Effects of a Green Nudging Advertisement on Positive Consumer Attributions and Perceived Credibility
Caro Palman – 11852852 Master’s Thesis
29 – 06 – 2018 Mw. Dr. E. de Waal
Master’s programme Communication Science Graduate School of Communication
Abstract
As a result of greenwashing practices consumers have become confused about green
advertising and increasingly suspicious of a company’s motive to support an environmental cause. What approach is capable of overcoming these shortcomings related to credibility and scepticism entangled in green advertising? The present study suggests that the introduction of a nudge in green advertising could be successful in this matter. A green advertisement that incorporates a nudge aims to alter consumption behaviour towards a more sustainable direction and is expected to receive more positive consumer attributions of the company’s motivation to support the environment than a green advertisement without a nudge.
Consequently, the green nudging ad is expected to have a higher perceived credibility of the claims. To test these assumptions data was collected using an online experiment. 236 respondents were randomly distributed to a green advertisement that either incorporated a nudge or a product claim. Participants exposed to the nudging ad did believe the claims to be more credible as compared to participants who had seen the regular green ad (p < .001). Moreover, results showed that positive consumer attributions partially mediate the effect of a green nudging ad on credibility (p < .001). Finally, there was a moderation effect of
individual’s scepticism towards green claims clarifying that the positive effects of a green nudging ad on consumer attributions only occurred for individuals with greater scepticism towards green advertising (p = .029). Findings from this study imply that in the context of green advertising, a nudging approach is effective at communicating a true intrinsic motivation for supporting the environment and thereby a valuable strategy in establishing credibility among young, and highly-educated sceptics towards green advertising.
Keywords: green advertising, nudge, consumer attributions, credibility, green claim scepticism
Introduction
Over the past thirty years, consumers have become increasingly concerned for the
environment and this has altered the way consumers behave and the products they purchase. (European Union, 2014). As a response towards the increased environmental awareness of consumers, companies began to develop environmentally friendly products leading to a significant growth in the market for these ‘sustainable’ or ‘green’ products. Consequently, marketers started to integrate environmental claims in their advertisements. This type of communication can be labelled as green advertising. The goal of green advertising is to inform consumers about the environmental aspects of a company’s offerings, to encourage green lifestyles and to improve the corporate socially responsible (CSR) image (Do Paço & Reis, 2012). Indeed, it has been demonstrated that companies who engage in CSR activities and green advertising received an increase in positive brand attributions (Behrend, Baker, & Thompson, 2009; Benoît-Moreau & Parguel, 2011; Hartmann, Apaolaza Ibañez, & Forcada Sainz, 2005; Kong & Zhang, 2014; Olsen, Slotegraaf, & Chandukala, 2014; Tucker, Rifon, Lee, & Reece, 2012).
However, green advertising experienced a downturn as well where its growing popularity led to an increase of deceptive claims. Despite some sincere efforts of companies to improve and protect the environment, others use ambiguous, misleading or even false green claims just to increase sales by appealing to green consumers. This is referred to as ‘green washing’ in the literature (Kangun, Carlson & Grove, 1991). As a result of greenwashing, consumers have not only become confused about green advertising but also increasingly suspicious of companies’ motives behind supporting a cause, and this can discredit both the message and the company (Anaur & Mohamad, 2012; Bae, 2018; Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). Consumers question whether a company’s support of an environmental cause is
designed with genuine concern for the cause itself or solely as a marketing tool to serve the firm’s benefit (Ellen, Webb, & Mohr, 2006).
Today, marketers are thus facing the issue of overcoming scepticism towards
environmental claims (Ottman, Stafford, & Hartman, 2006). They need to develop marketing strategies that communicate a genuine concern for the environment. The foundation of effective green marketing is therefore credibility. Newell and Goldsmith (2001) defined perceived corporate credibility as “the extent to which consumers feel that the firm has the knowledge or ability to fulfil its claims and whether the firm can be trusted to tell the truth or not” (p. 235). Recent studies in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) found that consumer’s positive attributions regarding a company’s motivation of engaging in CSR has a positive influence on the perceived credibility of claims (Bae, 2018; Ellen et al., 2006; Parguel, Benoît-Moreau & Larceneux, 2011; Walker, Heere, Parent, & Drane, 2010).
Consumers assign the most positive attributions to a company’s perceived motives when they are considered to be intrinsically motivated, which refers to the belief that the company engages in CSR actions purely because of its ethical, moral or societal ideals and standards (Ellen, Mohr, & Webb, 2000). This study proposes a strategy that - while being novel within green advertising - might be effective in receiving positive attributions which will increase the credibility of the claims; a nudging approach.
A nudge refers to making purposeful changes in the decision environment that alter people’s behaviour in a predictable way without limiting their choice options or changing economic incentives. In other words, to gently ‘push’ them in the right direction but without limiting them in their freedom (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008). Research that has been conducted on nudging to change behaviour mainly focused on health issues such as dietary and food intake (Cioffi, Levitsky & Pacanowski, 2015). For example, an experimental study that put, instead of the unhealthy snacks, the healthy snacks near the cash register of a train station’s
kiosk. This led to higher sales of healthy snacks (Kroes, Marchiory, & de Ridder, 2016). In addition, there are some examples of brands that successfully used nudging in their marketing campaigns to encourage people to behave in a more societal aware manner. A nudge
incorporated within a green claim aims to alter consumption behaviour towards a more
sustainable direction. It may be evaluated as an intrinsic motive considering that its purpose is the pursuit of a pro-environmental objective by conveying a message of aware consumption (Alemanno, 2015) and thus, neutral to corporate interests in the short-run. Therefore, it may be perceived a as a genuine concern for the environment and more credible.
The academic research performed on the concept of nudging mainly focused on demonstrating the effects on consumer behaviour. However, the effects of nudging on
credibility have not yet been studied. The current study takes nudging theory out of its usually studied context and tries to employ it within the context of green advertising in order to analyse whether it could be a successful strategy in overcoming the shortcomings related to credibility and consumer scepticism. It has already been shown that favourable consumer attributions of a company’s motivation to support a cause can lead to greater credibility (Bae, 2018; Ellen et al. 2006; Parguel et al. 2011) however, more research is needed to understand how managers can communicate a true intrinsic motivation. This study suggests that nudging for good could be effective in this matter and act as a strategy against the backfiring
mechanism in the highlighting of sustainable qualities of a product.
The research conducted consults existing literature about credibility, attribution theory and nudging theory and aims to add to existing scientific knowledge about ways in which nudging could be applied in different communication contexts. Through an experiment the overall effect of incorporating a nudge within a green advertisement on the perceived credibility of the environmental claims is examined. In addition, the mediating role of consumer attributions of a company’s motivation is explored in order to examine whether
motive attributions serve as the foundation for credibility. The aim of this study is therefore to answer the following research question:
RQ: To what extent does a nudge incorporated within green advertising affect greater credibility of the claims? And could this be explained by an increase in positive
consumer attributions of the company’s motivation to support the environment?
Theoretical Framework
In this section, the hypotheses that belong to the research question will be specified and explained. The expected relations are schemed in the conceptual model (Figure 1). Green Advertising and Nudging
Company’s environmental concerns are communicated through green advertising. Green advertising is defined as “any ad that meets one or more of the following criteria: (1) explicitly or implicitly addresses the relationship between a product/service and the biophysical environment, (2) promotes a green lifestyle with or without highlighting a product/services, and (3) presents a corporate image of environmental responsibility” (Banerjee, Gulas & Iyer, 1995, p.22). Its goal is to communicate the commitment to
ecologically responsible and environmentally sustainable practices (Do Paço & Reis, 2012). Generally, marketers promote their green products with certain descriptors such as ‘recycled’, ‘ozone friendly’ or ‘biodegradable’, but these green claims have unclear meanings. Often, consumers do not have sufficient technical knowledge to understand the information underlying these claims leading to great confusing regarding their correctness (Carlson, Grove, & Kangun, 1993; Furlow, 2010). If a green product claim is confusing and ambiguous it may be perceived as a manipulative claim to appeal to green consumerism and can therefore have a negative effect on the perceived credibility (Do Paço & Reis, 2012).
An exploratory study by Carlson et al. (1993) developed a typology that identified environmental advertising claims and classified them in terms of misleading and/or deceptive categories, as such that it may be helpful in identifying problem areas related to particular types of green claims. Their findings suggested that claims that promote the environmental benefits of a product are most likely to be considered as deceptive. Thorson, Page and Moore (1995) followed up on the results of the study by Carlson et al. (1993) by conducting an experiment that examined consumer responses to four categories of green commercials. They found that commercials that say either “Look at all the good things we’re doing for the environment” or “Let’s all learn how to be better to our environment” received the most positive consumer responses in terms of brand attitudes and credibility as opposed to commercials that focused on a product or packaging. Reasoning behind this is hat green advertising claims which are directly linked to the product are difficult to discern. Hence, consumers cannot verify the veracity of these claims through product experience (e.g. ‘ozone-friendly’, ‘made from 100 percent recycled materials’). When a company instead points out how society as a whole could contribute in improving the environment a green claim could become much more intelligible and valuable to both the source and the receivers of the message (Carlson et al., 1993; Thorson et al., 1995). Although these findings are insightful it appears that there is lack of studies that followed up on them. More research in the context of green advertising is needed to understand what type of strategies might be effective in
communicating a sense of shared values and thereby in overcoming the risks related to credibility and scepticism. The present study suggests that a nudging approach could be successful in this matter.
A nudge refers to any aspect of the decision environment “that alters people’s
behaviour in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives” (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008, p.8). This way, people can be influenced to
make better decisions, without forcing specific outcomes, a philosophy referred to as libertarian paternalism (Thaler, Sunstein & Balz, 2014). Thaler et al., (2014) suggested that nudges could be an effective tool for promoting a wide range of sustainable and
pro-environmental consumptions behaviours. A few studies already examined the use of nudging tools to discourage energy wasting (Bharma, Lilley, & Tang, 2011; Fischer, 2008). One example is the use of prompts such as stickers that reminds individuals to turn off the lights (Backhaus & Heiskanen, 2009). Nudging has not only been successfully applied in academic research but in practice as well. A good example of a brand that successfully used nudging in their marketing campaign to encourage people to behave in a more societal aware manner is Ariel’s ‘Turn to 30º’ in which P&G wanted to induce the use of a particular Ariel detergent with hot water at 30 degrees, which is significantly lower than the current habit of most consumers (NudgingForGood, 2015). In addition, there was the ‘WaterSavers’ campaign for the Unilever brands Dove and Andrelon which focused on creating awareness for water use - showering in particular - at home (NudgingForGood, 2017). Through these campaigns, P&G and Unilever attempted to create awareness around environmental issues and solve these issues together with the consumer.
The idea of a nudge, incorporated in a green claim, is that the company wants to address an environmental challenge. In order to achieve its aim, it asks consumers to contribute in attenuating the social costs caused by their own service or products. Through collaboration, companies and consumers might eliminate some of the negative side effects caused by the (over)-consumptions of a company’s offerings. Nudging for good thus calls upon and relies on the active cooperation of the individual, without the input of the consumer the joint objective will not be attained (Alemanno, 2015). A green nudging ad can thus be perceived as more credible because they are more intelligible and valuable to consumers than
green product claims (Carlson et al., 1993; Thorson et al., 1995). Therefore, this study hypothesizes the following:
H1: Green advertising that incorporates a nudge will have a higher perceived credibility of the claims compared to green advertising without a nudge
Attribution Theory
Attribution theory has been used to develop a model of how perceived marketer intention shapes consumer responses to persuasion attempts (Friestad & Wright, 1994). In the context of CSR, attribution theory distinguishes between two types of motives: extrinsic and intrinsic (Du, Battacharya & Sen, 2007; Parguel et al., 2011). Extrinsic or self-interested motives emphasize the potential benefits to the firm itself (e.g. increase in sales/profits or improve brand image), while intrinsic or selfless motives refer to a genuine wish to benefit the cause that the CSR actions focus on (Du et al., 2007). Generally, consumers respond negatively to extrinsic motives as it suggests that the action would not have been initiated without a reward and therefore indicate an opportunistic and individualistic perspective. When a companies’ motives for indulging in CSR are perceived as mainly extrinsic, consumers fear that it is just a promotional trick that marketers apply to mislead them (Parguel et al., 2011). In contrast, they evaluate a firm’s intrinsic motives favourably because they represent altruistic values and show an enhanced societal interest (Becker-Olsen, Cudmore, & Hill, 2006). In this case consumers belief that a company’s intentions are truthful and that it has a genuine desire to contribute to society (Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). Consumer’s positive attribution regarding a company’s motivation of engaging in CSR has a positive influence on the perceived credibility of the claims (Bae, 2018; Ellen et al, 2006).
Based on the attribution theory this study argues that a green claim in the form of a nudge for good will be evaluated by consumers as intrinsically motivated considering that the nudge is neutral to corporate interests in the short-run. It is aimed at promoting a behavioural change at the moment of consumption, not that of sale. Moreover, unlike traditional CSR, corporate nudging does not imply a reactive approach. Instead, it is proactive in nature: companies identify the social costs caused by consumption and try to alter the modalities of that consumption to diminish those very same costs (Alemanno, 2015). In addition, previous studies (Ellen et al. 2006; Forehand & Grier, 2003) found that consumers attribute more intrinsic motives to the company when the fit between a cause and the firm was high, resulting in more favourable evaluations in terms of credibility. Nudging for good
automatically acts on social issues that are connected to the core of the business rather than, exclusively focusing on generic social issues. Therefore, one could argue that a nudging strategy always represents a fit between the company and the cause. Based on this, and in particular the argument that a nudge is neutral to corporate interests in the short-run, the current study argues that green nudging might actually be perceived as a genuine effort to improve the environment and not as yet another conventional marketing technique whose sole objective is brand reputation or increasing sales. Therefore, the following hypothesis is posed:
H2: Green advertising that incorporates a nudge will lead to more positive consumer attributions of the company’s motivation compared to green advertising without a nudge, which consequently leads to a higher perceived credibility of the claims
Scepticism Towards Green Advertising
Previous studies have demonstrated that the extent of consumers’ green claim scepticism is an important determinant of their responses to green advertising (Bae, 2018; Do Paço & Reis, 2012; Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014; Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). Green claim scepticism refers to the tendency toward disbelief of environmental claims made in advertising (Mohr, Eroglu & Ellen, 1998). It has been found that individuals with high scepticism have better knowledge of what tactics marketers use for persuasion (Friestad & Wright, 1994). More sceptical consumers make a simplistic attribution in their inferences about CSR efforts, doubting whether a company’s societal interest is designed to benefit the cause itself with genuine concern, or to serve the company’s benefit (Ellen et al., 2006; Matthes &
Wonneberger, 2014; Webb & Mohr, 1998). As was pointed out above a green nudge is neutral to corporate interests in the short-run and therefore less likely to be perceived as a misleading trick that marketers use to increase sales. On the other hand, one could argue that sceptics could review green nudging as yet another marketing tactic to improve the brand’s own image. However, the present study argues that this is an unlikely event since the concept of nudging is novel within the context of green advertising. Therefore, those with greater scepticism may become less suspicious of the company’s underlying motive for supporting the environment when they are presented with a green nudging advertisement compared to exposure to a regular green advertisement.
Low sceptics are more likely to belief the product claims made in a green
advertisement, regardless of whether it incorporates a nudge or a green product claim. They already become positively tuned by the fact that a company claims to support a cause (Bae, 2018; Mohr et al., 1998) resulting in the positive effects on brand evaluation that many findings of studies have demonstrated (Baker & Thompson, 2009; Olsen, Slotegraaf & Chandukala, 2014). Following from this, the following hypothesis is posed:
H3: Green advertising that incorporates a nudge will lead to more positive consumer attributions of the company’s motivation compared to green advertising without a nudge. This effect however, is particularly true among individuals with greater scepticism towards green claims
Methodology Materials
According to Kong and Zhang (2014) green appeals in advertising are likely to have a
stronger effect for products that are more harmful for the environment. In addition, they found that more effective persuasion and consumer responses are elicited by green appeals for low involvement products compared to high involvement products. Findings from a study about the environmental impact of products by the European Union (Tukker et al. 2008)
demonstrated that product types in the food and household category are most impactful on the environment. Household consumables such as cleaning utilities are a common advertised product in green marketing (Banerjee et al., 1995). Therefore, this study employs a low-involvement product from a household category: laundry detergent. In order to avoid familiarity and existing associations with the brand, the fictional brand Softlan was used.
Participants were either shown a green advertisement for a laundry detergent that incorporates a nudge or a regular green claim based on real-life examples of green
advertisements for laundry detergents. The nudging advertisement is inspired by Ariel’s ‘Turn to 30º’ campaign (NudgingForGood, 2015). The idea behind this campaign was to induce the use of a particular Ariel detergent with hot water at 30 degrees, which is significantly lower than the current habit of most consumers.
Pilot study. A pre-test of the stimulus material was conducted to assess whether the manipulation was perceived as intended, which is the main requirement for the study. This means that the green nudging advertisement should be perceived as a message that primarily stimulates the receiver to behave in a more environmentally aware manner, versus the regular green advertisement that highlights the environmental benefits of the product. An online experiment was conducted with a between subject design with green advertising claim: nudge vs. non-nudge as conditions. Four different advertisements showing two different images per condition were designed. The two ad versions for both the nudge and the non-nudge condition featured either an image of a washing machine containing laundry which forms a subtle, not necessarily noticeable figure of a ship in seawater, or a washing machine that contained a figure of the world. The claims for the nudge condition and the non-nudge condition remained the same across the four different ad versions (see Appendix A for all ads). The motives for pre-testing various images were that certainty on the manipulation was not guaranteed as no study has examined nudging within the context of green advertising before. The image of the
washing machine featuring a figure of the world could, on the one hand, induce more green associations but on the other hand, it could also distract from the claims. The latter is not desired because it contains the manipulation. In this case perhaps the image containing a subtler image of a boat in the sea would be a better fit for a successful manipulation, or perhaps not only the claims, but the images as well should differ across the nudge and the non-nudge condition. The results of the pilot study should provide a clearer direction on what the advertisements for each condition should look like. A total of 40 participants were
randomly assigned to one of the four advertisements in the pilot study. Most participants were female (85%) and Dutch (85%). The average age was 25 (M = 24.65, SD = 4.32). The
manipulation check was measured on a two-items, 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) with the following statements regarding the message of the ad: (1) ‘With this ad Softlan wants to simulate its consumers to behave in a more environmentally friendly way.’, (2) ‘With this ad Softlan wants to promote the environmentally friendly aspects of its product.’ Two one-way Analysis of Variances (ANOVA) were conducted to compare the mean scores for each conditional ad on the two statements. The results showed that for both the nudge and the non-nudge condition, the washing machine that contains the laundry in the shape of a boat in the sea had the highest mean scores on statement 1 in the nudge condition (M = 6.27, SD = .65) (see Table 1) and statement 2 in the non-nudge condition (M = 6.33, SD = .71) (see Table 2). However, the mean differences across conditions were only significant for statement 2 F (3, 36) = 3.96, p = .016. For statement 1 the mean scores did not differ significantly across conditions F (3, 36) = .35, p = .793. For the main experiment the
advertisement that was thus selected was the version with the laundry shaped like a boat in the sea. However, revisions were made on the framing of the manipulation check, considering that the way it was presented in the pilot study could lead to a high score on both items within each condition. For the main experiment the manipulation check was framed as a choice
option between two statements regarding their opinion of the message of the advertisement that they had seen, instead of the two-items, 7-point Likert scale in the pilot study. This way, only one statement could be true.
Stimuli. The ads were identical except for the claims, which contained the
manipulation. Both ads display an image of a washing machine containing laundry in the shape of a boat in the sea. The claim of the nudge advertisement states: ‘Turn to 30º’, together with an additional claim in the bottom right that states: ‘Let’s all keep the world’s
temperature down’. This claim aims to increase environmental awareness among their consumers and alter the consumption behaviour by nudging them to lower their washing temperature to 30 degrees. The claim of the non-nudge advertisement states: ‘Eco cleaning, biodegradable detergent’ together with an additional claim in the bottom right that states: ‘One way to keep the world’s temperature down.’
Table 1
Mean scores and standard deviations on statement 1: ‘With this ad Softlan wants to stimulate its consumers to behave in an environmentally friendly way’
Ad versions M SD N
Nudge (world) 6.00 1.73 11
Nudge (boat) 6.27 0.65 10
Non-Nudge (world) 5.88 1.25 9
Table 2
Mean scores and standard deviations on statement 2: ‘With this ad Softlan wants to promote the environmentally friendly aspects of its product.’
Ad versions M SD N Nudge (world) 5.22 1.20 11 Nudge (boat) 4.30 1.89 10 Non-Nudge (world) 6.00 1.42 9 Non-Nudge (boat) 6.33* .72 10 Note. *< 0.05 Sample and Design
Sample. People starting from the age of eighteen were recruited to participate in the study, both offline and online through (online) social networks, student platforms at the UvA, and colleagues at work. They were approached face-to-face or via an URL on social
networks. 400 participants started filling out the survey, 161 respondents were excluded from the sample as they did not complete the survey at once. There were three outliers that fell more than three standard deviations from its mean. After a closer analysis of each of these cases it was decided to drop these outliers since the responses seemed odd and illogical, indicating that there was no attention paid to filling out the survey or a misunderstanding of the questions. The dropping of outlier records resulted in a final convenience sample of 236 participants of which 64.8% was female. The average age of the participants was 29 (SD = 12.03), ranging from 18-70 years. The sample consisted mainly out of highly educated people with 29.7% who were currently enrolled in or completed a university of applied sciences’ degree (HBO) and 61.9% who were currently enrolled in or completed a university degree (WO) degree. Most of the participants were Dutch (93.6%); the remaining 6.4% existed out of a variety of other nationalities.
Design. In order to test the assumed effect of green advertising on the outcome variables, consumer attributions and credibility of the claims, an online experiment was conducted with a between-subjects design. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental conditions: (1) a regular green advertisement (n = 113) and, (2) a green advertisement with a nudge (n = 123).
Procedure
The experimental study was conducted via an online questionnaire that was developed with Qualtrics research software. An anonymous URL was distributed via online social network sites. Before the start of the questionnaire participants were informed about the set-up of the survey and the general subject of the study, green advertising, but the term nudging was left out to prevent from possible response bias (see Appendix B). After proceeding all participants were requested to give their informed consent (see Appendix C) with the agreements of the study and to voluntarily participate. After consent was granted, participants were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental conditions. It was highlighted that respondents should carefully look at the advertisement since the questions of the survey would correspond to their opinions about the ad and the advertised brand. Next, participants were asked to fill out the questions measuring perceived credibility of the claims and consumer attributions. Thereafter, respondents’ scepticism towards green claims, and control variables were assessed followed by a manipulation check which was included to ensure that respondents perceived the
message of the ad as intended. Finally, several questions on demographic variables had to be filled out. The survey ended with a study debrief in which all respondents were thanked for their participation.
Dependent Variables
Perceived credibility of the claims. The dependent variable is measured by asking respondents to rate on a three-items, 7-point semantic differential scale whether they found the claims in the advertisement to be ‘Unbelievable/Believable’,
‘Untrustworthy/Trustworthy’, ‘Not credible/Credible’ (Newell & Goldsmith, 2001). The results of a Principal Component Analysis indicated that the scale was unidimensional (EV = 2.70, 𝑅2 = .90) and had good reliability (= .95, M = 4.86, SD = 1.29).
Mediating Variables
Consumer attributions. The scale items that measure the mediator, consumer
attributions of the company’s motivation to support the environment, are developed based on prior attribution research (Du et al., 2007; Ellen et al., 2006; Parguel et al. 2011). Intrinsic motives that represent a brand’s genuine concern for the environment as well as extrinsic motives in terms of the competitive pressures that may have led the brand to engage in CSR activities were measured. Intrinsic motives were measured on a five-items, 7-point Likert-scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) with the following statements regarding the motives behind the communication of environmental engagement: (1) ‘Softlan has a genuine concern for the environment’, (2) ‘Softlan puts forward a genuine consciousness regarding environmental problems’, (3) ‘Softlan wants to make consumers aware of environmental issues’, (4) ‘Softlan has a long-term interest in environmental improvement’, and (5) ‘Softlan tries to give something back to the environment’. All items loaded onto one factor (EV = 3.43, 𝑅2 = .69) and proved good reliability (= .85, M = 4.50, SD = 1.94).
Extrinsic motives were measured on a five-items, 7-point Likert-scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) with the following statements: (1) ‘Softlan wants to create a good brand image amongst consumers by supporting environmental responsibility’, (2)
‘Softlan wants to gain more consumers by supporting environmental responsibility’, (3) ‘Softlan hopes to increase profits by supporting environmental responsibility’, (4) ‘Softlan is supporting environmental responsibility because nowadays it’s fashionable to do this’, and (5) ‘Softlan is supporting environmental responsibility because they feel that consumers expect it’. The scale items are presented in a random order, mixing the items that measure intrinsic and extrinsic motives as to avoid potential steering of responses into a particular direction. The scale for extrinsic motives was unidimensional as well (EV = 2.59, 𝑅2 = .52) and proved reliable (= .76, M = 5.38, SD = 1.41).
Moderating Variables
Scepticism towards green claims. A four-items, 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree), adapted from Mohr et al. (1998), is employed to measure
scepticism towards green claims. Participants were asked to indicate to what extent they agree with the following statement statements: (1) ‘Most environmental claims made on package labels or in advertising are true’, (2) ‘Because environmental claims are exaggerated consumers would be better off if such claims on package labels or in advertising were
eliminated’, (3) ‘Most environmental claims on package labels or in advertising are intended to mislead rather than inform consumers’, (4) ‘I do not believe most environmental claims made on package labels or in advertising’. The scale presented itself as unilateral (EV = 2.10, 𝑅2 = .53) and reasonably reliable (= .68, M = 3.95, SD = 1.96).
Control Variables
Environmental involvement. Findings from several studies on scepticism towards green advertising found that in general, individuals who are high in environmental
Paço & Reis, 2012; Hartmann & Apaolaza-Ibañez, 2009). However, findings from other studies are contradictory to this notion and even demonstrate that green consumers put more trust in green ads compared to non-green consumers (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014; Royne, Martinex, Oakley, & Fox, 2012). In both scenarios the two variables were related. Therefore, participants’ level of environmental involvement was included in the measures. Regarding environmental involvement, there are at least three relevant conceptualizations (1)
environmental concern, (2) attitudes toward green products, and (3) green purchase behaviour (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014). Environmental concern is measured by a four-items, 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) with the following statements: (1) ‘I am concerned about the environment’, (2) ‘The condition of the environment affects the quality of my life’, (3) ‘I am willing to make sacrifices to protect the environment’, (4) ‘My actions impact the environment’. Attitude towards green product is measured by a three-items, 7-Point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) containing the following statements: (1) ‘I like green products’, (2) ‘I feel positive towards green products’, (3) ‘I feel proud when I use/buy green products’. Finally, green purchase behaviour is measured on a four-items, 7-Point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) asking participants to indicate whether they agree or not with the following statements: (1) ‘I have switched from products for ecological reasons’, (2) ‘When I have a choice between two equal products, I purchase the one less harmful for the environment’, (3) ‘I actively look for the most environmentally friendly products’, (4) ‘I avoid products that damage the environment’. While the three components of environmental involvement are related, they can have different outcomes (Matthes & Wonneberger, 2014). Therefore, the scores for the three components were kept separate because of interest in the potential impact of every distinctive facet. The results of the PCAs showed that the three scales respectively, were unidimensional (EV =
2.41, 𝑅2 = .60; EV = 2.25, 𝑅2 = .75; EV = 2.71, 𝑅2 = .68) and proved reliable ( = .75, M = 5.40, SD = 1.34; = .82, M = 5.39, SD = 1.37; = .84, M = 4.34, SD = 2.19).
Demographics
At the end of the questionnaire demographic variables were recorded by asking respondents about their age, gender, nationality and education (highest level completed or, if applicable, currently enrolled in).
Results
Randomization Check
In order to check whether participants were evenly distributed across experimental conditions on the variables gender, age and education, several randomization checks were conducted. Results confirm successful randomization as there were no significant differences across conditions on participants’ gender 𝑋2(1) = 1.04, p = .307, age t (234) = 3.35, p = .188, 95%
CI [-4.46, 1.72] and education 𝑋2 (4) = 3.74, p = .442.
Another randomization check was conducted on participants’ distribution on all three components measuring environment involvement (environmental concern, green attitude and green purchase behaviour. Results of a one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
demonstrated that participants did not significantly differ from each other on their level of environmental involvement across the two conditions F (1, 234) = .46, p = .497; F (1, 234) = .09, p = .764; F (1, 234) = .14, p = .706. Therefore, all three components of environmental involvement are ignored as a source of impact in further analyses.
Manipulation Check
A manipulation check was included to see whether the manipulation worked the way it was intended. Participants were asked to choose between two statements regarding their opinion of the message of the advertisement that they had seen: (1) ‘With this ad Softlan wants to stimulate me to wash at lower temperature in order to behave in an environmentally friendly way’ and (2) ‘With this ad Softlan wants to tell me that their detergent is an environmentally friendly product’. A Chi-square test of independence was performed comparing the frequency of how participants perceived the ad (nudge vs. non-nudge) in both conditions. The
manipulation appeared to be successful, as the results were significant 𝑋2(1) = 43.82, p <
.001. Participants that were exposed to the green ad with a nudge (n = 113) were more likely to perceive it as an advertisement that aims to stimulate its receiver to wash at a lower temperature (77.1%), and participants that were exposed to the regular green ad (n = 123) were more likely to perceive it as an advertisement that aims to inform its receiver about the environmental benefits of the product (68.0%).
Hypotheses Testing
The first hypothesis stated that participants who were exposed to a green advertisement that incorporates a nudge would have a higher perceived credibility of the claims than participants who were exposed to a regular green advertisement without a nudge. A one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) demonstrated that subjects who had seen the nudging ad did believe the claims to be more credible (M = 5.24, SD = 1.15) than subjects who had seen the regular green ad (M = 4.51, SD = 1.31). The effect is weak, but as hypothesized and significant F (1, 234) = 20.73, p < .001, 𝜂2 = 0.08. There is an association between a green nudging
advertisement and the perceived credibility of the claims, and therefore, hypothesis 1 is supported.
Baron and Kenny’s (1986), Judd and Kenny’s (1981), and James and Brett’s (1984) four steps in establishing mediation have been used to examine whether positive consumer attributions (intrinsic motives) mediate the effect of a green nudging advertisement on perceived credibility of the claims (H2) (see Figure 2). The analysis was performed with multiple Regression analyses, and therefore, the experimental condition was recoded as dummy variable. First, a Regression analysis was performed to examine the main effect (path c) with a green advertisement (non-nudge/nudge) as predictor, and perceived credibility of the claims as dependent variable. As demonstrated already with the Analysis of Variance, this effect was significant F (1, 234) = 20.73, 𝑅2= .081, p < .001. There was a positive relation
between a nudging ad and credibility b* = 0.29, t = 4.55, p < .001, 95% CI [0.42, 1.05]. When examining the effect of a green advertisement (non-nudge/nudge) on the mediator, intrinsic motives (path a), a significant effect was found F (1, 234) = 6.07, 𝑅2= .025, p = .014. For this sample the nudge advertisement scored 0.16 units higher on positive consumer attributions compared to the regular green advertisement b* = 0.16, t = 2.46, p = .014, 95% CI [0.07, 0.66]. Finally, a regression model that included a green advertisement (non-nudge/nudge), intrinsic motives and credibility as variables was ran and proved significant F (2, 233) = 61.17, 𝑅2= .344, p < .001. The results of the model showed that intrinsic motives had a significant and positive influence on credibility, when controlling for green advertisement (path b), b* = 0.52, t = 9.67, p < .001, 95% CI [0.47, 0.70]. In addition, the effect of a green advertisement (non-nudge/nudge) on credibility, controlling for intrinsic motives (path c’), was also significant b* = 0.20, t = 3.77, p < .001, 95% CI [0.25, 0.80]. Moreover, the coefficient for path c’ (b* = 0.20) is smaller than the coefficient for path c (b* = 0.29), indicating a partial mediation effect of positive consumer attributions. An estimate of the indirect effect using the Sobel’s Z test also indicated that perceived quality meditates the
direct effect, Sobel’s Z = 2.39, SE = 0.09, p = .017. Based on these results, hypothesis 2 is supported.
For the purpose of a complete analysis, the same set of Regression analyses was conducted for extrinsic motives (see Table 4 for all the coefficients), which refer to negative consumer attributions. The main effect (path c) was already examined for intrinsic motives and therefore skipped for this mediation analysis. The effect of a green advertisement (non-nudge/nudge) on extrinsic motives (path a) did show a significant effect b* = 0.14, t = 2.22, p = .027. However, no significant effect for path b was found b* = 0.06, t = .93, p = .351, which indicates that there is no mediation for perceived extrinsic motives on the effect of a green advertisement (non-nudge/nudge) on the perceived credibility of the claims.
Figure 2. Results of 4 steps in establishing mediation (standardized regression coefficients) *α < .05.
Table 4
The results of multiple regressions for predicting credibility and the mediation effect of consumer attributions (standardized regression coefficients)
Intrinsic motives Extrinsic Motives Predictor Dependent variable b t b t Green advertisement Credibility 0.29*** 4.55 0.29*** 4.55 Green advertisement Motives 0.16* 2.46 0.14* 2.22 Motives, controlled for green advertisement Credibility 0.52*** 9.67 0.06 0.93 Green advertisement, controlled for motives Credibility 0.20*** 3.77 0.28*** 4.37*** Overall model F 61.17*** 10.80*** 𝑅2 0.344 0.085
Note. For Non-nudge = 0, Nudge = 1. * α < .05, ** α < .01, *** α < .001
In order to check whether scepticism towards green advertising influences the effect of a green nudging ad on positive consumer attributions (H3), a moderation analysis was
performed using the PROCESS macro tool, model 1 (Hayes, 2013). The process of bootstrapping was created with a large sample from the original data (5000 for this study) through a sampling replacement strategy. A confidence interval of 95% was used for the indirect effect. The regression model to assess the effect on intrinsic motives was significant 𝑅2 = .39, F (5, 230) = 8.29, p < .001. The moderation analysis with exposure to a green
advertisement (non-nudge/nudge) as independent variable, intrinsic motives as dependent variable and scepticism towards green claims as moderating variable did yield a significant interaction effect, b* = 0.31, t = 2.19, p = .029, CI [.03, .59]. To find out at which condition of
the independent variable (non-nudge vs. nudge) there was a significant interaction effect the slopes were plotted in a graph (see Figure 3). It tells us that people with higher levels of scepticism towards green claims perceived the company’s motivation to support the
environment as being more intrinsically motivated in the nudge condition as compared to the non-nudge condition. From these results it can be concluded that hypothesis 3 is supported.
Figure 3. Impact of a green advertisement (non-nudge/nudge) on intrinsic motives under the influence of scepticicsm
The results of the same moderation analysis with extrinsic motives as the dependent variable demonstrate that there was no significant interaction effect b* = 0.11, t = .90, p =
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 2.93 3.93 4.92 Inti nsic Mot ives Scepticism Non-Nudge Nudge
.367, CI [-.12, .31], indicating that there was no moderation effect of scepticism towards green claims on the effect a green advertisement on extrinsic motives.
Discussion
The purpose of the current study was to test the extent to which a green advertisement that incorporates a nudge has more positive consumer attributions of the company’s motivation to support the environment and consequently greater credibility of the claims. In addition, it aimed to test whether participants’ scepticism towards green advertising interacted with this effect. First of all, results demonstrate that a green advertisement with a nudge indeed has greater credibility of the claims as compared to a regular green advertisement (H1). In addition, results show that the increase in credibility could be explained by an increase in positive consumer attributions regarding the company’s motivation for supporting the
environment (H2), which is consistent with previous findings on consumer responses to CSR (Bae, 2018; Ellen et al., 2006; Parguel et al., 2011; Walker et al., 2010). Individuals presented with a green nudging ad attribute more intrinsic motives to a company’s environmental engagement than individuals exposed to a regular green ad, indicating that it is better at communicating a genuine concern for the environment instead of solely an attempt to increase sales and improve brand image. These findings add to the literature on attribution theory that in the context of green advertising, a nudge is effective at communicating a true intrinsic motivation.
Although extrinsic motives do not significantly mediate the effect of a green nudging ad on credibility, it should be noted that individuals do not attribute less extrinsic motives to a green nudging ad than to a regular green ad. In fact, mean scores for extrinsic motives were even slightly higher for the nudging ad. This tells us that in comparison to extrinsic motives, the higher mean scores on intrinsic motives are the main explanation for participants’ greater credibility of the claims when presented with a green nudging ad versus a regular green ad.
Prior research on attribution theory in cause-related-marketing (CRM) further clarifies this (Bae, 2018; Forehand & Grier, 2003; Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). It explains that
consumers know that among a for-profit company’s primary goals are profits and image management and thus they will most likely perceive its actions to be extrinsically driven, regardless of the nature of these actions. A consumers’ disbelief of an environmental claim is therefore not primarily driven by the beliefs that the company’s motives for supporting the cause are extrinsically motivated, but rather the perception that the company is being deceptive about its true motives (Forehand & Grier, 2003; Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). A regular green ad that highlights the sustainable qualities of products to appeal to green consumerism has a risk of being perceived as a promotional trick that companies use to manipulate consumers into buying their product over another (Do Paço & Reis, 2012). The company’s motivation to support the environment is then perceived as being only
extrinsically motivated. Whereas consumers are probably less likely to find a green nudging ad manipulative because it is not captured at willingness to pay by offering a competitive advantage (i.e. washing at a lower temperature does not entail a monetary benefit for the nudging brand). Instead of promoting a behavioural change at the moment of sale, it is focused at stimulating a behavioural change at the moment of consumption (Alemanno, 2015). This entails that when perceived extrinsic motives coincide with intrinsic motives, then consumers are more prone towards believing that, in addition to obtaining profits, the
company genuinely wants to contribute to society. The current study sets out that in the context of green advertising, this can be obtained from the introduction of a nudging approach.
To further analyse the underlying processes of the observed effect, this study
examined if and how participants’ level of scepticism towards green advertising interacts with the effect of a green nudge on positive consumer attributions (H3). Results show that there is
indeed a moderation effect clarifying that for participants with low levels of scepticism it does not make a difference whether they are presented with a green nudging ad or a regular green ad in terms of attributing intrinsic motives. However, for those who are more sceptic towards green advertising it does make a difference, meaning that participants with greater scepticism towards green claims attribute more intrinsic motives to the company’s motivation to support the environment when presented with a green nudging ad versus a regular green ad. These findings are not surprising considering that individuals low in scepticism do not give much attention to a company’s actions’ underlying motives (Bae, 2018; Mohr et al., 1998). An individual who is sceptic on the other hand, is automatically more suspicious and more likely to attribute a company’s societal interest as an attempt to solely benefit the firm itself (Bae, 2018; Webb & Mohr, 1998). Indeed, results from the moderation analysis show that as the level of scepticism augment, the mean scores on intrinsic motives decrease in both conditions. However, this effect is diminished when sceptics are exposed to a green nudging ad, instead of a regular green ad. This entails that, for individuals with greater scepticism towards green advertising, it is actually beneficial to present them with a green nudge instead of a regular green ad. Considering the fact that currently there are more sceptics towards green advertising than non-sceptics (Du, Bhattacharya, Sen, 2010; Pomering & Johnson, 2009) this is a highly valuable finding and provides useful insights for marketers developing green advertisements.
Many studies have found the positive effects of green advertising on brand evaluations (Kong & Zhang, 2014; Olsen et al., 2014; Tucker et al., 2012). However, an increasing
amount of greenwashing practices also led to a general feeling of confusion and scepticism towards green advertising, resulting in ambivalent attitudes towards the brands. The potential for deception and confusion could cause consumers to question a company’s honesty and damage the brand (Furlow, 2010; Parguel et al., 2011). Because scepticism reduces the positive effects of green advertising companies need to develop better communications to
enhance its effects among all consumers (Do Paço & Reis, 2012). Inspired by some real-life cases (NudgingForGood, 2017; 2015), the present study extracted nudging theory from its usually studied context and employed it in the context of green advertising to examine whether it could be the strategy that is capable of overcoming the shortcomings related to credibility and consumer scepticism entangled in green advertising. Findings have indeed proven that the introduction of a nudge with a green advertisement is successful in this matter. In addition, this study further strengthens attribution theory by providing consumer
attributional thinking as a mechanism that can explain the benefits obtained from a green nudging ad on credibility.
Despite these important findings, there are limitations that need to be outlined as well, creating opportunities for future research. First of all, it should be noted that the positive effect of a green nudging ad on intrinsic motives among sceptics could change over time as sceptics could define it as yet another marketing tactic for persuasion once they become more familiar with it. Therefore, it would be relevant to repeat the present study once nudging has become a common used strategy in the context of green advertising.
Second, as the form of sampling was not completely random, some of the groups were over- and/or underrepresented. For example, the sample contained more females (64.3%) then males. Previous studies have shown that women are more altruistic-minded than men. In general, they feel a higher moral obligation to help others and improve the world (Brunel & Nelson, 2000). Therefore, they could be more appealed by a green nudging advertisement that communicates an altruistic value than men. Perhaps a sample that contains an equal ratio of men vs. women would show less positive effects of a green nudging ad. Future samples should thus extend beyond this study’s sample to ensure generalizability of the findings.
Finally, the present study incorporates a fictitious brand to prevent from potential bias in the sample. Brand image is argued to be constructed upon continued exposure to brands
(Aaker, 1997). When exposed to unfamiliar brands an initial image is developed on the basis of the advertisement faced with. Familiar brands may thus reflect a different impact of a green nudging ad and green claim scepticism as they are added to pre-existing brand associations, such as the trustworthiness or liking of the brand. Perhaps the benefits of a green nudging ad do translate to a trustworthy brand but not to an untrustworthy brand. Or perhaps they do not occur until a particular amount of exposures to the green nudging ad considering that existing brand associations are difficult to change. Future studies should thus be testing on familiar brands as well to examine whether the same benefits of a green nudging ad occur.
These suggestions for further research depict only a small selection. Because the concept of nudging is entirely novel to the field of green advertising future research can go into many directions. With this study a great contribution to nudging literature is made by broadening its context to green advertising and by expanding its empirical tests to perceived attribution of motives and credibility. Findings from this study imply that in the context of green advertising, a nudging approach is effective at communicating a true intrinsic motivation for supporting the environment and thereby a valuable strategy in establishing credibility among young, and highly-educated sceptics towards green advertising.
References
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347–356. doi: 10.2307/3151897
Alemanno, A. (2015). The future of behavioural change: Public or private nudging? Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710926
Anuar, M. M., & Mohamad, O. (2012). Effects of skepticism on consumer response toward cause-related marketing in Malaysia. International Business Research, 5(9), 98–105. doi: 10.5539/ibr.v5n9p98
Backhaus, J., & Heiskanen, E. (2009). Rating expert advice on how to change energy. Retrieved from http://energychange.info/articles/213-research- note-2-rating-expert-advice-on-how-to-change-energy-behaviour.
Bae, M. (2018). Overcoming skepticism toward cause-related marketing claims: The role of consumers’ attributions in a temporary state of skepticism. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 35(2), 194–207. doi: 10.1108/JCM-06-2016-1827
Banerjee, S., Gulas, C. S., & Iyer, E. (1995). Shades of green: a multidimensional analysis of environmental advertising. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 21–31. doi:
10.1080/00913367.1995.10673473
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 46– 53. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.01.001
Behrend, T. S., Baker, R. A., & Thompson, L. F. (2009). Effects of pro-environmental recruiting messages: The role of organizational reputation. Journal of Business & Psychology, 24(3), 341–350. doi: 10.1007/s10869-009-9112-6
Benoit-Moreau, F., & Parguel, B. (2011). Building brand equity with environmental
communication: An empirical investigation in France. EuroMed Journal of Business, 6(1), 100–116. doi: 10.1108/14502191111130334
Bharma, T., Lilley, D., & Tang, T. (2011). Design for sustainable behaviour: Using products to change consumer behaviour. The Design Journal, 14(4), 427–445. doi:
10.2752/175630611X13091688930453
Brunel, F. F., & Nelson, M. R. (2000). Explaining gendered responses to “help-self” and “help-others” charity ad appeals: The mediating role of world-views. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), 15–28. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2000.10673614
Carlson, L., Grove S. J., & Kangun, N. (1993). A content analysis of environmental
advertising claims: A matrix method approach, Journal of Advertising, 22 (3), 27–39. doi: 10.1080/00913367.1993.10673409
Chang, C. (2011). Feeling ambivalent about going green. Journal of Advertising, 40(4), 19– 32. doi: 10.2753/JOA0091-3367400402
Cioffi, C., Levitsky, D., & Pacanowski, C. (2015). A nudge in a healthy direction. The effect of nutrition labels on food purchasing behaviors in university dining facilities. Appetite, 92, 7–14. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.053
Do Paço, A. M. F., & Reis, R. (2012). Factors affecting skepticism toward green advertising. Journal of Advertising, 41(4), 147–155. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2012.10672463
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3), 224–241. doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.01.001 Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate
social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x
Ellen, P. S., Mohr, L. A., & Webb, D. J. (2000). Charitable programs and the retailer: Do they mix? Journal of Retailing, 76, 393–406. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00032-4
Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157. doi: 10.1177/0092070305284976
European Union (2014). The EU explained: environment. Luxembourg: European Commission.
Fischer, C., (2008). Feedback on household electricity consumption: A tool for saving energy? Energy Effic, 1 (1), 79–104. doi: 10.1007/s12053-008-9009-7
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of consumer research, 21(1), 1–31. doi: 10.1086/209380 Furlow, E. N. (2010), Greenwashing in the New Millennium. Journal of Applied Business and
Economics, 10 (6), 22–25. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/506504964?accountid=13598
Forehand, M. R., & Grier, S. (2003). When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company intent on consumer skepticism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 349– 356. doi: 10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_15
Hayes, A. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Publications.
Hartmann, P., Apaolaza Ibáñez, V., & Forcada Sainz, F. J. (2005). Green branding effects on attitude: Functional versus emotional positioning strategies. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 23(1), 9–29. doi: 10.1108/02634500510577447
Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza Ibáñez, V. (2008). Virtual nature experience as emotional benefits in green product consumption: The moderating role of environmental attitudes.
Environmental and Behavior, 40(6), 818–842. doi: 10.1177/0013916507309870
James, L. R., & Brett, J. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 307–321. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.69.2.307
Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Process analysis: Estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5(5), 602–619. doi: 10.1177/0193841X8100500502 Kangun, N., Carlson, L., & Grove, S. J. (1991). Environmental Advertising Claims: A
Preliminary Investigation. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 10(2), 47–58. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/30000235
Kong, Y., & Zhang, L. (2014). When does green advertising work? The moderating role of product type. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(3), 197–213. doi:
10.1080/13527266.2012.672335
Kroese, F. M., Marchiori, D. R., & De Ridder, D. T. (2016). Nudging healthy food choices: a field experiment at the train station. Journal of Public Health, 38(2), 133–137. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdv096
Matthes, J., Wonneberger, A., & Schmuck, D. (2014). Consumers` green involvement and the persuasive effects of emotional versus functional ads. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1885–1893. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.11.054
Mohr, L. A., Eroǧlu, D., & Ellen, P. S. (1998). The development and testing of a measure of skepticism toward environmental claims in marketers' communications. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 32(1), 30–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.1998.tb00399.x
Newell, S. J., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2001). The development of a scale to measure perceived corporate credibility. Journal of Business research, 52(3), 235–247. doi:
10.1016/S0148-2963(99)00104-6
NudgingForGood (2015). How did Ariel make consumers save energy by switching from 40° or 60° to 30°? – P&G. Retrieved from
http://www.nudgingforgood.com/2015/06/05/how-ariel-make-consumers-saving-energy-by-switching-from-40-or-60-to-30-pg/
NudgingForGood (2017). Unilever: Dove & Andrelon WaterSavers campaign. Retrieved from http://www.nudgingforgood.com/2017/03/02/unilever-dove-and-andrelon- watersavers/
Olsen, M. C., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Chandukala, S. R. (2014). Green claims and message frames: How green new products change brand attitude. Journal of Marketing, 78(5), 119–137. doi: 10.1509/jm.13.0387
Ottman, J. A., Stafford, E. R., & Hartman, C. L. (2006). Avoiding green marketing myopia: Ways to improve consumer appeal for environmentally preferable products.
Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 48(5), 22–36. doi: 10.3200/ENVT.48.5.22-36
Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of business ethics, 102(1), 15–28. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-0901-2
Pomering, A. & Johnson, L. W. (2009). Advertising corporate social responsibility initiatives to communicate corporate image: Inhibiting skepticism to enhance persuasion.
Corporate Communications. An International Journal, 14(4), 420–429. doi: 10.1108/13563280910998763
Royne, M. B. Martinez, J., Oakley, J. & Fox, A. K. (2012). The effectiveness of benefit type and price endings in green advertising. Journal of Advertising, 41(4), 85-102. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2012.10672459
Scammon, D. L., & Mayer, R. N. (1995). Agency review of environmental marketing claims: Case-by-case decomposition of the issues. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 33–43. doi: 10.1080/00913367.1995.10673474
Skarmeas, D., & Leonidou, C. N. (2013). When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1831–1838. doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.004
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press.
Thaler, R. H., Sunstein, C. R., & Balz, J. P. (2014). Choice Architecture. In E. Shafir. (Eds.), The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy (pp. 428–439). doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2536504 Thorson, E., Page, T., & Moore, J. (1995). Consumers response to four categories of green
television commercials. Advances in Consumer Research, 22, 243–250. Retrieved from http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/7709/volumes/v22/NA-22
Tucker, E. M., Rifon, N. J., Lee, E. M., & Reece, B. B. (2012). Consumer receptivity to green ads: A test of green claim types and the role of individual consumer characteristics for green ad response. Journal of Advertising, 41(4), 9–23. doi:
10.1080/00913367.2012.10672454
Tukker, A., Huppes, G., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., De Koning, A., Van Oers, L., Suh, S., Geerken T., van Holderbeke, M., Jansen, B., & Nielsen, P. (2008). Environmental Impact of Products. Retrieved from
Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (1998). A typology of consumer responses to cause-related marketing: From skeptics to socially concerned. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 17(2), 226–238. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/30000773
Walker, M., Heere, B., Parent, M. M., & Drane, D. (2010). Social responsibility and the Olympic games: The mediating role of consumer attributions. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(4), 659–680. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0445-x
Appendix A Pilot Study Stimuli
Appendix B Introduction Main Study Welcome to this survey!
Thank you for participating in this study that is part of a Master’s thesis on Communication Science at the University of Amsterdam. The topic of this study is related to green
advertising. You will be shown an advertisement and asked to answer a few questions related to it. Filling questions will take about 5 minutes. Your responses and reports of the data will be anonymous. Please take note that there are no wrong or right answers, you can answer the questions according to your opinion. The survey will take about 5 minutes of your time. Sharing the survey with friends, family and colleagues is much appreciated!
Appendix C Informed Consent
Below you’ll find a so-called ‘informed consent statement’.
Please read the statement and click on ‘I Agree’ if you can agree with the terms of the study. Otherwise, click ‘I do not agree’ to end your participation.
As this research is being carried out under the responsibility of the ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, I can guarantee that:
1) Your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your personal information will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions, unless you first give your express permission for this. 2) You can refuse to participate in the research or cut short your participation without having to give a reason for doing so. You also have up to 24 hours after participating to withdraw your permission to allow your answers or data to be used in the research.
3) Participating in the research will not entail your being subjected to any appreciable risk or discomfort, the researchers will not deliberately mislead you, and you will not be exposed to any explicitly offensive material.
4) No later than five months after the conclusion of the research, we will be able to provide you with a research report that explains the general results of the research.
If I wish to receive more information about the research, either now or in the future, I can contact Caro Palman (caro.palman@student.uva.nl) Should you have any complaints or
comments about the course of the research and the procedures it involves as a consequence of your participation in this research, you can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR Secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020‐525 3680; ascor‐secr‐fmg@uva.nl. Any complaints or comments will be treated in the strictest
confidence.
I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of the research, as described in the introduction for this study. I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. With this, I retain the right to withdraw my consent, without having to give a reason for doing so. I am aware that I may halt my participation in the
experiment at any time. If my research results are used in scientific publications or are made public in another way, this will be done such a way that my anonymity is completely
safeguarded. My personal data will not be passed on to third parties without my express permission.
√ I understand the text presented above, I am above 18, and I agree to participate in the research study
