The Sustainability Liability: Potential Negative Effects of Ethicality on Product Preference

Manufacturers are increasingly producing and promoting sustainable products (i.e., products that have a positive social and/or environmental impact). However, relatively little is known about how product sustainability affects consumers’ preferences. The authors propose that sustainability may not always be an asset, even if most consumers care about social and environmental issues. The degree to which sustainability enhances preference depends on the type of benefit consumers most value for the product category in question. In this research, the authors demonstrate that consumers associate higher product ethicality with gentleness-related attributes and lower product ethicality with strength-related attributes. As a consequence of these associations, the positive effect of product sustainability on consumer preferences is reduced when strength-related attributes are valued, sometimes even resulting in preferences for less sustainable product alternatives (i.e., the “sustainability liability”). Conversely, when gentleness-related attributes are valued, sustainability enhances preference. In addition, the authors show that the potential negative impact of sustainability on product preferences can be attenuated using explicit cues about product strength.

[1]  Julie R. Irwin,et al.  Ethical Decisions and Response Mode Compatibility: Weighting of Ethical Attributes in Consideration Sets Formed by excluding versus Including Product Alternatives , 2009 .

[2]  Fred Luthans,et al.  Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior , 2007 .

[3]  D. Turley,et al.  Compassion at the counter: Service providers and bereaved consumers , 2006 .

[4]  Wayne D. Hoyer,et al.  The Unhealthy = Tasty Intuition and Its Effects on Taste Inferences, Enjoyment, and Choice of Food Products , 2006 .

[5]  Xueming Luo,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility, Customer Satisfaction, and Market Value , 2006 .

[6]  Marc Gunther,et al.  The green machine. , 2006, Fortune.

[7]  A. Gini Why It's Hard to be Good , 2005 .

[8]  M. Zanna,et al.  Establishing a causal chain: why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. , 2005, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  Julie R. Irwin,et al.  Willful Ignorance in the Request for Product Attribute Information , 2005 .

[10]  N. Epley,et al.  Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. , 2004, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  T. Gilovich,et al.  Actions, Intentions, and Self-Assessment: The Road to Self-Enhancement Is Paved with Good Intentions , 2004, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[12]  Monica C. Worline,et al.  Compassion in Organizational Life , 2004 .

[13]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Gregory S. Carpenter,et al.  The Role of Market Efficiency Intuitions in Consumer Choice: A Case of Compensatory Inferences , 2001 .

[15]  C. Bhattacharya,et al.  Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility , 2001 .

[16]  J. Baron,et al.  Response Mode Effects and Moral Values , 2001, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[17]  G. McClelland,et al.  Misleading Heuristics and Moderated Multiple Regression Models , 2001 .

[18]  Tanya Menon,et al.  Culturally Conferred Conceptions of Agency: A Key to Social Perception of Persons, Groups, and Other Actors , 2001 .

[19]  Stephen M. Johnson,et al.  The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits , 2000 .

[20]  Michael K. Hussey,et al.  Projecting the right image: using projective techniques to measure brand image , 1999 .

[21]  A. Greenwald,et al.  Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[22]  Jonathan Baron,et al.  Regular ArticleProtected Values , 1997 .

[23]  Peter A. Dacin,et al.  The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses , 1997 .

[24]  Baron,et al.  Protected Values , 1997, Virology.

[25]  Joseph W. Alba,et al.  The Role of Consumers' Intuitions in Inference Making , 1994 .

[26]  R. Fisher Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning , 1993 .

[27]  Geoffrey A. Moore Crossing the chasm : marketing and selling technology products to mainstream customers , 1991 .

[28]  Gabriel J. Biehal,et al.  Memory-Based Inferences during Consumer Choice , 1990 .

[29]  M. Sujan,et al.  Product Categorization and Inference Making: Some Implications for Comparative Advertising , 1987 .

[30]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect. , 1986 .

[31]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[32]  D. Paulhus Two-component models of socially desirable responding. , 1984 .

[33]  Margaret H. Thomas,et al.  Desensitization to portrayals of real-life aggression as a function of television violence. , 1977 .

[34]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. , 1977 .

[35]  S. Blatt The validity of projective techniques and their research and clinical contribution. , 1975, Journal of personality assessment.

[36]  Mark I. Alpert,et al.  Identification of Determinant Attributes: A Comparison of Methods , 1971 .

[37]  M. Haire Projective Techniques in Marketing Research , 1950 .

[38]  S. Asch Forming impressions of personality. , 1946, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[39]  E. Thorndike A constant error in psychological ratings. , 1920 .