Hypocrisy in ethical consumption.
anchoring
ethical consumption
frugality
hypocrisy
moral decision making
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
20
02
2022
accepted:
01
08
2022
entrez:
12
9
2022
pubmed:
13
9
2022
medline:
13
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
When making consumption choices, people often fail to meet their own standards of both ethics and frugality. People also generally tend to demand more of others than they do of themselves. But little is known about how these different types of hypocrisy interact, particularly in relation to attitudes toward ethical consumption. In three experiments, we integrate research methods using anchoring and hypocrisy within the context of ethical consumption. Across three experiments, we find a default expectation that people (particularly people other than ourselves) should spend less on consumer items than they actually do. This default position can be inverted by making the ethical context of consumption salient, whereby the expectation is then that people (particularly other people) should spend more on consumer items than they actually do. Experiments 2 and 3 show that a moderate price anchor for ethical consumption is sufficient to shift expected standards for other people, but a higher price anchor is required to shift expected standards in personal behaviour. We discuss the countervailing roles of frugality and ethical consumption in understanding hypocrisy and ethical decision-making.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36092089
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.880009
pmc: PMC9453667
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
880009Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Foad, Haddock and Maio.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Psychol Sci. 2009 Jun;20(6):700-6
pubmed: 19422625
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2006 Feb;32(2):188-200
pubmed: 16382081
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012 Feb;141(1):124-33
pubmed: 21767047
Psychol Rev. 2012 Apr;119(2):345-72
pubmed: 22352358
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Oct;105(4):531-48
pubmed: 24000799
Science. 1974 Sep 27;185(4157):1124-31
pubmed: 17835457
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2020 Mar;118(3):562-583
pubmed: 30762418
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012 Nov;103(5):830-53
pubmed: 22708625
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2000 Jun;6(2):91-103
pubmed: 10937314
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004 Sep;87(3):327-39
pubmed: 15382983
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Oct;75(4):901-16
pubmed: 9825527
Psychol Mark. 2022 May;39(5):892-905
pubmed: 35465462
Psychol Sci. 2007 Aug;18(8):689-90
pubmed: 17680939
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008 Jul;3(4):324-38
pubmed: 26158952
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2004 Mar;30(3):328-39
pubmed: 15030624
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2012 Jan;38(1):129-39
pubmed: 21918064
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jun 23;117(25):14084-14093
pubmed: 32513745