Theoretical implications

The present research has been designed to help advance knowledge in relation to self-conscious emotions and ethical consumption. The qualitative study was carried out as an exploratory study into the role of emotions (both basic and SCEs) since

-

making in ethical consumption. As a result, a series of theoretical implications are generated by the results of the qualitative study and they are discussed below.

Additionally, some of these qualitative findings also informed the design of the experimental study for which the implications will be discussed in detail in Section 6.6.

This research has main direct implications for the literature on consumer behaviour

decision making. It also contributes to literature in psychology through its detail insights in the anatomy of guilt i.e. the taxonomy and guilt management strategy.

Some of the theoretical implications are evident from the proposed framework developed using the qualitative findings.

The largest part of the literature dedicated to ethical consumption has focused on

quality, price, convenience,

brand (e.g. Cowe and Williams, 2000; Levi and Linton, 2003), personal norms, responsibility and trust (Osterhus, 1997), reasons for boycotting (John and Klein 2003), attitudes (e.g. Muldoon, 2006; Thogersen, 2005), values (e.g. Shaw et al., 2005), and modelling of consumer rational decision making (e.g. Shaw, Shiu and Clarke, 2000; Uusitalo and Oksanen, 2004). Thus the present research has contributed to the literature on ethical consumption by moving the debate further from cognition-related variables and by offering evidence that emotions play a key role in ethical decision making. This has not been discretely examined in previous research. For example, anticipatory emotions grouped as a positive or negative index were included in the Model of Goal-Directed Behaviour (Perugini and Bagozzi, 2001) but these results were limited by the fact that the impact of each positive/negative emotions has not been individually measured but rather as part of an overall index. However, Carrus, Passafaro and Bonnes (2007) estimated only negative anticipatory emotions as predictors of pro-environmental action (i.e. use private means of transport rather than private car, and recycling). In contrast to these findings, the qualitative study of the present research demonstrates that pride and other positive emotions impact on decision making within the generic context of ethical consumption. As a result, when the effect of pride was isolated and measured as a discrete emotion within an experimental study, this emotion acted as significant

packaging.

The evidence given for the role of emotions does not discount the impact of rational processes in decision making and this is clearly reflected in the framework summarising the qualitative findings (Figure 4.2 in Section 4.6) which acknowledges the existence of a composite evaluation based on emotional and rational dimensions. Previous attempts to explain decision making in ethical consumption were confined to quantitative approaches (e.g. Carrus, Passafaro and Bonnes, 2007;

Shaw, Shiu and Clarke, 2000) which meant that the influence of emotions and other variables were not captured beyond the end outcome variables such as intentions or behaviour. In relation to this aspect, the qualitative findings reflect another contribution related to the cyclical influence of emotions. They emerged at different stages of consumption (i.e. in the form of anticipated, immediate and post-decision emotions) and their experience is likely to impact on future decisions and thus may become markers stored in memory (Cohen and Areni, 1991) (see link ethical choice-positive emotions and cognitive dissonance-negative emotions in Figure 4.2).

Among the range of positive emotions, expressed by consumers in relation to ethical

making. Since past research focused less on the anticipated form of positive emotions, the findings of the present research offer some theoretical developments and suggest that future research should examine in more detail the explanatory power of positive emotions in models of decision making.

This research has shown that emotions inform decision beyond the mediation of attitudes, as the interviewees recounted intense and inconsistent emotions that clearly to do act via attitudes, since these consumers demonstrated an attitude-behaviour gap. Unlike other studies which examined the attitude-attitude-behaviour gap only

M E

study). The findings related to dissonant behaviour also contributed to the literature by revealing systematic incongruent behaviour even within the same product category for the same individual (e.g. choice or product with impact on the environment). Regarding the attitude-behaviour gap, it was also concluded that self-conscious emotions play a role bridging the attitude-behaviour gap as positive and negative emotions encourage ethical behaviour, but also in opening the gap as some hedonic emotions drive consumers towards unethical purchases. The explanation found for this complex behaviour was related to a type of compensatory process that consumers, with different degrees of ethical orientation, have engaged in.

The compensatory process appears to allow consumers to switch regularly between ethical and unethical choices. The idea that consumers would use a balancing act in consumption situations was theoretically proposed by Beruchashvili, Gentry and

P

dimension. As a result, the present findings offered empirical evidence for this theoretical proposition and showed that emotions are connected to this process via the ethical/moral dimension that defines consumption situations. The evidence that the patterns of compensatory behaviour and dissonant behaviour (with accompanying justifications) were pertinent to both genders challenged the findings of previous studies (e.g. Balderjahn, 1988; McIntyre, Meloche and Lewis, 1993; Starr, 2009) that over-emphasised the role of demographic variables in explaining behaviour.

O

L M

the terms of people endeavouring not to spend negatively tagged money on hedonic products/services for their own benefit, but rather engage in utilitarian or virtuous

T

findings por

emotions are not generated by money but rather by previous unethical choices. Such findings not only extend those of Levav and Macgraw (2009) but also encourage consumer researcher to approach decision making from a different angle, where the consumer does not follow a neat sequence of decision making (e.g. such as that suggested by the Theory of Planned Behaviour) but much more complex, with both elements of planning and emotion-driven impulsiveness.

The qualitative stage of the present research led to the development of a guilt taxonomy (see Figure 4.1 in Section 4.5.2). Research carried out in various areas of generic or consumption behaviour have identified various types of guilt (e.g.

predispositional guilt and chronic guilt in relation to issues of mental health, prosocial behaviour, and religiosity Quiles and Bybee, 1997; reactive guilt, anticipatory guilt and existential guilt in guilt appeals Rawlings, 1970; Izard, 1977;

Ruth and Faber, 1988; social guilt and private guilt in charitable giving Hibbert et al.

2007). The presence of these various classifications of guilt is determined by the context of research and by which characteristics and properties of guilt as a SCE become dominant in that situation. As a result, the guilt taxonomy that emerged from the qualitative data contributes to the knowledge of guilt elicitation and manifestation in general, but more importantly to the understanding of its influence in ethical-consumption related decisions. The present guilt taxonomy contributed to the development of a theory that explains how and why the intensity of guilt varies.

The three dimensions that define the guilt categories are embedded in the data but also emerged from the psychology literature about self-conscious emotions i.e.

context, agent of evaluation, and level of intensity varies according to the other two dimensions. While context is an important dimension in the development of taxonomies, the present research has also demonstrated that, within the more general context of ethical consumption, sub-dimensions can help discriminate between the types and intensities of guilt as experienced by consumers i.e. sentient (human and animal) versus non-sentient (plants, trees). More important than the dichotomisation of the dimensions context (sentient versus non-sentient) and agent of evaluation (self versus others) is the fact that the intensity of the emotions varies according to these categories and this has direct implications for marketing communications (see Section 6.6). The interaction between the three dimensions make an additional theoretical contribution in the sense that they can help explain when and how much guilt an individual could experience and to what extent it does not carry into their consumption decisions.

Another explanation developed for the inconsistent influence that guilt has in determining ethical choices is related to the use of guilt management strategies (i.e.

outcome/expediency oriented actions, introspection, diminishing net impacts, and the use of positive emotions). The findings related to guilt management strategies represent a contribution to the literature on cognitive dissonance. Previous research has identified generic dissonance reduction strategies that were connected mainly to cognitive aspects such as: search for consonant information (Engel, 1963), distortion of provided information that is inharmonious with behaviour or purchase (Kassarjian and Cohen, 1965), attitude change, recall of consonant information,

avoidance of dissonant information (Oshikawa, 1969). While there are some similarities with these generic strategies, the guilt management strategies for ethical consumption choice include also novel insights into how guilt is counteracted,

I

been obtained about regret management technique such as ignorance, justifications (e.g. limited ability to react in hindsight; convenience) and promises for improved future behaviour. Altogether, the use of both guilt and regret management

E

-hoc rationalisation in order to manage negative emotions.

The emotional regulation strategies identified here also offer an explanation for how the attitude-behaviour gap is managed and sustained over time.