When are Consumers Motivated to Connect with Ethical Brands? The Roles of Guilt and Moral Identity Importance

Abstract

This research adds to the growing literature on what draws consumers to ethical brands. Findings from three studies demonstrate that guilt motivates consumers to connect with ethical brands, especially those consumers with high levels of moral identity importance (MII). Specifically, Study 1 finds that consumers report stronger self-brand connections (SBCs) with an ethical brand when they feel guilty (vs. control). Study 2 finds that guilt particularly motivates consumers with high MII toreport stronger SBCs with an ethical (vs. unethical) brand. In turn, these strong connections lead to increased intentions to purchase the ethical brand. Finally, Study 3 finds evidence for the proposed motivation-based process explanation by showing that high MII consumers' propensity to connect with ethical brands when feeling guilty (vs. control) is attenuated when these consumers are first given the opportunity to donate to a charitable cause to alleviate their guilt. Overall, the findings suggest that ethical brands can foster strong connections with and elicit higher purchase intentions from consumers seeking ways to alleviate their guilt.

Consumer guilt review: A practical guide for researchers

“…First, when inspecting the form of guilt, the majority of research utilized reactive guilt (Allard & White, 2015;Antonetti & Maklan, 2014aDahl et al, 2005;Goldsmith et al, 2012;Hanks & Mattila, 2014;Miao, 2011;Newman & Trump, 2017;Saintives & Lunardo, 2016;Soscia, 2007) followed by anticipatory guilt (Onwezen et al, 2013;Onwezen et al, 2014aOnwezen et al, , 2014bSteenhaut & Van Kenhove, 2006;Theotokis & Manganari, 2015) while no research has examined existential guilt. Second, in terms of the cause of guilt, the majority of research, in the examined contexts, evaluated guilt that is related to the self (caused by one's actions) (Allard & White, 2015;Newman & Trump, 2017) followed by guilt that is related to societal standards (Theotokis & Manganari, 2015). Limited research examined guilt that is related to others and guilt as result one's inactions (Dahl et al, 2005;Steenhaut & Van Kenhove, 2006).…”

“…In addition to guilt's effect on pro-environmental intentions, it also has a significant impact on behaviors. Research shows that guilt regulates sustainable consumption decisions (Gans & Groves, 2012), hinders consumers' neutralization efforts (Antonetti & Maklan, 2014b), and prompts consumers to identify with ethical brands (Newman & Trump, 2017). In addition, recent research elaborated on consumers' tendency to experience guilt, also known as guilt proneness, over ethical consumption decisions, indicating that consumers who are predisposed to feeling guilty abstain from engaging in unethical behavior (Arli, Leo, & Tjiptono, 2016).…”

“…Notably, the literature highlights the prognostic effect of attitudes, social norms, and high moral identity on guilt (Newman & Trump, 2017;Onwezen et al, 2014aOnwezen et al, , 2014b. In addition, Antonetti and Maklan (2014a) emphasized the role of numerous factors that influence social norms such as moral relevance and social visibility of the consumption decision, which in turn has a significant effect on guilt.…”

“…Due to the intricacy of the cognitive appraisals required to stimulate guilt (Tracy & Robins, 2004), all researchers who examined consumer guilt in their publications (see Tables 2, 3 & 4) utilized consumption narratives that have the potential to activate those appraisals in the research's subjects. For instance, in the context of PEB, the majority of researchers utilized narratives that incorporate products that were conditioned to be unethical or unsustainable (Antonetti & Maklan, 2014aNewman & Trump, 2017;Onwezen et al, 2013;Onwezen et al, 2014aOnwezen et al, , 2014bTheotokis & Manganari, 2015) (Table 5). Limited publications opted for examining consumers' behavior in ethically questionable narratives that do not focus on the product, but rather on other individuals such as salesmen (Steenhaut & Van Kenhove, 2006).…”

Consumer Behavior Research: Theoretical and Methodological Paradigms Trending

“…For example, to study embarrassment in products (Londono, Davies, & Elms, 2017), service encounters (Kilian, Steinmann, & Hammes, 2018), and how men and women cope with the embarrassment of buying condoms (Arndt & Ekebas-Turedi, 2017). An additional powerful negative emotion is guilt (Arli, Leo, & Tjiptono, 2016), since guilt and moral identity also help consumers to connect with ethical brands (Newman & Trump, 2017).…”