Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

acceptedVersion

Publication Date

10-2022

Abstract

In today's marketplace, users (e.g., purchasers, influencers) are increasingly the “face” of brands to potential consumers, increasing the risk for brands should these users act poorly. Across seven studies, we document that political orientation moderates the desire for punishment toward users of ethical (vs. conventional) brands who commit moral transgressions. In response to identical marketplace transgressions, we observe that liberals punish ethical brand users less than conventional brand users. In contrast, conservatives punish the same users of ethical brands more than conventional brand users. We document that this bias stems from how people interpret the inconsistency between the ethical branding and the act of transgression, rather than from a group-identity effect, showing how it does not arise in the absence of inconsistent information or when consumers are not able to integrate the inconsistent information to their judgments. We also investigate an avenue by which firms can reframe their ethical branding to reduce this politically motivated bias. We discuss this work's implications for moral judgments, marketplace attribute formation, and the branding of ethical goods in a politically divided world.

Keywords

Branding, Political Ideology, Ethical Consumption, Attribute Formation, Moral Judgment

Discipline

Advertising and Promotion Management | Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics | Marketing

Research Areas

Marketing

Publication

Journal of Consumer Psychology

Volume

32

Issue

4

First Page

551

Last Page

572

ISSN

1057-7408

Identifier

10.1002/jcpy.1270

Publisher

Wiley: 24 months

Copyright Owner and License

Authors

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1270

Download

Share

COinS