IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v119y2025ics2214804325000540.html

Avoiding cognitive inconsistency: Experimental evidence on sustainable online shopping

Author

Listed:
  • Eßer, Jana
  • Flörchinger, Daniela
  • Frondel, Manuel
  • Sommer, Stephan

Abstract

Cognitive inconsistency, the discrepancy between individuals’ behavior and their self-image, can cause the psychological discomfort called cognitive dissonance. Drawing on the results of a large-scale online survey experiment conducted in Germany in 2021, this paper investigates whether cognitive dissonance is reduced through self-deception and behavior change. After their attitudes toward sustainable production were elicited, participants could opt for a voucher from either a conventional or a sustainable online marketplace in an incentivized discrete-choice task. The task was combined with an experimental setting in which the salience of cognitive inconsistency was increased by either randomly reminding participants of their previously stated attitudes toward sustainable production or by providing information about the negative aspects of conventional online shopping. While we do not find evidence for self-deception, respondents adapt their behavior to their attitudes when their cognitive inconsistency is more salient.

Suggested Citation

  • Eßer, Jana & Flörchinger, Daniela & Frondel, Manuel & Sommer, Stephan, 2025. "Avoiding cognitive inconsistency: Experimental evidence on sustainable online shopping," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:119:y:2025:i:c:s2214804325000540
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2025.102387
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804325000540
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102387?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 look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nyborg, Karine & Howarth, Richard B. & Brekke, Kjell Arne, 2006. "Green consumers and public policy: On socially contingent moral motivation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 351-366, November.
    2. Marco Caliendo & Deborah A. Cobb-Clark & Arne Uhlendorff, 2015. "Locus of Control and Job Search Strategies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(1), pages 88-103, March.
    3. Rabin, Matthew, 1994. "Cognitive dissonance and social change," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 177-194, March.
    4. Kevin Ermecke & Rainer Olbrich & Philipp Brüggemann, 2023. "They Don’t Do What They Say – The Attitude-Behavior Gap in Online and Offline Grocery Shopping for Organic Products," Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, in: Francisco J. Martínez-López (ed.), Advances in Digital Marketing and eCommerce, pages 70-77, Springer.
    5. Astrid Matthey & Tobias Regner, 2011. "Do I Really Want to Know? A Cognitive Dissonance-Based Explanation of Other-Regarding Behavior," Games, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-22, February.
    6. Gosnell, Greer K., 2018. "Communicating Resourcefully: A Natural Field Experiment on Environmental Framing and Cognitive Dissonance in Going Paperless," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 128-144.
    7. Moser, Andrea K., 2016. "Consumers' purchasing decisions regarding environmentally friendly products: An empirical analysis of German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 389-397.
    8. Judd B. Kessler & Katherine L. Milkman, 2018. "Identity in Charitable Giving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 845-859, February.
    9. Jonathan de Quidt & Johannes Haushofer & Christopher Roth, 2018. "Measuring and Bounding Experimenter Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(11), pages 3266-3302, November.
    10. Katharina Momsen & Markus Ohndorf, 2023. "Expressive voting versus information avoidance: experimental evidence in the context of climate change mitigation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 45-74, January.
    11. Mark A. Andor & James Cox & Andreas Gerster & Michael Price & Stephan Sommer & Lukas Tomberg, 2022. "Locus of Control and Prosocial Behavior," NBER Working Papers 30359, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Mummolo, Jonathan & Peterson, Erik, 2019. "Demand Effects in Survey Experiments: An Empirical Assessment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(2), pages 517-529, May.
    13. 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.
    14. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2011. "Identity, Morals, and Taboos: Beliefs as Assets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(2), pages 805-855.
    15. Flörchinger, Daniela & Frondel, Manuel & Sommer, Stephan & Andor, Mark A., 2025. "Pro-environmental behavior and environmentalist movements: Evidence from the identification with Fridays for Future," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    16. Eric W. Djimeu & Deo-Gracias Houndolo, 2016. "Power calculation for causal inference in social science: sample size and minimum detectable effect determination," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 508-527, October.
    17. Deborah A. Cobb‐Clark & Stefanie Schurer, 2013. "Two Economists' Musings on the Stability of Locus of Control," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 358-400, August.
    18. Edenbrandt, Anna Kristina & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan & Nordström, Jonas, 2021. "Interested, indifferent or active information avoiders of carbon labels: Cognitive dissonance and ascription of responsibility as motivating factors," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    19. Daniel Zizzo, 2010. "Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(1), pages 75-98, March.
    20. James Konow, 2000. "Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1072-1091, September.
    21. Rausch, Theresa Maria & Baier, Daniel & Wening, Stefanie, 2021. "Does sustainability really matter to consumers? Assessing the importance of online shop and apparel product attributes," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    22. Jason Dana & Roberto Weber & Jason Kuang, 2007. "Exploiting moral wiggle room: experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(1), pages 67-80, October.
    23. Gosnell, Greer, 2018. "Communicating resourcefully: a natural field experiment on environmental framing and cognitive dissonance in going paperless," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 89815, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Eßer, Jana & Flörchinger, Daniela & Frondel, Manuel & Sommer, Stephan, 2024. "Avoiding cognitive dissonance: Experimental evidence on sustainable online shopping," Ruhr Economic Papers 1063, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    2. Nguyen, Trang & de Brauw, Alan & van den Berg, Marrit, 2022. "Sweet or not: Using information and cognitive dissonance to nudge children toward healthier food choices," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Fanghella, Valeria & Thøgersen, John, 2022. "Experimental evidence of moral cleansing in the interpersonal and environmental domains," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Momsen, Katharina & Ohndorf, Markus, 2020. "When do people exploit moral wiggle room? An experimental analysis of information avoidance in a market setup," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    5. Mechtenberg, Lydia & Perino, Grischa & Treich, Nicolas & Tyran, Jean-Robert & Wang, Stephanie W., 2024. "Self-signaling in voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    6. Mitesh Kataria & Tobias Regner, 2015. "Honestly, why are you donating money to charity? An experimental study about self-awareness in status-seeking behavior," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(3), pages 493-515, November.
    7. Spiekermann, Kai & Weiss, Arne, 2016. "Objective and subjective compliance: A norm-based explanation of ‘moral wiggle room’," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 170-183.
    8. Tobias Regner & Astrid Matthey, 2017. "Actions and the self: I give, therefore I am?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2017-018, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    9. Eugen Dimant, 2024. "Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(1), pages 1-31, January.
    10. Ging-Jehli, Nadja R. & Schneider, Florian H. & Weber, Roberto A., 2020. "On self-serving strategic beliefs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 341-353.
    11. Zhuoqiong (Charlie) Chen & Tobias Gesche, 2016. "Persistent bias in advice-giving," ECON - Working Papers 228, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Oct 2017.
    12. Ploner, Matteo & Regner, Tobias, 2013. "Self-image and moral balancing: An experimental analysis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 374-383.
    13. Flörchinger, Daniela & Frondel, Manuel & Sommer, Stephan & Andor, Mark A., 2025. "Pro-environmental behavior and environmentalist movements: Evidence from the identification with Fridays for Future," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    14. Thomas, Ranjeeta & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Moorhouse, Louisa & Nyamukapa, Constance & Hallett, Timothy B., 2024. "Do risk, time and prosocial preferences predict risky sexual behaviour of youths in a low-income, high-risk setting?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    15. Rustichini, Aldo & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2014. "Moral hypocrisy, power and social preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 10-24.
    16. Hillenbrand, Adrian & Verrina, Eugenio, 2022. "The asymmetric effect of narratives on prosocial behavior," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 241-270.
    17. Momsen, Katharina & Ohndorf, Markus, 2022. "Information avoidance, selective exposure, and fake (?) news: Theory and experimental evidence on green consumption," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    18. Nyborg, Karine, 2011. "I don't want to hear about it: Rational ignorance among duty-oriented consumers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 263-274, August.
    19. Hoeft, Leonard & Kurschilgen, Michael & Mill, Wladislaw, 2025. "Norms as obligations," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    20. Ellingsen, Tore & Mohlin, Erik, 2019. "Decency," Working Papers 2019:3, Lund University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:soceco:v:119:y:2025:i:c:s2214804325000540. 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.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

    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.