CHANGING PATTERNS: DOES AWE BOOST SUSTAINABLE FOOD CONSUMPION

(1)

CHANGING PATTERNS: DOES AWE BOOST

SUSTAINABLE FOOD CONSUMPION

Master thesis, MSc Marketing Management

University of Groningen, Faculty of Business and Economics

(2)

ABSTRACT

Environmental psychology research has shown that spectacular nature scenes evoke the feeling of awe the most compared to mundane natural and mundane urban environments. Awe was found to leave people feeling less troubled with day-to-day concerns and engage in self-diminishment. The aim of this paper is to explore whether these potential effects of awe spillover onto sustainable food consumption. Specifically, it was examined whether watching a video containing grand nature as opposed to mundane nature and mundane urban differentially affected people’s willingness to buy and willingness to pay more for sustainable food. Analysis revealed no significant effects of environmental condition (i.e. awesome vs. mundane nature vs. mundane urban) on sustainable food consumption. To test whether this effect potentially goes through change in environmental-relevant values (biospheric, altruistic, egoistic and hedonic) people hold, a mediation analysis is conducted. Values measured post-test were taken as mediators while values measured pre-test were taken as covariates. It was found that change in values orientation did not mediate the relationship between awe and sustainable food consumption. Nonetheless, pre-test biospheric and altruistic values had a positive direct effect on willing to pay more for sustainable products while hedonic values had a negative effect. Lastly, openness to experience was found to directly affect sustainable food consumption.

(3)

TABLE OF CONTENT

INTRODUCTION ... 5

ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LITERATURE ... 8

Sustainable food consumption ... 8

The effects of Awe ... 9

Values orientation ... 11 Openness to experience ... 13 Conceptual model ... 15 METHODOLOGY ... 15 Participants ... 15 Design ... 16 Materials ... 16 Manipulation of awe ... 16 Measurement scales ... 17 Emotion measures ... 17 Willingness to buy ... 17 Willingness to pay ... 17 Openness to experience ... 18 Values orientation ... 19 Procedure ... 19 RESULTS ... 20 Manipulation check ... 20 Values transformation ... 20

Awe and sustainable food consumption ... 22

Moderation analysis ... 23

Mediation analysis ... 26

Exploratory research ... 28

DISCUSSION ... 29

Conclusion ... 29

Evoking awe and the effects on sustainable food consumption ... 29

Value transformation ... 30

(4)

(5)

INTRODUCTION

(6)

makers. This research aims to uncover whether awe, as an emotional state, could influence consumers’ choice when it comes to sustainable food consumption.

Consumers are important stakeholders when viewing a society’s consumption patterns, and altering their perceptions could significantly contribute to a sustainable development. Sustainable (food) consumption has increased in popularity, still most consumers are driven in their everyday consumption practices by factors such as habits, hedonism, personal health concerns, convenience, value for money (FSA, 2000; IGD, 2002a, 2002b; SDC, 2003). These factors are based on personal values people hold and seem to be largely self-oriented, neglecting the idea of sustainable consumption.

According to Stern, Dietz, & Kalof (1993), People vary in the importance they allocate to three different types of environmental-relevant values: egoistic (self-enhancement or pro-self), altruistic (self-transcendent or pro-social), and biospheric (eco-centric) values. Value orientation reflecting concern for the well-being of others was found to positively affect environmental behavior in countless studies (e.g. Black, Stern & Elsworth, 1985; Haberlein & Black, 1976; Hopper & Nielsen, 1991). Value orientation reflecting the well-being of the self as well as for nature was also found to positively affect environmental behavior (Stern et al., 1993). Stern et al. (1993) hypothesize that the three value orientations coexist in people and may all influence behavior, where actions may depend on the value-set a person possess at a specific moment in time. An additional value was determined by Steg, Perlaviciute, van der Werff & Lurvink (2012). Hedonic values were found to be important as well in understanding environmentally-related beliefs, preferences and actions. Hence, transforming a person’s values orientation could significantly impact his or her food choices, and thus is worth studying.

(7)

Piff, Dietze, Feinberg, Stancato & Keltner (2015: 884) state the following: “Although many stimuli can inspire awe, from beautiful buildings to elegant equations, the prototypical awe experience, at least in Western cultures, involves encounters with natural phenomena that are immense in size, scope, or complexity”. Awe potentially has the ability to transform one’s values from self-enhancing to self-transcendence. Awe increases humbleness, prosociality, and leads to a closer connection and feeling of oneness with others (Joye & Bolderdijk 2014; Shiota, Keltner & Mossman, 2007; Van Cappellen & Saroglou 2012). Furthermore, it can make people feel smaller, less significant and focus less on personal day-to-day concerns and the self (Shiota et al., 2007). Awe, could serve as a worthy tool to boost consumers’ perceived importance of consuming sustainably. In sum, this thesis will address the question whether experiencing awe, induced by spectacular natural phenomena and through the change in a person’s values orientation, can increase people’s tendency to make more sustainable food choices

In addition to a possible mediation by change in values orientation, this report will take a deeper look into the influence openness to experience as a potential moderator on the relationship between awe and sustainable food consumption. Openness to experiences is one of the five personality traits. People who score high on this trait are amenable to new ideas, experiences, and unconventional perspectives whereas people scoring low prefer the conventional, routine and familiar (e.g. Costa & McCrae, 1992, George & Zhou, 2001). McCrae & Costa (1991) find positive correlation between both positive and negative affect and openness to experience, suggesting that people who are more open experience events more intense. Research by Shiota, Keltner & John (2006) support this by concluding strong correlation between openness to experience and awe. It is therefore assumed that, after exposure to awe-evoking nature, people who are more open to experiences will be affected more strongly and be triggered more quickly to purchase sustainable alternatives. Hence, this paper will answer the question if and to what extent openness to experience moderates the relationship between awe and sustainable food consumption.

(8)

adjust their strategies (Kotler, 2011: 132). In this report the food industry, as a major economic driver and a significant contributor to excessive consumption, is dealt with extensively. This thesis will address the question if and to what extent the experience of awe, as an emotional response to spectacular nature, influences sustainable food consumption, depending on one’s change in values orientations and influenced by openness to experience.

ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LITERATURE

Sustainable food consumption

(9)

(agricultural) products as well as affordable consumer prices. The social goals concern an integration of sustainability in the priorities and needs of the society and the appropriate support of consumers as well as policy makers. The environmental component involves preserving the environment and caring for livestock (production) conditions.

The market of sustainable products could benefit society as well as organizations. Everything being equal consumers prefer environmentally friendly products (Bhaskaran, Polonsky, Cary & Fernandez, 2006), and offering these sorts of products allow organizations to differentiate from competitors (Dosi & Moretto, 2001; McEachern & McClean, 2002). Moreover, environmental responsibility by firms fosters a positive image and provides points of differentiation (Carlson, Grove, Kangun & Polonsky, 1996; Morris, Hastak & Mazis; 1995). The market for sustainable products has grown, still most consumers are driven in their everyday consumption practices by values such as habits, hedonism, personal health concerns, convenience, value for money, and individual responses to social and institutional norms (FSA, 2000; IGD, 2002a, 2002b; Reisch et al., 2013; SDC, 2003). Influencing these values and ensuring environmental concern captures a more dominant position in consumers’ mind can significantly influence disproportionate and unsustainable use of resources. Hence, altering relevant factors of consumption patterns necessitates a value transformation, potentially caused by the experience of awe.

The effects of Awe

(10)

This paper will investigate consumer responses to the emotional state of awe. Awe has been classified as a positive emotion by some researchers (e.g. Campos, Shiota, Keltner, Gonzaga & Goetz, 2013; Shiota et al., 2007), and is treated as such in this paper. This distinct emotion is relatively little studied by academics, still it has found its presence in many research paradigms. A continuing interest in awe is noticed in the fields of philosophy, religion and sociology (Burke, 1990; Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Weber, 1947). Within psychology, a more closely related field to marketing, research has been more diffused (Shiota et al., 2007).

(11)

world through continuously changing mental schemas. These mental schemas guide individuals in their day-to-day life. The two main processes of the theory include assimilation and accommodation. According to Shiota et al. (2007) the former is knowledge driven and consists of new stimuli being accounted for as additional existing schemas. Thus, the assimilation process is concerned with adding new stimuli to existing current mental structures. The process of accommodation on the other hand is more concerned with changing existing schemas. New experienced stimuli deviate from existing schemas, which in turn need to be updated to create new mental structures (Shiota et al., 2007). Accommodation refers to the process in which a person’s mental schema needs to be adjusted because existing schema cannot assimilate the new experience (Keltner & Haidt, 2003). Experiencing awe potentially let an individual feel disoriented, powerless, and small, and can often be perceived as complex (Keltner & Haidt, 2003). Subsequently, existing mental schemas cannot assimilate the event and the process of accommodation takes place where sustainable behavior is triggered.

In their definition of awe, Keltner & Haidt (2003) suggest the experience of awe can be triggered by both positive and negative events, implying the emotion can be rather ambiguous in its interpretation. Subsequent inquiries of awe (e.g. Campos et al., 2013; Shiota, Campos & Keltner, 2003; Shiota et al., 2007; Van Cappellen & Saroglou, 2012), as well as this paper treat awe as a positive emotion. Given that awe, evoked by great natural scenery, results in people experiencing self-diminishment and possibly transforms self-enhancing values into self-transcendent values, it is hypothesized that these people will tend to make more sustainable food choices:

H1. Experiencing awe has a significant positive effect on sustainable food consumption.

Values orientation

(12)

(e.g. Black et al., 1985; Haberlein & Black, 1976; Hopper & Nielsen, 1991). However, Schwartz’s model implicitly assumes that individuals hold a general value orientation concerning the welfare of others, thus valuing outcomes that prevent harm and benefit others, and judge actions accordingly (Stern et al., 1993). Caring for community or social-altruistic value orientation is about acting prosocial and is fundamental for both collective and individual well-being (De Groot & Steg, 2009; Sheth et al., 2011).

Although acknowledged, a more integrative theoretical model is needed to explain pro-environmental attitude and behavior. Stern et al. (1993) expand the model to include egoistic value orientation and biospheric value orientation. Sheth, Sethia & Srinivas (2011) introduce the concept mindful mindset as part of mindful consumption. Mindful mindset refers to a person’s attitudes,

values and expectations of the particular consumption behavior. The core attribute for mindful mindset is caring about the implications and consequences of consumption on nature, the self, and the community. Some researchers view the egoistic value orientation to be most prominent motivation for human behavior (e.g. Hardin, 1968; Olson, 1965) while others argue that biospheric values are considerably important in motivating human behavior (e.g. Brennan, 1988; Eckersley, 1992). People with strong egoistic value orientation will consider the costs and benefits of environmentally friendly behavior for them personally (De Groot & Steg, 2009) while people with strong biospheric values consider costs and benefits of their behavior on the biosphere.

(13)

De Groot & Steg (2009), Stern et al. (1993), Stern & Dietz (1994) and Thøgersen & Ölander (2002) all show a clear link between environmental belief, behavioral intention, and altruistic, biospheric, and egoistic values. Steg et al. (2012) add an additional self-enhancement value to explain environmental relevant behavior. The four value orientations coexist and may all influence

behavior. Hence, stirring these values in a desired way could result in a person consuming more sustainably. Depending on the context, individuals’ actions may rely on the value that is most appropriate and on the comprised value-set he or she possesses at that moment (Stern et al., 1993). Improving behavior and changing these values implies a modification of the value-set, transforming people’s values from self-enhancing to self-transcending. Although all values are present to some degree, a decrease in egoistic and hedonic values and an increase in biospheric and altruistic values could prove worthy in displaying desirable behavior. As noted before, reaching a value transformation could potentially be caused by the experience of awe. Therefore, the following hypotheses have been formulated:

H2a. Experiencing awe will cause a values transformation, from enhancing to self-transcending.

H2b. Values transformation will positively affect a person’s sustainable food consumption.

Openness to experience

(14)

aesthetics, curious, independent thinkers, and amenable to new ideas, experiences, and unconventional perspectives; it distinguishes between those amenable to variety, novelty, and depth of experience and those who prefer the conventional, routine, and familiar” (Costa & McCrae, 1992; McCrae, 1996; McCrae & Costa, 1997; as cited in George & Zhou, 2001: 514). Thus, people with high openness to experience will be more sensitive to the aesthetic characters of grand nature and experience awe more deeply. Subsequently, people scoring high on this dimension are curious and amenable to unconventional perspectives, and thus are more likely to become interested in sustainable food, which is represented by a fairly small portion of the total food market.. Previous research (Shiota, Keltner & John, 2006; Shiota, Keltner & Mossman, 2007; Agate, 2010; Van Cappellen & Saroglou, 2012) already found significant correlations between openness to experience and awe. Furthermore, given that most consumers are driven in their everyday consumption patterns by routines and are relatively unfamiliar with sustainable food, initial try-outs and subsequent purchases are more likely for people scoring high on this dimension. It is also hypothesized that openness to experience is the dimension that is most likely to manifest itself under situational conditions. Given the reasoning above, the following hypothesis is formed:

(15)

+

Conceptual model

Figure 1 gives a visualized representation of the model and the expected relationships between the selected variables, as hypothesized by the literature review.

FIGURE 1 Conceptual Model

METHODOLOGY

Participants

Hundred and fifty four people (85 females; Mage = 29.8, SD = 10.91) completed the survey. Seven

participants indicated to be vegetarian and approximately one third of the participants were students, mainly from the University of Groningen. To reach participants snowball sampling through social media was used. Twenty-two people did not pass the reliability requirement check and were therefore excluded from the data set. Lastly, given the nature of this report, none of the

(16)

participants were excluded based on duration of watching one of the videos and total duration of completing the survey1_.

Design

This study had a between subjects design and was designed using the online platform Qualtrics2. “Environmental condition” (awesome vs. mundane nature vs. mundane urban) was the independent variable and “sustainable food consumption” was the dependent variable. More specifically, willingness to pay in Euro and willingness to buy were measured as proxy for sustainable food consumption. Lastly, to measure behavioral intention participants were asked to indicate whether or not they would like to receive a petition to improve living conditions of livestock.

Materials

Manipulation of awe. Awe was manipulated by randomly assigning participants to one of three possible videos. Each video condition displayed a different environment, i.e. grand nature, mundane nature and mundane urban. All videos were found online (Knitter, 2017). The grand nature video lasted for 2 minutes and 58 seconds (N=43) and participants were shown vast natural scenes or phenomena (e.g. huge iceberg, a mountain range, a deep canyon, a waterfall, a crater lake). The mundane nature condition (N=46) included a video lasting 2 minutes and 59 seconds taking the person on a walk through the forest near the water. The mundane urban condition (N=43) showed a video of unspectacular streetscapes lasting for 2 minutes and seven seconds. More specifically, it took the participant on a walk through the city streets of Berlin on a somewhat rainy day, showing neither physically vast nor particularly fascinating settings and devoid of any natural features or elements. Figures 2-4 illustrate scenes participants were confronted with while watching one of the assigned videos.

1_{No extreme values were found. Further, given that pictures only can already evoke awe (Joye & Bolderdijk, 2015) none were} excluded based on duration of watching one of the videos.

2_{The survey was conducted in collaboration with another student to reach a sufficient amount of participants. Question blocks containing the}

(17)

FIGURES 2-4

Sample Pictures of Environmental Condition Video

Grand nature Mundane nature Mundane urban

Measurement scales

Emotion measures. Different emotions were measured in this study. First, to measure whether or not a person had experienced awe after watching one of the three videos an 11-items scale by Piff et al. (2015) was used measuring several emotion including awe (α = .832). Participants were asked to rate on a 7-points scale words measuring the emotions they felt directly after watching one of the videos: amusement, awe, disgust, anger, fear, sadness, and happiness. It was also measured the extent to which participants felt small or insignificant, felt the presence of something greater than themselves, felt part of some great entity and felt like they were in the presences of something grand.

Willingness to buy. To measure willingness to buy sustainable food a bipolar scale (α = .854) was used in which participants had to choose between a ‘normal’ and a sustainable alternative, the latter being fair trade or biologic. The following products were used: bananas, minced beef, eggs, chicken, cucumber, fish, and salt (see figure 5 for illustration) All pictures were found online and did not carry brands to eliminate bias. The mean across all product choices is calculated to capture willingness to buy sustainable food and the shift between conditions. Lastly, to measure whether participants were willing to act rather than simply implying their willingness to buy they were asked to indicate if they want receive a petition to improve living conditions of livestock.

(18)

and the mean of the difference between the means is used for further analysis. With higher scores meaning people are willing to spend more on sustainable products. To correspond with more recent research the term willingness to pay is used. Lastly, to measure whether participants were willing to act rather than simply implying their willingness to pay they were asked to indicate if they want receive a petition to improve living conditions of livestock.

FIGURE 5

Measures of Willingness to Buy and Willingness to Pay

(19)

Values orientation. Values orientation was measured using the scale developed by Steg et al. (2012). Built upon previous research (e.g. Schwartz, 1992; Stern et al., 1993), the researchers developed a scale to measure the four environmental-relevant values: biospheric, altruistic, egoistic and hedonic, consisting of sixteen items in total. The measurement was taken once before [egoistic (α = .779), hedonic (1 item deleted α = .708), biospheric (α = .772) and altruistic (α = .572)], and once after the manipulation [(egoistic (α = .819), hedonic (1 item deleted α =.712), biospheric (α = .864) and altruistic (α = .752)] to assess possible transformation in value orientation. Sample items before the manipulation are “having pleasure in life is really important to me” or “Equality between people is important” while sample items after the manipulation are “pleasure” or “Equality” (both were rated on a 7-point scale: 1 = “strongly disagree” to 7 = “strongly agree”). The latter corresponds to the original scale while the former is altered to prevent people from filling in the same. The original scale is well established with considerable recent modification and is reliable measure of assessing individuals’ value orientation.

Procedure

(20)

RESULTS

Manipulation check

The manipulation check is concerned with whether or not the manipulation indeed evoked the desired feeling for a specific condition, in this case awe, and related feelings, such as “smallness”. More specifically, whether participants in the grand nature condition experienced awe to a greater extent as opposed to being exposed to one of the other two conditions. A one-way ANOVA was conducted with ‘perceived awe’ as the dependent variable and ‘environmental condition’ as the independent variable. Indeed, a significant difference was found between the three conditions F(2,129) = 37,724 p = .000. Furthermore, a post-hoc Tukey test was conducted to see whether experiencing awe also differed between conditions. In terms of awe, individuals in the grand nature condition (M = 5.19, SD = .99) were significantly more awed than participants in the mundane nature condition (M = 4.21, SD = 1.05), p = .000, and the mundane urban condition (M = 2.87, SD = 1.14), p = .000. People in the mundane nature condition felt significantly more awe than people in the mundane urban condition (p = .000).

Values transformation

(21)

FIGURES 6-8

Changes in Values Orientation

(22)

It was hypothesized that people who experience awe to a greater extent will show a transformation in values. Specifically, an increase in biospheric and altruistic values and a decrease in egoistic and hedonic values. Figures 6-8 illustrate the change in values over time per condition. As can be seen no interaction has been noted between any of the values, meaning no value transformation occurred. Furthermore, as figures 6-8 illustrate, across all three conditions hedonic values seem to be most present while egoistic values seem to be the least present within people’s values orientation. And, although insignificant, it can be seen that the only increase occurred for egoistic values in the mundane nature condition. A repeated measure ANOVA was conducted to test whether values on their own changed significantly over time across the three conditions. A significant decrease was found for biospheric values across all three conditions and significant decrease is also found for altruistic values in the grand nature and mundane urban condition (see Appendix A for results of the repeated measure ANOVA).

Awe and sustainable food consumption

To assess whether experiencing awe has a direct effect on sustainable food consumption a one-way ANOVA was conducted with environmental condition as independent variable and sustainable food consumption as dependent variable. Looking at willingness to buy sustainable food products, there was a marginally significant difference between the three conditions F(2,129) = 2.997, p = .053. A post-hoc Tukey was conducted to understand the difference between the three conditions (see table 1). The grand nature condition did not differ significantly (p = .919) from the mundane urban condition and differed only marginally significant (p = .062) from the mundane nature condition. Mundane nature and urban did not show significant difference in willingness to buy (p= .148). Conflicting evidence can be found in that the grand nature condition differed (marginally) significantly from the mundane nature where it was expected to be significantly different from the mundane urban condition. In addition, given that some participants indicated to be vegetarian, the same test was conducted without these participants. Very similar results were found.

(23)

analysis, thus accounting for every single participant, we see similar results, F(2,129) = 2.010, p =.130. A post-hoc Tukey test among the three conditions does not show significant difference in

TABLE 1

Willingness to Buy per Condition

Condition Mean Standard deviation

Grand nature 57.48 32.62

Mundane nature 40.37 35.55

Mundane urban 54.49 37.70

mean willingness to pay more for sustainable food products. Looking across all products, thus excluding vegetarians from the analysis, participants in the grand nature condition were willing to pay on average €0.55 (SD = 0.51) more for sustainable alternatives compared to the non-sustainable equivalents. Putting against the other conditions we do not find significant results. Grand nature did not differ significantly (p = .677) from both the urban condition (M = €0.65, SD = 0.70) and the mundane nature condition (M = €0.40, SD = 0.55), p = .498. The latter two did not differ significantly from each other as well (p = .120). Not taking meat products into account, the grand nature condition (M = €0.43, SD = 0.40) did not differ significantly (p = .316) from the urban condition (M = €0.61, SD = 0.74), and the mundane nature condition (M = €0.37, SD = 0.51), p = .879. The latter two did not differ significantly from each other as well (p = .125).

Lastly, a correlation analysis has been performed to further explore the effect of perceived awe on sustainable food consumption. Correlation analysis between perceived awe and willingness to pay did not yield with statistical significance (r = .095, n = 132, p = .281). The same analysis did not provide statistical significance for willingness to buy (r = .017, n =132, p = .842).

Moderation analysis

(24)

set in the conceptual model taking willingness to pay and willingness to buy as dependent variables, environmental condition and perceived awe as dependent variables and openness to experience as moderator.

Table 2 shows the results of the moderation analysis taking willingness to buy as dependent variable and environmental condition as independent variable. Condition type is treated as dummy variable with grand nature being the dummy reference. No significant interaction was found between environmental condition and openness to experience in influencing willingness to buy. Concretely, no significant moderation effect was found for openness to experience on willingness to buy for participants in the mundane nature condition (β = -20.769, p = .144) and the mundane urban condition (β = -.192, p = .988) compared to participants in the grand nature condition (table 2). However, direct effects on willingness to buy were found for openness to experience (β = 17.194, p =.043) and being in the mundane nature condition as opposed to being in the grand nature condition (β = -14.643, p = .056). Table 3 displays the results of the moderation analysis including environmental condition as independent variable, openness to experience as moderator, but now with willingness to pay as dependent variable. Once more, no moderation effect was found. Specifically, no significant moderation effect was found for openness to experience on willingness to pay for participants in the mundane nature condition (β = .115, p = .602) and the mundane urban condition (β = .172, p = .589) compared to participants in the grand nature condition (table 3).

TABLE 2

Moderation Effect of Openness to Experience on the Relationship of Environmental Condition on Willingness to Buy

Beta (SE) p LLCI; ULCI Constant 54.420 (4.94) .000 44.6417; 64.1991 Mundane nature* -14.643 (7.60) .056 -29.6833; .3969 Mundane urban* .055 (7.57) .994 -14.9272; 15.0377 Openness to experience 17.194 (8.41) .043 .5577; 33.8311 Interaction: mundane nature* x

openness to experience

-20.769 (14.13)

.144 -48.7366;

7.1982 Interaction: mundane urban* x

-.192 (12.99)

.988 -25.9072;

(25)

TABLE 3

Moderation Effect of Openness to Experience on Relationship of Environmental Condition on Willingness to Pay

Beta (SE) p LLCI; ULCI Constant .534 (.08) .000 .3742; .6930 Mundane nature* -.101 (.13) .424 -.3506; .1484 Mundane urban* .119 (.14) .390 -.1538; .3918 Openness to experience .063 (.16) .698 -.2589; .3858 Interaction: mundane nature* x

.115 (.22)

.602 -.3197;

.5494 Interaction: mundane urban* x

.172 (.32)

.589 -.4562;

.7999 * Dummy reference = grand nature condition

Subsequently, a moderation analysis taking perceived awe as the independent variable, openness to experience as moderator, and willingness to buy as dependent variable (table 4) we do not find significant interaction effect (β = -5.058, p = .272). However, we do see a direct positive effect of openness to experience on willingness to buy. When taking willingness to pay as dependent variable we do find significant moderating effect (table 5). Thus, openness to experience weakens the effect of awe on people’s willingness to pay more for sustainable food, but the effect is only marginally significant (β= -.119, p = .088). On the contrary, when people feel less awe, openness to experience strengthens the effect on willingness to pay more for sustainable food. When performing this analysis excluding vegetarians and meat products the moderating effect disappears. Furthermore, direct positive effects on willingness to pay were found for both perceived (β = .058, p = .034) and openness to experience (β= .198, p = .099).

TABLE 4

Moderation effect of openness to experience on relationship of perceived awe on willingness to buy

(26)

(5.70) 26.5647 Interaction: perceived awe *

openness to experience -5.058 (4.59) .272 -14.1338; 4.0167 TABLE 5

Moderation Effect of Openness to Experience on Relationship of Perceived Awe on Willingness to Pay

Beta (SE) p LLCI; LLCU Constant .524 (.05) .000 .4211; .6273 Perceived awe .058 (.03) .034 .0046; .1117 Openness to experience .198 (.12) .099 -.0386; .4353 Interaction: perceived awe *

openness to experience -.119 (.07) .088 -.2562; .0179 Mediation analysis

(27)

TABLE 6

Indirect Effects of Values Taking Perceived Awe as Independent Variable Willingness to pay Willingness to buy Beta (SE) LLCI ULCI Beta (SE) LLCI ULCI Bio. values .003 (.01) -.0023; .0200 .421 (.67) -.4881; .2806 Alt. values -.001 (.00) -.0160; .0041 -.161 (.38) -1.4635; .2613 Ego. values .000 (.00) -.0053; 0075 .002 (.18) -.3640; .4206 Hed. values .004 (.01) -.0029; 0267 .142 (.39) -.4163; 1.2722 TABLE 7

Relative Indirect Effects of Values Taking Environmental Condition as Independent Variable*

(28)

Exploratory research

Upon completing the survey participants were thanked for their efforts and were asked whether or not they want to receive a petition to improve living condition of livestock. People accepting to receive this petition show an intention to act rather than just indicating their beliefs. To understand whether environmental condition had a direct effect on willingness to receive the petition a chi-square test of independence was performed. The relation between these variables was insignificant, X² (2, N = 132) = 3.139, p = .208, meaning people in one condition are not more likely to sign the petition than in any of the other two conditions. Furthermore, the relation between perceived awe and petition signing was not significant either (r = .144, p = .103).

Lastly, to measure whether participants that indicated to be willing to pay more for sustainable food, and/or willing to buy sustainable food would show actual intention to act, a binary regression analysis was conducted. Looking at table 8 we see significant positive effect of willingness to buy on willingness to receive a petition. Concretely, one unit increase in willingness to buy increases the odds of people wanting to receive the petition with about 1.014 times.

TABLE 8

The Effect of Perceived Willingness to Pay More for Sustainable Food and Perceived Willingness to Buy Sustainable Food on Behavioral Intention

(29)

DISCUSSION

Conclusion

This aim of this paper was to research the potential effect the emotion awe has on sustainable food consumption. Awe, as was found to trigger the sense of self-diminishment, was evoked using videos of grand nature scenes as opposed to scenes of mundane nature and mundane urban. Willingness to pay and willingness to buy were used as proxy for sustainable food consumption. Transformation in environmental-relevant values individuals hold was treated as a potential mediator and openness to experience as a potential moderator.

(30)

Value transformation. It was hypothesized that participants who experience the emotional state of awe would exhibit an increase in biospheric and altruistic values and a decrease in egoistic and hedonic values. Past research (e.g. Steg et al, 2012) notes that the former values can be classified as self-transcending while the latter values can be classified as self-enhancing. Subsequently, awe was found to trigger the feeling of self-diminishment and caring less for the self and day-to-day concerns (Shiota et al., 2007). Thus, a potential effect of awe on a person’s value orientation was expected. A significant decrease was found for biospheric values in all three conditions and for altruistic values in the grand nature and mundane urban condition. Given that egoistic and hedonic values did not show significant change after manipulation it can be said that the exact composition of the values changed but that no value transformation occurred. Furthermore, biospheric values decreased most in mundane urban condition, meaning that people in that condition were affected most regarding their biospheric values, compared to people in the other two conditions. It should be noted however that no significant difference in values was found between the conditions measured after the manipulation, while accounting for differences before the manipulation. This means that although some values decreased over time, this decrease was not significantly different than decreases of that same value in one of the other two manipulations. Lastly, it is striking to see that across all three conditions hedonic values score the highest while egoistic values score the lowest. People say to care most about their comfort and pleasure while indicating to care the least about costs and benefits to their resources (Steg et al., 2012), possibly to maintain a positive self-image.

(31)

awe-evoking nature. In addition, perceived awe and openness to experience had a direct positive effect on willingness to pay. To conclude, hypothesis 2 is not supported, yet openness to experience shows to have substantial effect on willingness to pay more for sustainable food. And that being confronted with scenes of grand nature as opposed to mundane nature result in people buying more sustainable food.

The effects of values. The four environmental-relevant values researched in this paper did not seem to mediate the effect of awe on sustainable food consumption. However, biospheric, altruistic and hedonic values measured pre-test were found to have a significant relationship with willingness to pay, and biospheric values were also found to have a significant relationship with willingness to buy. It was hypothesized that evoking awe would transform these values and increase sustainable food consumption. But, as can be seen, values measured before manipulation were better predictors of sustainable food consumption. Consistent with previous research (De Groot & Steg, 2009; Sheth et al., 2011; Steg et al., 2012; Stern et al., 1993; Stern & Dietz, 1994; Thøgersen & Ölander, 2002). Biospheric and altruistic values positively affect sustainable food consumption, whereas hedonic values were found to have negatively effect on sustainable food consumption.

Limitations and recommendations for further research

Current research recruited participants using snowball sampling. Although this method provided the researcher with relatively high number of participants, it produces several limitations. First, seeing that this paper is conducted by a student, the majority of the participants were still in their study years as well. Similarly, the average age of the participants was approximately 30 years old. Further research could benefit from more heterogeneous sample group (e.g. in terms of occupation, age, nationality and income).

Secondly, participants were asked to choose between two products on seven occasions. More specifically between ‘normal’ and Fairtrade or biological. Asking participants to choose between meat and meat substitutes would have provided with insight in whether or not people are willing to replace meat with meat substitutes.

(32)

other, the length of the survey did not benefit from this collaboration. Combined with the fact that many people use their phones to fill in surveys, this possibly explains the high drop-out rate. Given that the survey was also conducted in English could have presented some difficulties to majority of the participants, which were non-native English speakers.

Another limitation of this paper concerns the scales used to measure the variables. First, measuring the values was done in one single experiment, while a considerable time span between the two measurements would have been more ideal. Given the time limitation, it has been decided to measure values directly before and after the manipulation, where the second time the measurement tool was rephrased. This could explain the statistically weakened effects of values after manipulation on the dependent variables. Furthermore, due to complication matters this paper used simplified measures of willingness to buy and willingness to pay. Subsequent enquiries would surely benefit from measuring the values at separate times as well as using exact scales.

Managerial implications

This paper finds that indeed, confirming to previous literature, awe can be evoked through exposing people to scenes of spectacular nature. Practitioners could use this when wanting to evoke this specific emotion. Subsequently, it was found that mundane nature was least effective in influencing individuals to buy sustainable food. Thus, marketers should avoid using scenes of mundane nature when promoting sustainable food. Furthermore, this research finds proof that environmental-relevant values indeed influence environmental belief. Managers who desire to promote sustainable food consumption would benefit by targeting individuals with high biospheric and altruistic values and low hedonic values.

(33)

(34)

REFERENCES

Agate, J. (2010). Inspiring Awe in the Outdoors: A Mechanistic and Functional Analysis

Bagozzi, R. P., Gopinath, M., & Nyer, P. U. (1999). The role of emotions in marketing. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 27(2), 184-206.

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta‐analysis. Personnel psychology, 44(1), 1-26.

Bhaskaran, S., Polonsky, M., Cary, J., & Fernandez, S. (2006). Environmentally sustainable food production and marketing: opportunity or hype?. British food journal, 108(8), 677-690.

Black, J. S., Stern, P. C., & Elworth, J. T. (1985). Personal and contextual influences on household energy adaptations. Journal of applied psychology, 70(1), 3-21.

Brennan, A. (1988). Thinking About Nature: An Investigation of Nature, Value and Ecology. Athens: University of Georgia Press

Burke, E. (1990). A philosophical inquiry into the origin of our ideas of the sublime and beautiful. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work published in 1757)

Campos, B., Shiota, M., Keltner, D., Gonzaga, G., & Goetz, J. (2013). What is shared, what is different? Core relational themes and expressive displays of eight positive emotions. Cognition & Emotion, 27, 37-52.

Carlson, L., Grove, S., Kangun, N., Polonsky, M.J. (1996), "An international comparison of environmental advertising: substantive vs associative claims", Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 16 No.2, pp.57-68.

Church, A. T., & Burke, P. J. (1994). Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the big five and Tellegen's three-and four-dimensional models. Journal of personality and social psychology, 66(1), 93.

Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Cronin, J. J., Smith, J. S., Gleim, M. R., Ramirez, E., & Martinez, J. D. (2011). Green marketing strategies: an examination of stakeholders and the opportunities they present. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 158-174.

(35)

Current world population. (2017). (accessed March 6, 2017), [available at http://www.worldometers.info /world-population/]

DEFRA (2003). Changing Patterns: UK Government Framework for Sustainable Consumption and Production. DEFRA, London.

De Groot, J. I., & Steg, L. (2009). Mean or green: which values can promote stable pro‐ environmental behavior?. Conservation Letters, 2(2), 61-66.

Derbaix, C., & Vanhamme, J. (2003). Inducing word-of-mouth by eliciting surprise–a pilot investigation. Journal of economic psychology, 24(1), 99-116.

Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual review of psychology, 41(1), 417-440.

Digman, J. M., & Takemoto-Chock, N. K. (1981). Factors in the natural language of personality: Re-analysis, comparison, and interpretation of six major studies. Multivariate behavioral research, 16(2), 149-170.

Dosi, C., & Moretto, M. (2001). Is ecolabelling a reliable environmental policy measure?. Environmental and Resource Economics, 18(1), 113-127.

Douthwaite, R. (1993). The Growth Illusion: How Economic Growth Has Enriched the Few, Impoverished the Many, and Endangered the Planet. Council Oak Books, Tulsa, OK.

Eckersley, R. (1992). Environmentalism and political theory: Toward an ecocentric approach. Suny Press.

Faber, M., Petersen, T., Schiller, J. (2002). Homo economicus and homo politicus in ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 40, 323–333.

FSA (Food Standards Agency). (2000). Qualitative research to explore public attitudes to food safety, Report prepared for the FSA by Cragg Ross Dawson Ltd. (accessed March 6, 2017), [available at: http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/qualitativer ep.pdf].

George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: an interactional approach. Journal of applied psychology, 86(3), 513.

Griskevicius, V., Shiota, M. N., & Neufeld, S. L. (2010). Influence of different positive emotions on persuasion processing: a functional evolutionary approach. Emotion, 10(2), 190-206.

Haberlein, T. A., & Black, J. S. (1976). Attitudinal specificity and the prediction of behavior in a field setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33(4), 474-479.

(36)

Hakel, M. D. (1974). Normative personality factors recovered from ratings of personality descriptors: The beholder's eye. Personnel psychology, 27(3), 409-421.

Holbrook, M. B., & Batra, R. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of consumer research, 14(3), 404-420.

Hopper, J. R., & Nielsen, J. M. (1991). Recycling as altruistic behavior normative and behavioral strategies to expand participation in a community recycling program. Environment and behavior, 23(2), 195-220.

IGD(Institute of Grocery Distribution) (2002a). Consumer attitudes to ‘‘Eat the View’’: part two – store exit interviews, Report prepared for the Countryside Agency by the IGD, Letchmore Heath, Watford, Herts. (accessed March 6, 2017), [available at: http://www.eat-the-view.org.uk/research/pdf/Consumer%20Attitudes%20%20Part%202.pdf]

IGD (Institute of Grocery Distribution) (2002b) UK consumers put price before the environment, animal welfare and fair trade, Press release. (accessed March 6, 2017) [available at: http://www.igd.com].

Joye, Y., & Bolderdijk, J. W. (2014). An exploratory study into the effects of extraordinary nature on emotions, mood, and prosociality. Frontiers in psychology, 5, 1577.

Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., & Wendt, J. S. (1972). Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual material.Perception & Psychophysics,12(4), 354-356

Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 17(2), 297-314

Knitter, H. (2017, Feb 14). Video [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=fkl3rZNCvOM

Knitter, H. (2017, Feb 14). Video [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=RllP6KESBdI

Knitter, H. (2017, Feb 14). Video [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=y4s1gjF7xLc

Kotler, P. (2011). Reinventing marketing to manage the environmental imperative. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 132-135.

Laros, F. J., & Steenkamp, J. B. E. (2005). Emotions in consumer behavior: a hierarchical approach. Journal of business Research, 58(10), 1437-1445.

McEachern, M. G., & Mcclean, P. (2002). Organic purchasing motivations and attitudes: are they ethical?. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26(2), 85-92.

(37)

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1991). Adding Liebe und Arbeit: The full five-factor model and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(2), 227-232

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1985). Updating Norman's" adequacy taxonomy": Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language and in questionnaires. Journal of personality and social psychology, 49(3), 710.

Midden, C. J., Kaiser, F. G., & Teddy McCalley, L. (2007). Technology's four roles in understanding individuals' conservation of natural resources. Journal of Social Issues, 63(1), 155-174.

Morris, L.A., Hastak, M., Mazis, M.B. (1995), "Consumer comprehension of environmental advertising and labelling claims", Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 22 No.4, pp.439-60.

Norman, W. T. (1963). Towards an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 4, 681-691.

Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Otto, R. (1958). The idea of the holy (Vol. 14). Oxford University Press.

Peabody, D., & Goldberg, L. R. (1989). Some determinants of factor structures from personality-trait descriptors. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57(3), 552.

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child (Vol. 5001). Basic books.

Piff, P. K., Dietze, P., Feinberg, M., Stancato, D. M., & Keltner, D. (2015). Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 108(6), 883.

Piscopo, S. (2015). Are Food Convenience and Sustainable Consumption Mutually Exclusive?. In Responsible Living (pp. 197-215). Springer International Publishing.

Rahbar, E., & Abdul Wahid, N. (2011). Investigation of green marketing tools' effect on consumers' purchase behavior. Business strategy series, 12(2), 73-83.

Reisch, L., Eberle, U., & Lorek, S. (2013). Sustainable food consumption: an overview of contemporary issues and policies. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, 9(2).

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free press.

Rudd, M., Vohs, K. D., & Aaker, J. (2012). Awe expands people’s perception of time, alters decision making, and enhances wellbeing. Psychological science, 23(10), 1130-1136

Saroglou, V., Buxant, C., & Tilquin, J. (2008). Positive emotions as leading to religion and spirituality. The Journal of Positive Psychology,3(3), 165-173

(38)

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in experimental social psychology, 25, 1-65.

Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. Advances in experimental social psychology, 10, 221-279.

SDC (Sustainable Development Commission). (2003). A vision for sustainable agriculture.

(accessed March 8 2017) [available at:

http://www.sd-commission.gov.uk/pubs/food2001/index.htm].

Serrat, O. (2017). The future of social marketing. In Knowledge solutions (pp. 119-128). Springer Singapore.

Seyfang, G. (2006). Ecological citizenship and sustainable consumption: Examining local organic food networks. Journal of rural studies, 22(4), 383-395.

Shaver, P., Schwartz, J., Kirson, D., & O'connor, C. (1987). Emotion knowledge: further exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of personality and social psychology, 52(6), 1061. Sheth, J. N., Sethia, N. K., & Srinivas, S. (2011). Mindful consumption: a customer-centric approach to sustainability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 21-39.

Shiota, M. N., Campos, B., & Keltner, D. (2003). The faces of positive emotion. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1000(1), 296-299.

Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & John, O. P. (2006). Positive emotion dispositions differentially associated with Big Five personality and attachment style. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 61-71.

Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & Mossman, A. (2007). The nature of awe: Elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cognition and Emotion, 21(5), 944-963.

Steg, L. & Vlek, C., 2009. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Volume 29, pp. 309-317.

Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., Van der Werff, E., & Lurvink, J. (2014). The significance of hedonic values for environmentally relevant attitudes, preferences, and actions. Environment and

behavior, 46(2), 163-192.

Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environment and behavior, 25(5), 322-348.

(39)

Thøgersen, J., & Ölander, F. (2002). Human values and the emergence of a sustainable consumption pattern: A panel study. Journal of economic psychology, 23(5), 605-630.

UNEP, 2005. Talk the walk: Advancing sustainable lifestyles trough marketing and communications, s.l.: Biomonitor.

Van Cappellen, P., & Saroglou, V. (2012). Awe activates religious and spiritual feelings and behavioral intentions. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 4(3), 223.

Van de Veer, S., 2011. Consuming Environments: Options and Choices for 21st Century Citizens. Review of Policy Research, 28(5), pp. 517-524.

Varian, Hal (1992), Microeconomic Analysis, 3d ed. New York: Norton.

Verbeke, W., Vermeir, I., & Brunsø, K. (2007). Consumer evaluation of fish quality as basis for fish market segmentation. Food quality and preference, 18(4), 651-661.

Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2005). Sustainable food consumption, involvement, certainty and values: an application of the theory of Planned Behaviour (No. 05/352). Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.

Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2008). Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values. Ecological economics, 64(3), 542-553.

Weber, M. (1947). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (Based on 4th

(40)

APPENDIX A

Repeated measures ANOVA

The ANCOVA measured the difference in biospheric, altruistic, egoistic, and hedonic values between the conditions after the manipulation, while controlling for differences between the conditions before the manipulation. The repeated measure ANOVA was conducted to capture the change of these values before and after the manipulation.

Before manipulation

After

Manipulation

Value Mean SD Mean SD Difference Wilk’s

(41)

APPENDIX B Mediation analysis results

During all calculation pre-test measured values were taken as covariates to control for a priori differences between the variables. Secondly, all the outcomes noted for environmental conditions are relative to the urban mundane condition. Lastly, given that the steps for a mediation analysis are not met, no tables showing indirect effects are provided

Table B1

Total effect on willingness to pay (c)

Beta (SE) p CCLI CCLU

Mundane nature -.1827 (.12) .138 -.4251 .0596 Grand nature -.1243 (.12) .290 -.3559 .1073 Measured awe .005 (.04) .904 -.0765 .0864 Table B2

Total effect on willingness to buy (c)

Mundane nature -11.6409 (7.89) .143 -27.2522 3.9704 Grand nature 2.7112 (7.55) .720 -12.2291 17.6514 Measured awe -1.1645 (3.85) .726 -8.7775 6.4485 Table B3

The effect of mundane nature on (post-test) values (a)

Bio. values .1221 (.16) .437 -.1881 .4323 Alt. values .0304 (.15) .837 -.2619 .3227 Ego. values -.0338 (.16) .830 -.3455 .2779 Hed. values .0012 (.13) .993 -.2533 2.557 Table B4

The effect of grand nature on (post-test) values (a)

Bio. values .0489

(.16)

.758 -.2647 .3625

(42)

(.14) Ego. values .0367 (.15) .813 -.2688 .3422 Hed. values .1443 (.13) .251 -.1034 .3920 Table B5

The effect of experiencing awe on (post-test) values (a)

Bio. values .0393 (.07) .604 -.1100 .1885 Alt. values -.0458 (.06) .420 -.1579 .0663 Ego. values -0.159 (.05) .773 -.1247 .0929 Hed. values .0768 (.06) .201 -0.414 .1951 Table B6

The effect of (post-test) values on willingness to pay (IV = environmental condition*) (b)

Bio. values .0806 (.06) .192 -.0409 .2020 Alt. values .0328 (.09) .703 -.1371 .2028 Ego. values -.0402 (.08) .620 -.2002 .1198 Hed. values .0915 (.09) .327 -.0926 .2575

* similar results were found when iv = measured awe

Table B7

The effect of (post-test) values on willingness to buy (IV = environmental condition*) (b)

Bio. values 12.2740 (4.94) .014 2.4877 22.0604 Alt. values 6.0035 (6.15) .331 -6.1740 18.1811 Ego. values -1.2245 (5.34) .819 -11.8037 9.3546 Hed. values 1.1722 (5.49) .844 -10.6072 12.9516

(43)

Table B8

Direct effects on willingness to pay (C’)

Mundane nature -.1827 (.12) .138 -.4251 .0596 Grand nature -.1243 (.12) .290 -.3559 .1073 Measured awe -.0040 (.04) .922 -.0847 .0767 Table B9

Direct effects on willingness to buy (C’)

Mundane nature -13.3650 (7.66) .084 -28.5336 1.8035 Grand nature 1.9754 (7.30) .787 -12.4703 16.4211 Measured awe -1.6198 (3.73) .665 -8.9977 5.7581 Table B10

Effect of pre-test values on willingness to pay

Bio. values .1876 (.08) .019 .0316 .3436 Alt. values .1825 (.1063) .089 -.0279 .3930 Ego. values .0986 (.06) .129 -.0140 .2111 Hed. values -3017 (.10) .002 -.4936 -.1099 Table B11

Effect of pre-test values on willingness to buy