardt, & Birtchnell, 2006) or “sustainable
consumption” (Defila, 2011) might indeed reflect reality more apposite but could be interpreted as
not including dimensions such as animal-testing.
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 13
4.2.2 Ethical decision-making
The ethical decision-making process is a well covered topic in the existing literature so that only a
short overview is presented here. An extensive list of empirical researches of ethical decision-
making in business is provided by Loe et al. (2000, pp. 188-194). In addition, Brady and
Gougoumanova (2011, p. 13) give an overview of different authors and their approaches to the
ethical decision-making process.
A fundamental model for ethical decision-making is Rest‟s four-stage model whose core elements
are consistent with many successive models advanced, for instance, by Hunt and Vitell (1986,
rev.1993) or Ferrell and Gresham (1985) (both cited in Chatzidakis et al., 2006, p. 695). Therefore,
it was also used by Jones (1991, p. 370) as a basis for his synthesis of different ethical decision-
making models. As depicted by Chatzidakis et al. (2006, p. 696) Rest‟s model suggests that an
individual pass through four stages when making an ethical decision:
1. Recognition of a moral issue
2. Making a Moral judgement
3. Establishment of a moral intent
4. Engagement in moral behaviour
Hereby it is to mention that success at one stage does not necessarily lead to success in following
stages. This means for instance that a person who judges organic food as being better for the
environment (stage 2) might not establish the intention to buy corresponding products (stage 3).
In the following discussions it is implied that the recognition of a moral or ethical issue (stage 1) is
given so that the focus lies only on the stages 2 to 4 and are renamed as attitude, intention and
behaviour which is illustrated in the following figure.
Figure 2: Ethical decision-making process and the focus for further discussions.
Attitude Intention
Make a moral
judgement
Establish a moralintent
Recognise a moral issue
assumed as being given
Engage in moral
behaviour
Behaviour
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 14
4.2.3 Discussion about the existence of the ethical consumer
As indicated in the beginning there are numerous controversial discussions in the literature
concerning the question whether the ethical consumer does exist or not. The results and opinions
range from confirmation to negation. Creyer and Ross (1997, p. 428) found that ethical
considerations are important during the purchase decision, that consumers reward ethical behaviour
by agreeing on paying higher prices for complying product and that they the punish unethical firms
by accepting products only at lower prices. They even suggested that ethics represent more and
more a core part of consumers‟ decision making (p. 432). These results are confirmed by
Viriyavidhayavongs and Yothmontree (2002, p. 10). However, by analysing the underlying
questionnaires it can be assumed that the questions posed favoured answers in accordance to social
expectations and did not consider that actual behaviour might turn out to be not in line with the
responses obtained. Nevertheless, it has to be mentioned that, as initially presented, the current
development of corresponding products such as fair trade or organic labels as well as regular
product boycotts confirm an increasing awareness of and interest in ethical considerations.
Opposed to the results presenting a positive picture of consumers‟ ethical involvement other authors
hold a more sceptical or even denying view. Boulstridge and Carrigan (2000) claim for instance that
ethics may not be as important in influencing consumer behaviour as believed so far (p. 361) and
that factors such as price, quality, brand familiarity and convenience are the most important
decision factors (p. 359; p. 363). The latter is also confirmed by Carrigan and Attalla (2001, p. 569)
who identified price, value, brand and fashion trend as being crucial factors influencing the buying
behaviour. Finally, Boulstridge and Carrigan (2000, p. 360; p. 364) stated that consumers are more
likely to reward and support positive actions than to punish a firm‟s bad behaviour. This, however,
contradicts the findings of Carrigan and Attalla (2001, p. 568) who argued that a firm‟s poor ethical
record would not affect consumers‟ purchase intentions nor would respondents pay a higher price
for products that were produced in a socially responsible way. They found also that consumers are
unwilling to undertake extra inconvenience for ethical purchases (p. 570). This rather negative
perspective of consumers‟ ethical involvement also revealed that consumers are likely to experience
inner conflicts and to feel uncomfortable which, in turns, leads to a kind of helplessness (p. 569)
and unhealthy scepticism towards ethical consumption (p. 571). On the one hand consumers are
confused about which company is “guilty” and which behaves “correctly” so that they are sceptical
towards most of the firms. On the other hand they believe that an individual‟s behaviour has little
impact in changing anything (p. 571).
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 15
These broad and various discussions are not surprising if one takes into account that consumer
behaviour – especially when it comes to ethical considerations – is a highly complex process (Shaw
& Clarke, 1999, p. 111). Different understandings and dimensions of ethics as well as personal
emotions are involved. Therefore, the results discussed by diverse authors are likely to be
influenced by the selection of the sample, the usually narrow scope of the study, the direction into
which the often used interviews might be led and the perspective under which the results are
interpreted. Already the fundamental question “What does ethical consumption mean?” leads to
various outcomes. Shall one consider rather the environmental impact of a product or under which
working conditions it was produced? Is a safe work place more important than fair wages? What
about animal testing or the usage of scarce resources? What if “fair trade” contradicts the
exploitation of the rain forest? And how can a consumer know that the environmental impact of
regional apples stored in cold warehouses might be higher compared to apples shipped from New
Zealand?
Additionally, today‟s society is exposed to a rapidly changing environment which has an impact on
consumers‟ behaviour. The quickly developing information technologies for instance influence the
way of how consumers actively search for or passively obtain information about products, prices or
companies. Furthermore, especially during the last decade big discussions about the global climate
change and environmental disasters such as the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011 or the BP oil
disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 led to increased awareness and concerns regarding
environmental pollution. The same is true for other ethical issues such as unreasonable working
conditions or exploitation of natural sources which hit regularly the headlines due to Foxconn,
Samsung, Nestlé or other large enterprises. Depending on this daily changing news, consumers are
influenced and might tend to consume under more or less ethical considerations.
4.3 Factors influencing the purchase decision
In this section a brief overview of the general factors influencing consumer behaviour shall be
provided as they also influence the ethically minded consumer. These factors are categorised into
external, internal, situational and permanent factors which are discussed briefly (a similar
categorisation is provided by Kleinhückelkotten, 2011, pp. 138-141). The strong impact that those
factors can have will be presented for time pressure and the Good Samaritan Experiment (Devinney
et al., 2010, p. 6).
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 16
4.4 Attitude-intention-behaviour gap
Widely accepted in the literature is the existence of a gap between what people say they would do
and what they finally do. While an increasing number of consumers is interested in and motivated
by ethical consumerism, a change in consumers‟ behaviour is far less noticeable (Carrington et al.,
2010, p. 139). Several studies confirm that the ethically minded consumer does not always behave
according to the expressed attitude or intention (Boulstridge & Carrigan, 2000, p. 361; Carrigan
& Attalla, 2001, p. 564; Devinney et al., 2010, p. 2).
The question how deep this gap is differs from study to study. Vershoor suggested that 75% of
consumers argue that they would switch the brand or retailer in order to support a good cause
associated with a certain product (cited in Boulstridge & Carrigan, 2000, p. 359). In contrast, the
Cone/Roper study found that 51% of the respondents stated that they would be likely to pay a higher
price for a product linked to a cause they care about (cited in Simon, 1995, p. 23). However, the
formulation likely let assume that this result does not reflect reality. The study found as well that
although these respondents declared a kind of ethically attitude only 20% said that they had actually
bought a corresponding product in the past year. These proportions are found by the futerra-study in
2005 as being even lower (as cited in Carrington et al., 2010, p. 139). It revealed that while 30% of
the respondents declared that they would buy ethically, only 3% actually do so. This broad variety
of percentages shows that there is no clarity about the extent of the gap and that the results might
highly depend on how questions are posed. This means, that if answers as per social desirability are
fostered the gap is likely to be inflated. Social desirability means that respondents can be reluctant
or unable to answer honestly to sensitive topics in order to defend their ego or impress. As a
consequence, data can be biased towards what is perceived as being “right” or socially expected
(Fisher, 1993, p. 303).
Although the social desirability bias is well known, surveys continue to predict behaviour based on
attitude and intention and regularly fail in doing so (Devinney et al., 2010, p. 3). This lack of
validity finally results in contradictious discussions about the existence and behaviour of the ethical
consumer (as shown in section 4.2.2). Even though this gap is debated in most of the studies related
to ethical consumer behaviour “minimal attention has been paid to the critical gap“ (Carrington et
al., 2010, p. 154) so that there is little research focusing directly on the gap itself. Therefore, it is not
surprising that this phenomena is partly declared as attitude-behaviour gap (e.g. Boulstridge
& Carrigan, 2000; Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Roberts, 1996) or as intention-behaviour gap (e.g.
Carrington et al., 2010) but is not differentiated in detail and still poorly understood.
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 17
The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980 as cited in Shaw, Shiu, Hassan,
Bekin, & Hogg, 2007, p. 31) and the further developed Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen,
1985 as cited in Shaw et al., 2007, p. 31) provide a framework for the relationship between attitude
and behaviour. Especially the TPB has been widely applied in behavioural domains and was further
developed for the ethical consumer behaviour context (Carrington et al., 2010; Shaw et al., 2007).
Carrington et al. (2010) constructed a conceptual model of the intention-behaviour gap by bringing
together implementation intentions, actual behavioural control and situational context. Those are
considered as moderators influencing the translation from intention into behaviour. It was
concluded that by formulating an intention to translate it into actual behaviour a strongly positive
effect in bridging the gap may be reached (p. 154). Intention is hold as being an important precursor
to action (Shaw et al., 2007, p. 31). In addition, Carrington et al. (2010; p. 142) mentioned that there
are two gaps: firstly, the gap between consumer attitude and purchase intention and secondly, the
gap between the latter and the actual buying behaviour. However, this differentiation is not further
developed and their conceptual model focuses only on the second gap, namely the intention-
behaviour gap.
As a conclusion a lack can be seen in (1) the differentiation between and (2) the integration of both,
attitude and intention as well as (3) a deeper examination in terms of different combinations of
attitude, intention and behaviour. Moreover, no attention is paid to the possibility of (4) a vice-
versa-gap, this means that some consumers might not really care about ethical issues but finally
purchase correspondent products, for instance because it is currently fashionable or they feel guilty.
4.5 Neutralisation techniques: How unethical decision-making can be justified
When consumers behave in a way which is contradictious to their expressed ethical concerns or
social norms psychological tension arises (Chatzidakis et al., 2006, p. 694). This section presents
how consumers cope with this inner tension and decision conflicts by justifying and neutralising
their unethical decision making. Originally, the neutralisation techniques were introduced by Sykes
and Matza in 1957 (as cited in Strutton, Vitell, & Pelton, 1994, p. 254) in order to explain juvenile
delinquency and were adapted by Strutton et al. (1994) in a consumer context. Chatzidakis et al.
(2006) applied it finally to consumer‟s (un)ethical decision making.
The neutralisation techniques are seen as not only following unethical behaviour but also can
proceed it. The ability to neutralise can interfere with the translation from attitude into intention and
finally into behaviour and thus gives one explanation for the existence of the gap (Chatzidakis et
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 18
al., 2006, p. 694). By understanding those techniques and justifications it might be possible to reply
the arguments which are used by consumers to justify unethical product choices. Therefore, it is
suggested that further research is needed in order to reveal which of these neutralisation techniques
are mostly used (Chatzidakis et al., 2006, p. 697).
5 Conceptual model to analyse the gap
As indicated earlier a conceptual model shall serve as a basis in order to examine the different
combinations between attitude, intention and behaviour. Therefore, it is suggested that after an
ethical problem is recognised the consumer can have either a positive/supportive (+) or a
neutral/ignoring (O) attitude. A purely negative attitude, intention or behaviour will not be
considered as it is assumed that consumers are in general not against ethical considerations. Since
success on one stage does not imply success on the following stage it is possible that although a
consumer has a positive attitude (+) he or she might not actually intent to follow the positive
attitude. This would mean that the intention is neutral (O). The same logic is applied for the third
stage, namely the behaviour which means that the consumer finally either purchase (+) or not (O)
according to ethical considerations. Following this logic, eight +/O combinations are possible which
are illustrated in the figure below.
Figure 3: Conceptual model for the derivation of eight possible AIB-combinations.
These eight combinations represent the possibilities of how a consumer can pass through the
decision-making process, ranging from the ideal ethical consumer (category 1; C1) to the fully
uninvolved consumer (C8). It can be seen that the gap does not only exist between a positive
attitude and a failure in behaviour but that it might be also vice-versa. This means, that a consumer
can purchase ethical products without having a positive attitude (C5) or a real intention (C7). Based
on this, the purpose is to reveal how big each of these categories is and to analyse each of them.
Thereby it is not intended to create consumer profiles but to understand the existence of the
different combinations.
++
+ ++
+ +1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Behaviour
Intention
Attitude
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 19
6 Methodology
After an intensive desk research which includes the analysis of existing studies and surveys, a field
research is to be conducted.
The research design foresees a mixed-research method by combining a qualitative and a
quantitative method in order to obtain different, complementary views of the researched issues and
to benefit from the strengths of both methods (Zachariadis, Scott, & Barrett, 2013, p. 865). The
sequencing of the different phases is illustrated in the following figure.
Figure 4: Different phases of the field research
The research starts with in-depth interviews to gain valuable insights for the creation of the
questionnaire (phase I). By using this insights and existing questionnaires from other surveys an
own questionnaire will be created. In a short pilot-phase (phase II) it is to be verified whether the
questionnaire is feasible and adequate for a valid and reliable data collection. Subsequent to
possible adjustments the quantitative survey will be launched by means of a self-administrated,
anonymous online questionnaire (phase III-a). During this collection phase 15±10 in-depth
interviews (phase III-b) will be conducted until a point of saturation, where additional interviews
provide little new knowledge (Kvale, 1996, p. 102).
The composition of sample shall be representative regarding gender, age and profession. Due to the
accessibility to respondents via an online questionnaire it is expected that the majority of
respondents will be between 18 and 40 years. Also the nationality of the respondents will be mixed
as cultural differences are regarded as having a much lower impact on consumers‟ ethical
considerations as suggested in previous work (Devinney et al., 2010, p. 109). However, the
economical, political and legal environment might influence the importance an individual places on
ethical issues (Singhapakdi, Karande, Rao, & Vitell, 2001). As the European countries can be seen
as roughly similar in terms of these aspects, responses will be collected from different European
countries.
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 20
As introduced in section 4.4 the social desirability bias is a well known phenomena and is inherent
in all surveys that deal with consumers‟ willingness to adopt social responsible or ethical behaviour
(Auger & Devinney, 2007, p. 265). As a consequence, this bias has to be taken into account when
creating the survey instruments and analysing the results. For instance, indirect questioning by the
use of projective techniques is deemed as very helpful when dealing with sensitive topics in order to
bypass answers influenced by social desirability (Belk, Ger, & Askegaard, 2003, p. 332; Fisher,
1993).
7 Overview of Chapters
Abstract
1 Introduction
2 Problem statement and justification
3 Purpose and research questions (incl. limitations)
4 Theoretical foundation
4.1 Overview
4.2 Ethical consumption
4.2.1 Definition and differentiation of ethical terminologies
4.2.2 Ethical decision-making
4.2.3 Discussion about the existence of the ethical consumer
4.3 Factors influencing the purchase decision
4.4 Attitude-intention-behaviour gap
4.5 Neutralization techniques: How unethical decision-making can be justified
4.6 Uncertainty in decision-making
5 Conceptual model to analyse the gap
6 Methodology
7 Analysis and results
8 Discussion
8.1 Summary
8.2 Managerial implications
8.3 Limitations (incl. further research)
References
Appendix
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 21
8 Plan of Work
Week 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Activity Month
PRIMARY TASKS
Desk research
- Literature Review
- Development of Research
Preparation Research tools
- Drafting (questionnaire & interview)
- Pre-Interviews (Phase I)
- Pre-Test questionnaire (Phase II)
Data collection
- Online-survey (Phase III-a)
- Interviews (Phase III-b)
Data analysis
- Analysing results
- Drawing conclusions
SECUNDARY TASKS
Writing Exposé
Writing Thesis (theory, Interm. Report)
Preparation Interm. Presentation
Preparation Interm. Report
Writing Thesis (data analysis)
Review & Finalization →
Deadlines 21. 19.
Meetings 4. 2./3.
Interm. Report + Presentation 22./23.
21st Oct Hand in Exposé
4th Nov Colloquium
2nd/3rd Dec Colloquium
19th Dec Hand in presentation intermediate report
22nd/23rd Intermediate Report + Presentation
Jan 14 Feb 14 Mar 14 Apr 14Sep 13 Oct 13 Nov 13 Dec 13
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 22
References
Absatz Fairtrade-Produkte im Einzelnen. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.fairtrade-
deutschland.de/produkte/absatz-fairtrade-produkte/absatz-fairtrade-produkte-2012/
Fairtrade weltweit. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.fairtrade-deutschland.de/ueber-
fairtrade/fairtrade-weltweit/
Fairtrade wächst: Der Umsatz mit Fairtrade-gesiegelten Produkten wächst im 1. Halbjahr 2012 um
35 Prozent. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.fairtrade-deutschland.de/top/news/detailseite-
news/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=1204&cHash=a637bc6f9c88467824dfdafa5ec928a2
Auger, P., & Devinney, T. M. (2007). Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment of
preferences with unconstrained ethical intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(4), 361–383.
doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9287-y
Belk, R. W., Ger, G., & Askegaard, S. (2003). The fire of desire: A multisited inquiry into
consumer passion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 326–351. doi:10.1086/378613
Boulstridge, E., & Carrigan, M. (2000). Do consumers really care about corporate responsibility?
Highlighting the attitude-behaviour gap. Journal of Communication Management, 4(4), 355–
368.
Brady, D., & Gougoumanova, Z. (2011). An analysis of the “core” decision process of the Hunt and
Vitell model of ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics,
4, 1–18.
Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in purchase
behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–578. doi:10.1108/07363760110410263
Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don‟t walk their
talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions
and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1),
139–158. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6
Chatzidakis, A., Hibbert, S., & Smith, A. (2006). “Ethically concerned, yet unethically behaved”:
Towards an updated understanding of consumer‟s (un)ethical decision making. Advances in
Consumer Research, 33, 693–698.
Creyer, E. H., & Ross, W. T. (1997). The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: Do
consumers really care about business ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(6), 421–432.
doi:10.1108/07363769710185999
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 23
Defila, R. (Ed.). (2011). Ergebnisse sozial-ökologischer Forschung: Vol. 13. Wesen und Wege
nachhaltigen Konsums: Ergebnisse aus dem themenschwerpunkt "Vom wissen zum Handeln -
Neue wege zum nachhaltigen Konsum". München: oekom.
Deth, J. W. van. (2009). New modes of participation and norms of citizenship. Paper prepared for
delivery at the Joint Sessions of the European Consortium for Political Research Workshop
“Professionalization and Individualized Collective Action: Analyzing New „Participatory‟
Dimensions in Civil Society”; Lisbon (Portugal), April 14-19 2009. Retrieved from
http://www.academia.edu/2233375/New_Modes_of_Participation_and_Norms_of_Citizenship
Devinney, T. M., Auger, P., Eckhardt, G., & Birtchnell, T. (2006). The other CSR: Consumer social
responsibility. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=901863
Devinney, T. M., Auger, P., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2010). The myth of the ethical consumer.
Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fisher, R. J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. Journal of
Consumer Research, 20(2), 303–315.
Hassan, L., Shaw, D., Shiu, E., Walsh, G., & Parry, S. (2013). Uncertainty in ethical consumer
choice: a conceptual model. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12(3), 182–193.
doi:10.1002/cb.1409
Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue contingent
model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.
Kleinhückelkotten, S. (2011). Konsumverhalten im Spannungsfeld konkurrierender Interessen und
Ansprüche: Lebensstile als Moderatoren des Konsums. In L. Heidbrink, I. Schmidt, & B. Ahaus
(Eds.), Die Verantwortung des Konsumenten. Über das Verhältnis von Markt, Moral und
Konsum (pp. 133–156). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks,
Calif: Sage Publications.
Loe, T. W., Ferrell, L., & Mansfield, P. (2000). A review of empirical studies assessing ethical
decision making in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(3), 185–204.
doi:10.1023/A:1006083612239
Roberts, J. A. (1996). Will the real socially responsible consumer please step forward? Business
Horizons, 39(1), 79–84.
Shaw, D., & Clarke, I. (1999). Belief formation in ethical consumer groups: An exploratory study.
Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 17(2), 109–119.
E t h i c a l c o n s u m p t i o n | 24
Shaw, D., Shiu, E., Hassan, L., Bekin, C., & Hogg, G. (2007). Intending to be ethical: An
examination of consumer choice in seatshop avoidance. Advances in Consumer Research, 34,
31–38.
Simon, F. L. (1995). Global corporate philanthropy: a strategic framework. International Marketing
Review, 12(4), 20–37. doi:10.1108/02651339510097711
Singhapakdi, A., Karande, K., Rao, C. P., & Vitell, S. J. (2001). How important are ethics and
social responsibility? - A multinational study of marketing professionals. European Journal of
Marketing, 35(1/2), 133–152. doi:10.1108/03090560110363382
Strutton, D., Vitell, S. J., & Pelton, L. E. (1994). How consumers may justify inappropriate
behavior in market settings: An application on the techniques of neutralization. Journal of
Business Research, 30(3), 253–260. doi:10.1016/0148-2963(94)90055-8
Viriyavidhayavongs, V., & Yothmontree, S. (2002). The impact of ethical considerations in
purchase behavior: A propaedeutic to further research. ABAC Journal, 22(3), 1–15.
Vitell, S. J., & Festervand, T. A. (1987). Business ethics: Conflicts, practices and beliefs of
industrial executives. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(2), 111–122.
Vitell, S. J., & Muncy, J. (1992). Consumer ethics: An empirical investigation of factors influencing
ethical judgments of the final consumer. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(8), 585–597.
doi:10.1007/BF00872270
Zachariadis, M., Scott, S., & Barrett, M. (2013). Methodological implications of critical realism for
mixed-methods research. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 855–879.