Religious but not ethical: the effects of extrinsic religiosity, ethnocentrism and self-righteousness on consumers' ethical judgments

The current research investigates how religiosity can influence unethicality in a consumption context. In particular, considering the link between extrinsic religious orientations and unethicality, this research clarifies why and when extrinsic religiosity leads to unethical decisions. Across two studies, findings show that ethnocentrism is both a mediator (Study 1) and a moderator (Studies 1 and 2) of the effects of extrinsic religiosity on consumers' ethical judgments. This is because extrinsic religiosity leads to ethnocentrism, and in-group loyalty manifested through ethnocentrism increases support for unethical consumer actions, thus establishing ethnocentrism as a mediator. At the same time, different levels of ethnocentrism can also influence how extrinsic religiosity leads to supporting unethical consumption via self-righteousness, thus establishing ethnocentrism as a moderator. The findings from this research have significant implications for diverse stakeholders who have an interest in religiosity and consumer behavior

Consumers’ responses to moral controversies of religiously positioned brands: the effects of religiosity on brand loyalty

Purpose: This study aims to examine how religiosity influences brand loyalty toward religiously positioned brands (Chick-fil-A, Forever 21, etc.) when these brands engage in morally controversial actions. Design/methodology/approach: Study 1 investigates how religiosity affects brand loyalty when religiously positioned brands engage in religiousness-related vs nonreligiousness-related morally controversial actions. Study 2 examines several psychological processes (reactance, forgiveness and moral decoupling) as mediators of the effects of intrinsic religiosity and extrinsic religiosity on brand loyalty for controversial religious brands. Findings: Study 1 demonstrates that religiosity leads to positive brand loyalty for religiously positioned brands in the case of both religiousness-related and nonreligiousness-related controversies. Study 2 reveals that intrinsic religiosity (extrinsic religiosity) leads to brand loyalty through moral decoupling and forgiveness, but not through reactance, when religious brands engage in religiousness-related (nonreligiousness-related) controversies. Research limitations/implications: This research focuses on the effects of religiosity on brand loyalty for morally controversial religious brands but does not examine the effects of religious affiliation (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc.). The samples include only US residents. Practical implications: Religious positioning of brands can engender brand loyalty for consumers with high levels of intrinsic religiosity and/or extrinsic religiosity, even when these brands engage in morally controversial actions. Originality/value: This research shows that religiosity affects brand loyalty for morally controversial religious brands and demonstrates that psychological processes used by consumers to justify support for morally controversial religious brands depend on type of religiosity (intrinsic vs extrinsic) and type of controversy (religiousness-related and nonreligiousness-related).</p

The relationships of empathy, moral identity and cynicism with consumers\u27 ethical beliefs: the mediating role of moral disengagement

This study examines the relationships of empathy, moral identity and cynicism with the following dimensions of consumer ethics: the passive dimension (passively benefiting at the expense of the seller), the active/legal dimension (benefiting from questionable but legal actions), the \u27no harm, no foul\u27 dimension (actions that do not harm anyone directly but are considered unethical by some) and the \u27doing-good\u27/recycling dimension (pro-social actions). A survey of six hundred Australian consumers revealed that both empathy and moral identity were related to negative beliefs regarding the passive and the active/legal dimensions of consumer ethics and were related to positive beliefs regarding the \u27doing-good\u27/recycling dimension. Cynicism was related to positive beliefs regarding the passive dimension of consumer ethics and was related to negative beliefs regarding the \u27doing-good\u27/recycling dimension. The role of moral disengagement in mediating these relationships was examined. Empathy and moral identity were only indirectly negatively related to the \u27no harm, no foul\u27 dimension of consumer ethics through moral disengagement, while cynicism was indirectly positively related to this dimension through moral disengagement. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed