Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T19:22:14.909Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Marketplace Morality

from 1 - Consumer Psychology of Individuals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2023

By
Saerom Lee  and
Karen Page Winterich
Edited by
Cait Lamberton ,
Derek D. Rucker  and
Stephen A. Spiller
Cait Lamberton
Affiliation:
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Derek D. Rucker
Affiliation:
Kellogg School, Northwestern University, Illinois
Stephen A. Spiller
Affiliation:
Anderson School, University of California, Los Angeles
Get access

Summary

Consumers are placing increasing importance on morality in the perceived costs and benefits of a marketplace transaction. This chapter considers the moral decisions consumers make, focusing on three key areas of marketplace morality: (1) how company morality or immorality influences consumer perceptions and decisions, (2) how consumers’ morality is expressed in their prosocial and sustainable decisions, and (3) how consumers’ immorality influences companies and other consumers. Finally, we identify areas for future research that we hope will lead to advancement of the literature on marketplace morality.

Keywords

consumer moralitycause marketingbrand purposeconsumer ethicsmarketing ethicsconsumer psychology
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Consumer Psychology , pp. 122 - 150
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aaker, J., Vohs, K. D., & Mogilner, C. (2010). Nonprofits are seen as warm and for-profits as competent: Firm stereotypes matter. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 224–237.Google Scholar
Acar, O. A., Dahl, D. W., Fuchs, C., & Schreier, M. (2021). The signal value of crowdfunded products. Journal of Marketing Research, 58(4), 644–661.Google Scholar
Aflac Incorporated. (2020, January 7). Aflac survey says majority of consumers want companies to ‘take a stand.’ www.csrwire.com/press_releases/43346-aflac-survey-says-majority-of-consumers-want-companies-to-take-a-stand-Google Scholar
Allard, T., Dunn, L. H., & White, K. (2020). Negative reviews, positive impact: Consumer empathetic responding to unfair word of mouth. Journal of Marketing, 84(4), 86–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allard, T., & McFerran, B. (2021). Ethical branding in a divided world: How political orientation motivates reactions to marketplace transgressions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1–22.Google Scholar
Andrews, M., Luo, X., Fang, Z., & Aspara, J. (2014). Cause marketing effectiveness and the moderating role of price discounts. Journal of Marketing, 78(6), 120–142.Google Scholar
Aquino, K., & ReedII, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440.Google Scholar
Bennett, C. M., Kim, H., & Loken, B. (2013). Corporate sponsorships may hurt nonprofits: Understanding their effects on charitable giving. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(3), 288–300.Google Scholar
Bhagwat, Y., Warren, N. L., Beck, J. T., & WatsonIV, G. F. (2020). Corporate sociopolitical activism and firm value. Journal of Marketing, 84(5), 1–21.Google Scholar
Bhattacharjee, A., Berman, J. Z., & Reed, A. (2013). Tip of the hat, wag of the finger: How moral decoupling enables consumers to admire and admonish. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(6), 1167–1184.Google Scholar
Bhattacharjee, A., Dana, J., & Baron, J. (2017). Anti-profit beliefs: How people neglect the societal benefits of profit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(5), 671–696.Google Scholar
Blasi, A. (1984). Moral identity: Its role in moral functioning. Morality, Moral Behavior, and Moral Development, 128, 39.Google Scholar
Bolton, L. E., & Mattila, A. S. (2015). How does corporate social responsibility affect consumer response to service failure in buyer–seller relationships? Journal of Retailing, 91(1), 140–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brough, A. R., Wilkie, J. E., Ma, J., Isaac, M. S., & Gal, D. (2016). Is eco-friendly unmanly? The green-feminine stereotype and its effect on sustainable consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(4), 567–582.Google Scholar
Cain, D. M., Loewenstein, G., & Moore, D. A. (2011). When sunlight fails to disinfect: Understanding the perverse effects of disclosing conflicts of interest. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(1), 836–857.Google Scholar
Campbell, M. C., & Winterich, K. P. (2018). A framework for the consumer psychology of morality in the marketplace. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 167–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catlin, J. R., & Wang, Y. (2013). Recycling gone bad: When the option to recycle increases resource consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(1), 122–127.Google Scholar
Cavanaugh, L. A., Bettman, J. R., & Luce, M. F. (2015). Feeling love and doing more for distant others: Specific positive emotions differentially affect prosocial consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(5), 657–673.Google Scholar
Chernev, A., & Blair, S. (2015). Doing well by doing good: The benevolent halo of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6), 1412–1425.Google Scholar
Chernev, A., & Blair, S. (2021). When sustainability is not a liability: The halo effect of marketplace morality. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 31(3), 551–569.Google Scholar
Conway, P., & Peetz, J. (2012). When does feeling moral actually make you a better person? Conceptual abstraction moderates whether past moral deeds motivate consistency or compensatory behaviour. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(7), 907–919.Google Scholar
Cowley, E., & Anthony, C. I. (2019). Deception memory: When will consumers remember their lies? Journal of Consumer Research, 46(1), 180–199.Google Scholar
Cox, K. D., Covernton, G. A., Davies, H. L., Dower, J. F., Juanes, F., & Dudas, S. E. (2019). Human consumption of microplastics. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(12), 7068–7074.Google Scholar
Cryder, C., Botti, S., & Simonyan, Y. (2017). The charity beauty premium: Satisfying donors’ “want” versus “should” desires. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(4), 605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, H., & Zhang, D. J. (2019). Prosocial goal pursuit in crowdfunding: Evidence from kickstarter. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(3), 498–517.Google Scholar
Du, S., & Xie, C. (2021). Paradoxes of artificial intelligence in consumer markets: Ethical challenges and opportunities. Journal of Business Research, 129, 961–974.Google Scholar
Duclos, R., & Barasch, A. (2014). Prosocial behavior in intergroup relations: How donor self-construal and recipient group-membership shape generosity. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(1), 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckhardt, G. M., Houston, M. B., Jiang, B., Lamberton, C., Rindfleisch, A., & Zervas, G. (2019). Marketing in the sharing economy. Journal of Marketing, 83(5), 5–27.Google Scholar
Edinger-Schons, L. M., Sipilä, J., Sen, S., Mende, G., & Wieseke, J. (2018). Are two reasons better than one? The role of appeal type in consumer responses to sustainable products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(4), 644–664.Google Scholar
Eikenberry, A. M. (2009). The hidden costs of cause marketing. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 7(3), 51.Google Scholar
Ein‐Gar, D., & Levontin, L. (2013). Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 197–211.Google Scholar
Fernandes, D. (2020). Politics at the mall: The moral foundations of boycotts. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 39(4), 494–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. J., & Ma, Y. (2014). The price of being beautiful: Negative effects of attractiveness on empathy for children in need. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), 436–450.Google Scholar
Friedman, E. M., & Toubia, O. (2022). Pricing fairness in a pandemic: Navigating unintended changes to value or cost. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 7(1), 89–97.Google Scholar
Gai, P. J., & Puntoni, S. (2021). Language and consumer dishonesty: A self-diagnosticity theory. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(2), 333–351.Google Scholar
Garvey, A. M., & Bolton, L. E. (2017). Eco-product choice cuts both ways: How proenvironmental licensing versus reinforcement is contingent on environmental consciousness. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 36(2), 284–298.Google Scholar
Gershoff, A. D., & Frels, J. K. (2015). What makes it green? The role of centrality of green attributes in evaluations of the greenness of products. Journal of Marketing, 79(1), 97–110.Google Scholar
Gershon, R., & Cryder, C. (2018). Goods donations increase charitable credit for low-warmth donors. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(2), 451–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giebelhausen, M., Chun, H. H., CroninJr., J. J., & Hult, G. T. (2016). Adjusting the warm-glow thermostat: How incentivizing participation in voluntary green programs moderates their impact on service satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 80(4), 56–71.Google Scholar
Gill, T. (2020). Blame it on the self-driving car: How autonomous vehicles can alter consumer morality. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(2), 272–291.Google Scholar
Gino, F., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). Vicarious dishonesty: When psychological closeness creates distance from one’s moral compass. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(1), 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, K., Roux, C., & Ma, J. (2018). When seeking the best brings out the worst in consumers: Understanding the relationship between a maximizing mindset and immoral behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 293–309.Google Scholar
Govind, R., Singh, J. J., Garg, N., & D’Silva, S. (2019). Not walking the walk: How dual attitudes influence behavioral outcomes in ethical consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, 155, 1195–1214.Google Scholar
Grayson, K. (2014). Morality and the marketplace. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), vii–ix.Google Scholar
Green, T., & Peloza, J. (2014). Finding the right shade of green: The effect of advertising appeal type on environmentally friendly consumption. Journal of Advertising, 43(2), 128–141.Google Scholar
Haidt, J. (2012). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. Vintage.Google Scholar
Han, D., Lalwani, A. K., & Duhachek, A. (2017). Power distance belief, power, and charitable giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(1), 182–195.Google Scholar
Hildebrand, D., DeMotta, Y., Sen, S., & Valenzuela, A. (2017). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) contribution type. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(4), 738–758.Google Scholar
Hofmann, W., Wisneski, D. C., Brandt, M. J., & Skitka, L. J. (2014). Morality in everyday life. Science, 345, 1340–1343.Google Scholar
Hydock, C., Paharia, N., & Blair, S. (2020). Should your brand pick a side? How market share determines the impact of corporate political advocacy. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(6), 1135–1151.Google Scholar
IEG. (2018). Cause sponsorship spending to total $2.14 billion in 2018. https://engageforgood.com/stats/Google Scholar
Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. (2021). The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2020. Giving USA Foundation.Google Scholar
Janoff-Bulman, R., Sheikh, S., & Hepp, S. (2009). Proscriptive versus prescriptive morality: Two faces of moral regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 521–537.Google Scholar
Jiao, J., & Wang, J. (2018). Can lonely people behave morally? The joint influence of loneliness and empathy on moral identity. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(4), 597–611.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. G. B., Zhang, J., & Keil, F. C. (2022). Win–win denial: The psychological underpinnings of zero-sum thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151(2), 455–474.Google Scholar
Johnson-Young, E., & Magee, R. G. (2019). The CSR paradox: When a social responsibility campaign can tarnish a brand. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 24(1), 179–196.Google Scholar
Kähr, A., Nyffenegger, B., Krohmer, H., & Hoyer, W. D. (2016). When hostile consumers wreak havoc on your brand: The phenomenon of consumer brand sabotage. Journal of Marketing, 80(3), 25–41.Google Scholar
Kang, C., Germann, F., & Grewal, R. (2016). Washing away your sins? Corporate social responsibility, corporate social irresponsibility, and firm performance. Journal of Marketing, 80(2), 59–79.Google Scholar
Karmarkar, U. R., & Bollinger, B. (2015). BYOB: How bringing your own shopping bags leads to treating yourself and the environment. Journal of Marketing, 79(4), 1–15.Google Scholar
Kim, D. J., & Yoon, S. (2020). Guilt of the meat‐eating consumer: When animal anthropomorphism leads to healthy meat dish choices. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 31(4), 665–683.Google Scholar
Kirmani, A. (2015). Marketplace Morality. ACR 2015 Presidential Address.Google Scholar
Kirmani, A., Hamilton, R. W., Thompson, D. V., & Lantzy, S. (2017). Doing well versus doing good: The differential effect of underdog positioning on moral and competent service providers. Journal of Marketing, 81(1), 103–117.Google Scholar
Krishna, A. (2011). Can supporting a cause decrease donations and happiness? The cause marketing paradox. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(3), 338–345.Google Scholar
Kristofferson, K., McFerran, B., Morales, A. C., & Dahl, D. W. (2017). The dark side of scarcity promotions: How exposure to limited-quantity promotions can induce aggression. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(5), 683–706.Google Scholar
Kristofferson, K., White, K., & Peloza, J. (2014). The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(6), 1149–1166.Google Scholar
Lee, S., Bolton, L. E., & Winterich, K. P. (2017). To profit or not to profit? The role of greed perceptions in consumer support for social ventures. Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (4), 853–876.Google Scholar
Lee, S., Winterich, K. P., & RossJr., W. T. (2014). I’m moral, but I won’t help you: The distinct roles of empathy and justice in donations. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 678–696.Google Scholar
Lin, L., Dahl, D. W., & Argo, J. J. (2013). Do the crime, always do the time? Insights into consumer-to-consumer punishment decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (1), 64–77.Google Scholar
Liu, P. J., & Lin, S. C. (2018). Projecting lower competence to maintain moral warmth in the avoidance of prosocial requests. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(1), 23–39.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, G., & Small, D. A. (2007). The scarecrow and the tin man: The vicissitudes of human sympathy and caring. Review of General Psychology, 11(2), 112–126.Google Scholar
Luchs, M. G., Naylor, R. W., Irwin, J. R., & Raghunathan, R. (2010). The sustainability liability: Potential negative effects of ethicality on product preference. Journal of Marketing, 74(5), 18–31.Google Scholar
Mazar, N., & Zhong, C. B. (2010). Do green products make us better people? Psychological Science, 21(4), 494–498.Google Scholar
McGraw, A., Schwartz, J. A., & Tetlock, P. E. (2012). From the commercial to the communal: Reframing taboo trade-offs in religious and pharmaceutical marketing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(1), 157–173.Google Scholar
Mende, M., Scott, M. L., van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4), 535–556.Google Scholar
Mintel, . (2015, November 18). 56% of Americans stop buying from brands they believe are unethical. www.mintel.com/press-centre/social-and-lifestyle/56-of-americans-stop-buying-from-brands-they-believe-are-unethicalGoogle Scholar
Mohan, B., Schlager, T., Deshpandé, R., & Norton, M. I. (2018). Consumers avoid buying from firms with higher CEO‐to‐worker pay ratios. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 344–352.Google Scholar
Mohr, L. A., & Webb, D. J. (2005). The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(1), 121–147.Google Scholar
Newman, G. E., & Cain, D. M. (2014). Tainted altruism: When doing some good is evaluated as worse than doing no good at all. Psychological Science, 25(3), 648–655.Google Scholar
Newman, G. E., Gorlin, M., & Dhar, R. (2014). When going green backfires: How firm intentions shape the evaluation of socially beneficial product enhancements. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 823–839.Google Scholar
Newman, K. P., & Brucks, M. (2018). The influence of corporate social responsibility efforts on the moral behavior of high self‐brand overlap consumers. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 253–271.Google Scholar
Nielsen, A. E., & Thomsen, C. (2018). Reviewing corporate social responsibility communication: A legitimacy perspective. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23(4), 492–511.Google Scholar
Nikolova, H., Lamberton, C., & Coleman, N. V. (2018). Stranger danger: When and why consumer dyads behave less ethically than individuals. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(1), 90–108.Google Scholar
Olson, J. G., McFerran, B., Morales, A. C., & Dahl, D. W. (2016). Wealth and welfare: Divergent moral reactions to ethical consumer choices. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(6), 879–896.Google Scholar
Paharia, N. (2020). Who receives credit or blame? The effects of made-to-order production on responses to unethical and ethical company production practices. Journal of Marketing, 84(1), 88–104.Google Scholar
Paharia, N., Avery, J., & Keinan, A. (2014). Positioning brands against large competitors to increase sales. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(6), 647–656.Google Scholar
Paharia, N., Vohs, K. D., & Deshpandé, R. (2013). Sweatshop labor is wrong unless the shoes are cute: Cognition can both help and hurt moral motivated reasoning. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121(1), 81–88.Google Scholar
Peck, J., Kirk, C. P., Luangrath, A. W., & Shu, S. B. (2021). Caring for the commons: Using psychological ownership to enhance stewardship behavior for public goods. Journal of Marketing, 85(2), 33–49.Google Scholar
Philipp‐Muller, A., Teeny, J. D., & Petty, R. E. (2021). Do consumers care about morality? A review and framework for understanding morality’s marketplace influence. Consumer Psychology Review, 1–18.Google Scholar
Puntoni, S., Reczek, R. W., Giesler, M., & Botti, S. (2021). Consumers and artificial intelligence: An experiential perspective. Journal of Marketing, 85(1), 131–151.Google Scholar
Reczek, R. W., Irwin, J. R., Zane, D. M., & Ehrich, K. R. (2018). That’s not how I remember it: Willfully ignorant memory for ethical product attribute information. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(1), 185–207.Google Scholar
ReedII, A., Forehand, M. R., Puntoni, S., & Warlop, L. (2012). Identity-based consumer behavior. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 310–321.Google Scholar
Rotman, J. D., Khamitov, M., & Connors, S. (2018). Lie, cheat, and steal: How harmful brands motivate consumers to act unethically. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 353–361.Google Scholar
Salamat, M. R. (2016). Ethics of sustainable development: The moral imperative for the effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Natural Resource Forum, 40(1–2), 3–5.Google Scholar
Samper, A., Yang, L. W., & Daniels, M. E. (2018). Beauty, effort, and misrepresentation: How beauty work affects judgments of moral character and consumer preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(1), 126–147.Google Scholar
Savary, J., Goldsmith, K., & Dhar, R. (2015). Giving against the odds: When tempting alternatives increase willingness to donate. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(1), 27–38.Google Scholar
Schein, C., & Gray, K. (2018). The theory of dyadic morality: Reinventing moral judgment by redefining harm. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 32–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwabe, M., Dose, D. B., & Walsh, G. (2017). A regulatory focus approach to consumers’ moral decision making. In Gneezy, A., Griskevicius, V., Williams, P., & Duluth, M. N. (Eds.). ACR North American Advances (45th ed., pp. 874–875). Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243.Google Scholar
Shang, J., Reed, A., Sargeant, A., & Carpenter, K. (2020). Marketplace donations: The role of moral identity discrepancy and gender. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(2), 375–393.Google Scholar
Shelton, S. S., & Waddell, T. F. (2021). Does ‘inspiration porn’ inspire? How disability and challenge impact attitudinal evaluations of advertising. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 42(3), 258–276.Google Scholar
Simpson, B., Schreier, M., Bitterl, S., & White, K. (2021). Making the world a better place: How crowdfunding increases consumer demand for social-good products. Journal of Marketing Research, 58(2), 363–376.Google Scholar
Sun, M., & Trudel, R. (2017). The effect of recycling versus trashing on consumption: Theory and experimental evidence. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(2), 293–305.Google Scholar
Sustainable Brands. (2018, March 1). B Corp analysis reveals purpose-led businesses grow 28 times faster than national average. https://sustainablebrands.com/read/business-case/b-corp-analysis-reveals-purpose-led-businesses-grow-28-times-faster-than-national-averageGoogle Scholar
Tait, A. (2018). Are vloggers exploiting homeless people? www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/2018/07/are-vloggers-exploiting-homeless-peopleGoogle Scholar
Tezer, A., & Bodur, H. O. (2020). The greenconsumption effect: How using green products improves consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(1), 25–39.Google Scholar
Torelli, C. J., Monga, A. B., & Kaikati, A. M. (2012). Doing poorly by doing good: Corporate social responsibility and brand concepts. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(5), 948–963.Google Scholar
Touré-Tillery, M., & Kouchaki, M. (2021). You won’t remember this: How memory efficacy influences virtuous behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 47, 737–754.Google Scholar
Townsend, C. (2017). The price of beauty: Differential effects of design elements with and without cost implications in nonprofit donor solicitations. Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (4), 794–815.Google Scholar
Trudel, R., & Cotte, J. (2009). Does it pay to be good? MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(2), 61.Google Scholar
Tsiros, M., & Irmak, C. (2020). Lowering the minimum donation amount increases consumer purchase likelihood of products associated with cause-related marketing campaigns. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(4), 755–770.Google Scholar
Library, Vatican (2009), “Caritas in veritate,” Encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI, June 29, 2009. Accessed online at https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate.htmlGoogle Scholar
Vieites, Y., Goldszmidt, R., & Andrade, E. B. (2022). Social class shapes donation allocation preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(5), 775–795.Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Kirmani, A., & Li, X. (2021). Not too far to help: Residential mobility, global identity, and donations to distant beneficiaries. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(6), 878–889.Google Scholar
Wang, Y., & Krishna, A. (2012). Enticing for me but unfair to her: Can targeted pricing evoke socially conscious behavior? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 433–442.Google Scholar
Wang, W., Krishna, A., & McFerran, B. (2017). Turning off the lights: Consumers’ environmental efforts depend on visible efforts of firms. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(3), 478–494.Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Stoner, J. L., & John, D. R. (2019). Counterfeit luxury consumption in a social context: The effects on females’ moral disengagement and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 29(2), 207–225.Google Scholar
Wertenbroch, K. (1998). Consumption self-control by rationing purchase quantities of virtue and vice. Marketing Science, 17(4), 297–423.Google Scholar
White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22–49.Google Scholar
White, K., MacDonnell, R., & Ellard, J. H. (2012). Belief in a just world: Consumer intentions and behaviors toward ethical products. Journal of Marketing, 76(1), 103–118.Google Scholar
Wilson, A. V., & Bellezza, S. (2022). Consumer minimalism. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(5), 796–816.Google Scholar
Winterich, K. P., Aquino, K., Mittal, V., & Swartz, R. (2013). When moral identity symbolization motivates prosocial behavior: The role of recognition and moral identity internalization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(5), 759.Google Scholar
Winterich, K. P., Nenkov, G. Y., & Gonzales, G. E. (2019). Knowing what it makes: How product transformation salience increases recycling. Journal of Marketing, 83(4), 21–37.Google Scholar
Winterich, K. P., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Accepting inequality deters responsibility: How power distance decreases charitable behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), 274–293.Google Scholar
Xu, H. F., Bolton, L. E., & Winterich, K. P. (2021). How do consumers react to company moral transgressions? The role of power distance belief and empathy for victims. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(1), 77–101.Google Scholar
Xu, J., & Ding, M. (2019). Using the double transparency of autonomous vehicles to increase fairness and social welfare. Customer Needs and Solutions, 6(1), 26–35.Google Scholar
Yang, A. X., & Hsee, C. K. (2022). Obligatory publicity increases charitable acts. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(5), 839–857.Google Scholar
Yang, L. W., & Aggarwal, P. (2019). No small matter: How company size affects consumer expectations and evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(6), 1369–1384.Google Scholar
Yin, B., Li, Y. J., & Singh, S. (2020). Coins are cold and cards are caring: The effect of pregiving incentives on charity perceptions, relationship norms, and donation behavior. Journal of Marketing, 84(6), 57–73.Google Scholar
Zane, D. M., Irwin, J. R., & Reczek, R. W. (2016). Do less ethical consumers denigrate more ethical consumers? The effect of willful ignorance on judgments of others. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(3), 337–349.Google Scholar
Zhang, K., Cai, F., & Shi, Z. (2021). Do promotions make consumers more generous? The impact of price promotions on consumers’ donation behavior. Journal of Marketing, 85(3), 240–255.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×