IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v111y2016icp317-326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No I won't, but yes we will: Driving sustainability-related donations through social identity effects

Author

Listed:
  • Champniss, Guy
  • Wilson, Hugh N.
  • Macdonald, Emma K.
  • Dimitriu, Radu

Abstract

Shifting consumers towards sustainable behaviours is difficult, with an attitude–behaviour gap persistently reported. This study proposes a route towards sustainable behaviours that does not depend on individual attitudes or values: social identity forces within novel online brand-convened consumer groups. A field experiment using a fictitious fruit drink brand demonstrates that by assembling an online consumer group and providing it with sustainability objectives, consumers will engage in a sustainability-aligned behaviour, namely donating to social or environmental charities at the request of the firm, irrespective of their individual attitudes. Furthermore, this behaviour is accompanied by an improvement in brand attachment. As these effects are found within a newly-formed online group, practitioners may be able to achieve sustainability objectives through this mechanism even in the absence of well-established brand communities. The study contributes to social identity literature by demonstrating the impact of group identity effects in a consumer context, and by showing a mechanism by which the negative side of group identity – out-group derogation – can be avoided.

Suggested Citation

  • Champniss, Guy & Wilson, Hugh N. & Macdonald, Emma K. & Dimitriu, Radu, 2016. "No I won't, but yes we will: Driving sustainability-related donations through social identity effects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 317-326.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:111:y:2016:i:c:p:317-326
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516000688
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emily Northrop, 2014. "Prosperity Without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 440-442, June.
    2. Kivetz, Ran & Simonson, Itamar, 2002. "Self-Control for the Righteous: Toward a Theory of Precommitment to Indulgence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(2), pages 199-217, September.
    3. Jen Shang & Rachel Croson, 2006. "The Impact of Social Comparisons on Nonprofit Fund Raising," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experiments Investigating Fundraising and Charitable Contributors, pages 143-156, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    4. Grunert, Klaus G., 2011. "Sustainability in the Food Sector: A Consumer Behaviour Perspective," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2(3), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Jennifer Aaker & Kathleen D. Vohs & Cassie Mogilner, 2010. "Nonprofits Are Seen as Warm and For-Profits as Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 224-237, August.
    6. Aaker, Jennifer & Vohs, Kathleen D. & Mogilner, Cassie, 2010. "Non-profits Are Seen as Warm and For-Profits as Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter," Research Papers 2047, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    8. Kilbourne, William & Pickett, Gregory, 2008. "How materialism affects environmental beliefs, concern, and environmentally responsible behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(9), pages 885-893, September.
    9. George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 1992. "Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 573-597.
    10. Strahilevitz, Michal & Myers, John G, 1998. "Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(4), pages 434-446, March.
    11. Auger, Pat & Devinney, Timothy M. & Louviere, Jordan J. & Burke, Paul F., 2008. "Do social product features have value to consumers?," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 183-191.
    12. Eleni Papaoikonomou & Gerard Ryan & Matias Ginieis, 2011. "Towards a Holistic Approach of the Attitude Behaviour Gap in Ethical Consumer Behaviours: Empirical Evidence from Spain," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 17(1), pages 77-88, February.
    13. Cornelissen, Gert & Pandelaere, Mario & Warlop, Luk & Dewitte, Siegfried, 2008. "Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 46-55.
    14. Pat Auger & Timothy Devinney, 2007. "Do What Consumers Say Matter? The Misalignment of Preferences with Unconstrained Ethical Intentions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 361-383, December.
    15. Macdonald, Emma K. & Sharp, Byron M., 2000. "Brand Awareness Effects on Consumer Decision Making for a Common, Repeat Purchase Product:: A Replication," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 5-15, April.
    16. Small, Deborah A. & Loewenstein, George & Slovic, Paul, 2007. "Sympathy and callousness: The impact of deliberative thought on donations to identifiable and statistical victims," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 143-153, March.
    17. repec:kap:iaecre:v:17:y:2011:i:1:p:77-88 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Guéguen, Nicolas & Jacob, Céline, 2013. "Behavioral consequences of money: When the automated teller machine reduces helping behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 103-104.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Khalil, Mary & Khan, Saira & Septianto, Felix, 2020. "Effects of power and implicit theories on donation," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 98-107.
    2. Ahmed, Iram & Arnott, David & Dacko, Scott & Wilson, Hugh N., 2022. "Trying on a role: Mentoring, improvisation and social learning in luxury retailing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1039-1051.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chang, Chia-Chi & Chen, Po-Yu, 2019. "Which maximizes donations: Charitable giving as an incentive or incentives for charitable giving?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 65-75.
    2. Michael G. Luchs & Minu Kumar, 2017. "“Yes, but this Other One Looks Better/Works Better”: How do Consumers Respond to Trade-offs Between Sustainability and Other Valued Attributes?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 567-584, February.
    3. Canh Thien Dang & Trudy Owens, 2017. "What motivates Ugandan NGOs to diversify: Risk reduction or private gain?," Discussion Papers 2017-11, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    4. Jean-Pierre Thomassen & Marijke C. Leliveld & Kees Ahaus & Steven Walle, 2020. "Prosocial Compensation Following a Service Failure: Fulfilling an Organization’s Ethical and Philanthropic Responsibilities," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 123-147, February.
    5. Anne Hamby & Niusha Jones & Guohong Yu, 2021. "Exploring the effects of for‐profit and nonprofit size congruency: An exchange perspective on cause‐related marketing," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 274-292, March.
    6. Katharina Dowling & Daniel Guhl & Daniel Klapper & Martin Spann & Lucas Stich & Narine Yegoryan, 2020. "Behavioral biases in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 449-477, May.
    7. Elgaaied-Gambier, Leila & Monnot, Elisa & Reniou, Fanny, 2018. "Using descriptive norm appeals effectively to promote green behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 179-191.
    8. Saccardo, Silvia & Li, Charis X. & Samek, Anya & Gneezy, Ayelet, 2021. "Nudging generosity in consumer elective pricing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 91-104.
    9. Henri Kuokkanen & William Sun, 2020. "Companies, Meet Ethical Consumers: Strategic CSR Management to Impact Consumer Choice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(2), pages 403-423, October.
    10. Abhi Bhattacharya & Valerie Good & Hanieh Sardashti & John Peloza, 2021. "Beyond Warm Glow: The Risk-Mitigating Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(2), pages 317-336, June.
    11. Tiefenbeck, Verena & Staake, Thorsten & Roth, Kurt & Sachs, Olga, 2013. "For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 160-171.
    12. van Doorn, Jenny & Verhoef, Peter C., 2011. "Willingness to pay for organic products: Differences between virtue and vice foods," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 167-180.
    13. Camilla Barbarossa & Patrick Pelsmacker, 2016. "Positive and Negative Antecedents of Purchasing Eco-friendly Products: A Comparison Between Green and Non-green Consumers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(2), pages 229-247, March.
    14. Murphy Patrick J. & Pollack Jeff & Nagy Brian & Rutherford Matthew & Coombes Susan, 2019. "Risk Tolerance, Legitimacy, and Perspective: Navigating Biases in Social Enterprise Evaluations," Entrepreneurship Research Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, October.
    15. Pengji Wang & Adrian T. H. Kuah & Qinye Lu & Caroline Wong & K. Thirumaran & Emmanuel Adegbite & Wesley Kendall, 2021. "The impact of value perceptions on purchase intention of sustainable luxury brands in China and the UK," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 28(3), pages 325-346, May.
    16. Claudia Townsend & Darren DahlEditor & Page MoreauAssociate Editor, 2017. "The Price of Beauty: Differential Effects of Design Elements with and without Cost Implications in Nonprofit Donor Solicitations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(4), pages 794-815.
    17. Katja H. Brunk & Cara Boer, 2020. "How do Consumers Reconcile Positive and Negative CSR-Related Information to Form an Ethical Brand Perception? A Mixed Method Inquiry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 443-458, January.
    18. Sohyun Bae, 2021. "Holding an entity mind-set deters consumption of recycled content products: the role of perceived product quality," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 18(4), pages 553-571, December.
    19. Luigi Mittone & Lucia Savadori, 2008. "Influence of time delay on choice between gambles: Savoring the emotion," CEEL Working Papers 0802, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    20. Rai, Tage S. & Diermeier, Daniel, 2015. "Corporations are Cyborgs: Organizations elicit anger but not sympathy when they can think but cannot feel," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 18-26.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:111:y:2016:i:c:p:317-326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.