The authors develop a conceptual model of how the congruence of political ideology and persuasive appeals enhances sustainable behaviors. In study 1, persuasive appeals consistent with individualizing and binding moral foundations were developed to enhance liberal and conservative recycling. In study 2, individualizing and binding appeals were tested on actual recycling behavior using a longitudinal field study to demonstrate the effectiveness of messages congruent with the moral foundations of liberals and conservatives. Study 3 demonstrated that enhanced fluency represents the underlying psychological process that mediates the relationship between message congruence and intentions. Moreover, study 3 established that spillover effects resulting from increased intentions to engage in sustainable disposition behavior enhance intentions to engage in sustainable acquisition and consumption behaviors. Finally, study 4 ruled out potential message confounds to demonstrate the robustness of the findings. Practical implications for marketers and public policy officials interested in increasing sustainable behaviors are offered.

The authors examine political ideology as it influences how people distribute their donations across multiple charities. Findings from five studies indicate that liberals and conservatives donate similar overall amounts of money; however, liberals tend to give to a greater number of charities, people, and causes overall while giving less to each (breadth). Conservatives tend to donate to fewer charities, people, and causes overall while giving more to each (depth). Using the model of moral motives, conservatives' endorsement of social order led to their focus on smaller groups and protecting members of these groups as they give with depth. In contrast, liberals' endorsement of social justice led to their focus on eliminating broad inequality as they give with breadth. However, these ideological tendencies can be reversed as conservatives gave with breadth when protecting social order and liberals gave with depth when equality was restored.

No abstract

The authors examine how political ideology impacts consumer preferences for hedonic and utilitarian choices and the underlying reasons for these differences. Five studies indicate that conservatives are less tolerant of ambiguity than liberals, leading to a preference for utilitarian options, whereas liberals are more tolerant of ambiguity leading to a preference for hedonic options. However, these preferences were reversed when utilitarian options were framed as ambiguous and hedonic options were framed as explicit and clear.

No abstract