How does the perception of ethically labeled
prod-ucts affect the likelihood to purchase throughout
different shopping motivations?
This thesis will be defended on
2
ndof July 2014
By
How does the perception of ethically labeled products affect the
like-lihood to purchase throughout different shopping motivations?
Master Thesis
To obtain the degree of M.Sc. Marketing Management at the Faculty of Economics and Business
University of Groningen On the authority of Martijn Keizer
This thesis will be defended on
2nd of July 2014
By
Antonia Maria Kauter S2544903
Winschoterdiep 46, 9723 AC Groningen Phone: +31630103003
Executive summary
Socially responsible. Sustainable. Green. Fair Trade. Locally grown.
In today’s retailing industry, catchwords as these play an increasingly important role, taking into account that consumers gradually become more conscious about their health, sustainabil-ity and social equalsustainabil-ity. As a consequence, organic and Fair Trade products became a common retailing object throughout the world. In countries such as the United Kingdom, the spending on ethical products nowadays encompasses around 6% of overall consumer spending. This indicates that consumers are already aware of sustainable substitutes for regular products, however do consider them as their main purchase items yet.
What is considered to have a strong impact on the purchase of so-called ethically la-beled products is the perception consumers have in mind about these products. If consumers associate positive attributes with ethical products such as a superior taste, higher quality and healthier nutrition values, their state of mind is positively influenced. Thus, these consumers are assumed to be more likely to buy ethical products. In contrast, when consumers think about sustainably produced groceries in a negative way, their likelihood to buy these products is assumed to be significantly lower. Negative associations can be caused due to a lack of in-formation about the actual production of ethical products and consequently a perceived lower product safety. When not perceiving ethical products to be superior to regular products or at least equally good, consumers may refrain from the purchase, also taking into account that the premium price asked for ethically labeled products does not seem to be justified.
Besides, also the shopping motivation, to which consumers are exposed to, may have an impact on the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products. Utilitarian self-shoppers, who purchase products in order to satisfy ordinary self-needs, are considered to be less prone to buy ethically labeled products than are hedonic gift shoppers, who want to please someone else with the purchase of a present. This is because self-shoppers are considered to be most concerned about prices of the items in their shopping basked, whereas gift shoppers are more quality focused and generous. Eventually, gift shoppers want to hand over a gift of which they are convinced that the receiver will like it.
of gift shoppers. On the other hand, negative perceptions are assumed to lead to a lower like-lihood to purchase when being in the gift shopping condition, as the product does not appear to be an appropriate present. Due to self impression reasons, consumers are not assumed to hand over presents which they do not like themselves.
By conducting a survey among 121 participants, the research paper on hand gave indi-cation about the mentioned assumptions. Indeed, a higher perception of ethically labeled products led to a higher likelihood to purchase these groceries. Besides, gift shoppers consid-ered ethical products to be part of their shopping basked more frequently than did self shop-pers. The interaction between the perception and the shopping motivation however could only be approved partially. When having positive associations about ethical labels and being in the gift shopping condition, respondents in fact unveiled a higher likelihood to purchase. Howev-er, gift shoppers were still more prone to purchase the Fair Trade product than were self shop-pers when having negative perceptions. An explanation for that was found when referring to the price premium of ethical products, which may act as a guarantor for high quality even if the individual perception of ethically labeled products is negatively biased. Moreover, the price premium emphasizes on the generosity of gift buyers. Additionally, the trendiness of ethical products may play a role.
Based on the outcome of this study, practical implications can be made. For instance, retailers as well as producers can try to further inform consumers about ethical products in order to influence consumers’ perceptions positively. This could be done my on- and offline marketing activities such as documentary reports, open days at the producer and displays in the supermarket promoting ethical products as well as stressing on the actual benefit of these groceries. Moreover, considering that gift shoppers are more likely to purchase Fair Trade and organic products, retailers could try to explicitly target this consumer group by offering al-ready arranged gift packages composed of sustainable products or promoting ethical products at times when gift buying is common (e.g. Christmas, Valentine’s Day).
Table of contents
1. Introduction ... 1
2. Theoretical framework ... 3
2.1 Perception of ethically labeled products ... 5
2.2 Shopping motivations ... 11
3. Conceptual framework ... 15
4. Methodology ... 17
4.1 Design & stimuli... 17
4.2 Data collection ... 19 4.3 Procedure ... 20 4.4 Measurement of variables ... 23 5. Results ... 25 5.1 Manipulation checks ... 25 5.2 Test of hypotheses ... 26 5.3 Additional results... 30 6. Discussion ... 32 6.1 Summary... 32 6.2 Theoretical implications ... 32 6.3 Practical implications ... 36
7. Limitations and directions for future research ... 37
8. Final conclusion ... 39
1
Table of figures
Figure 1: Conceptual framework ... 15 Figure 2: Likelihood to purchase throughout different shopping motivations ... 28 Figure 3: Likelihood to purchase with interaction effect ... 29
List of tables
1
1. Introduction
Anna, a young student, is browsing through the supermarket for the purpose of buying a small gift for a friend who invited her for dinner. She intends to purchase a nice, high quality prod-uct in order to express her appreciation for the invitation. Since Anna is aware of the fact that her friend is a chocolate lover, she stops in front of the chocolate shelf where she is exposed to several different brands - Milka, Cote d’Or, Tony’s Chocolonely as well as the private label of the supermarket. Milka as well as the private label seem to be too ordinary for Anna to be considered as a present. Anna would buy these brands for her own consumption, since she knows that the taste as well as the quality are good. However, in order to be chosen as a pre-sent, these brands seem to be too simple and cheap. Eventually, when handing over the host gift, Anna wants to express her appreciation and to be perceived as a generous friend. Thus, she puts Cote d’Or and Tony’s Chocolonely on the shortlist, since both brands are relatively expensive compared to competitive products and are well-known for their quality. When An-na recognizes the Fair Trade label on the Tony’s Chocolonely’s package, she immediately associates this chocolate with a superior quality and taste. Moreover, the price premium for Tony’s Chocolonely strengthens Anna’s superior perception of the Fair Trade chocolate bar. It seems like the chocolate bar from Tony’s Chocolonely fulfills all expectations which Anna considered: she links the brand to a high quality, the taste must be really good as well, even-tually it is a Fair Trade product, and the price acts as a kind of additional quality indicator for her. Despite the fact that Anna’s budget is restricted and she would not have chosen the prod-uct for her own use, she decides to buy the Fair Trade chocolate. By that, Anna is sure to pur-chase the best available chocolate and to impress her friend by showing how generous, social-ly and ecologicalsocial-ly conscious she is.
Fechten-2
hauer, 2013) and convey a positive feeling to the purchaser with respect to improving the world’s poor (Bowes & Croft, 2007). Consumers who have these initial associations in mind are assumed to be more likely to consider ethical products to be part of their shopping basket than do consumers who have initial negative perceptions.
Furthermore, one can assume that people tend to purchase high quality and more ex-pensive products when performing gift shopping – thus the act of buying a product for some-one else – in order to uphold or increase self-impression aspects, keep a good social standing and please the receiver. As such, gift shoppers tend to be more quality focused and unveil a more generous behavior than do consumers who buy products for the own consumption.
These aspects are also supported by Anna’s decision making process which is mainly eased due to the availability of the ethical label displayed on the chocolate bar. The label is accompanied with certain perceived product attributes, which are of importance for Anna when buying a gift for her friend. Depending on the shopping motivation, the importance of certain product attributes will be ascribed differently. When being confronted with a product for the own consumption, Anna is likely to base her purchase decisions on the price, since her budget as a student is limited. However, when performing gift shopping, other attributes, such as a high quality, come to the fore, while regular attributes are overshadowed. This may be the result of so-called impression management, according to which individuals try to influence the perception that other people have about them (Schneider, 1981) by handing over presents which strengthen the intended image. The concept of impression management will be further outlined in detail in the following section.
3
This topic may be of interest especially for the retailing sector. Knowing the motives of consumers for purchasing ethically labeled products could lead to improved marketing ac-tions taking place in the retail environment. For instance, if it could be proven that consumers tend to buy more ethically labeled products when performing gift shopping, it could be as-sumed, that sales of ethically labeled products could be boosted through special displays dur-ing Valentine’s Day and Christmas for instance, when gift shoppdur-ing often takes place.
In order to get there, a brief theoretical framework should be established by referring to both scientific articles and books. Thereafter, the conceptual framework, the research de-sign and results will be presented before finalizing the thesis with a discussion and implica-tions.
2. Theoretical framework
Nowadays, being a consumer goes beyond the simple purchase of goods. Consumers are more informed about products, their origin and way of production than ever before. This can be seen as a consequence of information transfer across various media such as the internet (Ward & Lee, 2000) but also the offering of highly diverse shops, which specialize for instance on Fair Trade products or bio food. Whereas in former times consumers were mostly driven by rational reasons for purchasing groceries, nowadays there is an additional consciousness for health, social responsibility as well as sustainability (Chen, 2009 / Auger, Devinney, Louviere & Burke 2008). Especially in the food industry, an international move towards organic and Fair Trade products – which are hereinafter referred to as “ethically labeled products” - can be noticed (Raynolds, 2000). Consequently, organic and Fair Trade products became a common retailing object (Van Herpen, Van Nierop & Sloot, 2011).
4
ethical label will evoke the assumption that the product is different from regular products and somehow stands out. Considering that consumers nowadays judge products not solely on price and quality but also value aspects which correlate with the sustainability (Bemporad & Baranowski, 2007), ethical labels seem to have the finger on the pulse.
Fair Trade as well as organic labels often act as a warranty for consumers that certain expectations set on the use of a product will be satisfied. The sole display of such labels may evoke perceptions about the product, such as having a better taste (Lotz et al., 2013), being healthier when it comes to the nutrition value (Lee, Shimizu, Kniffin & Wansink, 2013) and supporting fair working conditions (Moore, 2004). The obvious superiority of ethical products is also reflected in a price premium, which may serve as an additional indicator for a better quality (Rao & Monroe, 1989) as well as higher wages for labor (Van Herpen et al., 2011). As such, when consumers perceive these attributes to be important and think about ethically la-beled products to be superior compared to regular products in any respect, their willingness to pay may increase as well.
The final decision to purchase a product, however, may not only be dependent on the importance of health aspects, social responsibility and sustainability, but may also be influ-enced by different shopping motivations. These motivations can either be of utilitarian or he-donic nature (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982 / Hopkinson & Davashish, 1999). For the study on hand, the utilitarian self shopping as well as the hedonic gift shopping (Arnold & Reyn-olds, 2003) should be objects of investigation. Both shopping conditions come along with diverse motives. Whereas the self shopper is more concerned about simply fulfilling ordinary self-needs, such a hunger, gift shoppers aim to please someone else with the purchase of the product. Accordingly, when performing gift shopping, consumers attach more importance to certain product attributes than they normally do when being in the condition of self shopping.
5 2.1 Perception of ethically labeled products
Today, an increasing interest in ethical products can be noticed throughout the world (Yiridoe, Bonti-Ankomah & Martin, 2005). As mentioned before, the reasons for this ethical movement are diverse: on the one hand, consumers are more concerned about health, food safety as well as the manner of production (Harper & Makatouni, 2002). On the other hand, consumers’ concerns about the environment and social equality increased (Grunert & Juhl, 1995). As re-search showed, consumers perceive these aspects to be partly covered and satisfied when pur-chasing products which are ethically labeled (Lotz et al., 2013 / Bowes & Croft, 2007). This is given the fact that ethical labels serve for instance as an indicator for the absence of additives and the presence of a higher nutrition value (Lee et al., 2013). As Torjusen, Lieblein, Wandel & Francis (2001) state, consumers nowadays intensively bear such non-sensory attributes in mind, compared to the past, when food quality was solely judged based on sensory attributes such as smell, appearance and taste. Thus, the attitudinal change of consumers to purchase more organic and Fair Trade food is partly based on the belief that these groceries are able to cover social, ecological and health relevant issues.
6
In general, one can assume that perceptions about ethically labeled products are based on past experiences or gathered information. As such, these perceptions are grounded in con-sumers’ minds and thus are not easily changeable. So far, several studies already dedicated to the analysis of how ethically labeled products are perceived.
As an example, Latacez-Lohmann and Foster (1997) found out that consumers per-ceive organically labeled groceries to be produced with less or no pesticides, hormones and antibiotics. As a consequence of this, consumers perceive organic products to be healthier (Latacez-Lohmann & Foster, 1997) and safer to consume (Schmidt, 1999). In contrast to or-ganically produced groceries, Fair Trade products provide better trading conditions (Krier, 2001), empower artisans and foster well-being in general (Littrell & Dickson, 1999). Thus, the aim of these products is to influence consumers who are socially conscious and care about the minimization of social disparity (Bowes & Croft, 2007). Consequently, both organic as well as Fair Trade labels influence consumers’ purchasing decisions, even if the motives may differ from each other regarding social, environmental and product attribute related aspects. However, as the subsequent paragraph will show, consumers in general often perceive ethical labels, independent from whether being organic or Fair Trade, to cover all aspects with re-spect to a better taste, healthiness and a fair trading conditions (Lotz et.al, 2013).
Evidence about the fact that ethical labels influence consumers’ perception of certain product attributes was supplied by a study of Lotz et al. (2013). Participants in this study were asked to rate the tastiness of chocolate and coffee of both Fair Trade and regular products. Four conditions were established (label: Fair Trade vs. regular; content: actual Fair Trade product vs. regular product) to which the participants were exposed. As it turned out, all par-ticipants perceived the Fair Trade labeled products to be of significantly better taste, even though in certain conditions the seemingly Fair Trade product was actually regular produced chocolate/coffee. Especially when considering that some of the participants explicitly stated before the study that they do not believe in recognizing any taste difference between Fair Trade products and regular products, this result is surprising. Eventually, this study unveiled that ethical labels can strongly affect product perceptions and by that may also have an impact on the likelihood to purchase.
7
(2002), showed that the perceived better quality and taste claimed by Lotz et al.(2013) may be dependent on the object of the study. Their study unveiled that organic orange juice was per-ceived to taste better than regular orange juice, whereas no difference could be noticed be-tween organic milk and regular milk (Fillion & Arazi, 2002). Furthermore, the superior taste experience of some ethically labeled products is not supported by blind tests, in which these products were ranked just as high as regular products (Thøgersen, 2011).
In order to explain the perceived better quality of some ethical products, one could re-fer to the following two theories:
First, positive perceptions may be evoked through the higher price level of ethically labeled products. Generally, prices are positively linked with perceived quality (Rao, & Mon-roe, 1989). In other words, this means that consumers assume higher prices to be an indicator for superior quality. With reference to Fair Trade products however, the higher prices are more likely to be a consequence of better working conditions and higher wages for the labor rather than a better quality or taste compared to regular labeled products (Lotz et al., 2013). At least this is true, if the Fair Trade product does not carry any further organic label, indicating a sustainable production process.
Second, the expectancy-confirmation theory from Wansink & Park (2002), according to which people taste what they expect to taste, could explain the perceived better taste. Espe-cially, when being highly motivated that the bought ethical product is of superior nature, con-sumers tend to confirm their initial expectations about a product by adapting their actual tast-ing experience accordtast-ingly (Balcetis & Dunntast-ing, 2007). Consumers, who paid a price premi-um and are unconsciously positively influenced by ethical labels, may expect the products to have a better taste. Thus, their attitude when trying the product is already positively influ-enced and will most likely impact their final assessment in favor of these products by transfer-ring their initial positive attitude on the taste perception of the product. Nevertheless, as the study by Fillion & Arazi (2002) and Thøgersen (2011) proved, the expectancy-confirmation theory may not take effect on all ethical products.
8
environment (Hamilton, Sunding & Zilberman, 2003). As such, consumers expect these prod-ucts to be safer for consumption (Schmidt, 1999).
The previously mentioned theories gave a first explanation why consumers perceive ethically labeled products to be superior compared to regular products. Summarized, the ma-jor cause is mainly given by the fact that people’s expectations as well as their mental evalua-tion of these products are inevitably influenced by the display of labels such as “Fair Trade” or “organic”. This effect can be ascribed to the common finding that ethical labels often evoke the so-called halo effect in consumers (Nisbett & Wilson,1977 / Lee et al., 2013 / Lotz et al., 2013).
According to Nisbett and Wilson (1977), the halo effect can be defined as a psycho-logical phenomenon that influences the way people think about other people even with the absence of sufficient knowledge/information about the person. The same can hold true for ethically labeled products, which, by solely carrying an ethical label, may evoke certain per-ceptions and characteristics of the product in the mind of consumers. In order to examine the halo effect of ethical labels, a study was conducted by Lee et al. (2013), in which participants had to evaluate the health, taste and willingness to pay for a specific food sample. All samples were identical and organically produced, however labeled differently. Whereas one food sam-ple was truthfully labeled with an organic logo, the other food samsam-ple was presented as a reg-ular product. Results showed that participants estimated the organically labeled sample to be healthier regarding calories and nutritional values. Besides, participants stated that they would be willing to pay slightly more money for the organically labeled product compared to the regular product (Lee et al. 2013). Consequently, this study as well as the ones mentioned be-fore, provide evidence for the effect of ethical labels on the perception of product attributes in consumers’ mindset. The sole imaging of ethical labels made consumers changing their opin-ion about the estimatopin-ion of certain product features.
9
minimizes social disparity and promotes a healthy lifestyle. As a consequence, these products are bought on the basis of curiosity and trendiness (Chinnici, D’Amico & Pecorino, 2002). Once more the impression management is apparent. People may tend to buy Fair Trade and organic products in order to express a certain lifestyle/attitude or enhance their desired stand-ing and image in society (Chinnici et al., 2002).
Despite the evidence that ethical labels evoke numerous positive perceptions in con-sumers’ minds, the market share of ethically labeled products is still small. As an example, the spending on ethical products in the United Kingdom still only encompasses around 6% of overall consumer spending (Ethical Consumer Markets Report, 2013). This fact may indicate that consumers are not fully convinced of ethical products as being a good choice to purchase yet. The literature on hand provides some evidence for that.
As Raynolds (2000) stated, consumer awareness about ethical food continuously in-creases, what can be seen as a consequence of the consistent exposure of these products in nowadays retailing environment and media (Hughner et al., 2007) as well as a general interest in a more healthy lifestyle (Divine & Lepisto, 2005). Neverthelessactual concerns about the quality and safety of ethical products are still existent and cannot be resolved easily (Naspetti & Zanoli, 2009). The reasons for that are the following:
10
Moreover, studies have investigated that organic food is perceived as safer due to the absence of chemical additives (Schmidt, 1999). However, consumers may question whether organic products are indeed safer, since the absence of pesticides comes along with a more extensive use of manure, which in turn may be contaminated as well (Tauxe, Kruse, Hedberg, Potter, Madden & Wachsmuth, 1997). Moreover, the absence of certain additives, which normally prevent foods from pest infestation, is likely to make the consumer wondering about the actual product safety. This is because the ethical products seem to be more delicate to in-festation now. Once again, the aspect of insufficient consumer information about the actual production plays an essential role here. If consumers are well informed about the way of pro-duction and the growing process, doubts regarding product safety may become obsolete.
Finally, the price premium of ethically labeled products may play an essential role in the perception and evaluation of these products. As stated before, consumers often link a high price with a higher quality (Rao & Monroe, 1989). However, there is no guarantee that there is a literal correlation between those two aspects. Thus, some consumers may perceive ethi-cally labeled products simply as more expensive without an involved justification or benefit. Eventually, price-sensitive consumers are likely to rate ethically labeled products negatively and may perceive the premium price as an obstacle to purchase these groceries (Uusitalo & Oksanen, 2004).
To draw a final conclusion, it can be said that the sole display of ethical labels on gro-ceries are likely to have an inevitable effect on the perception of product attributes in the mind of consumers. These perceptions can be both positive and negative and will have a direct im-pact on the likelihood to purchase ethical products accordingly.
11
Eventually, consumers only want to buy items which they like and which come along with a certain guaranteed quality, reaching at least common standards or preferably even exceed them.
On the other hand however, negative perceptions may also become obvious taking into account that information about the production of ethical products is still limited for consumers (Naspetti & Zanoli, 2009). Thus, consumers may perceive a lack of guarantee that the com-municated benefits of ethically produced products will truly be adhered to (Uusitalo & Oksanen, 2004). Moreover, the price premium may be seem as unjustified and serves as an obstacle to purchase these goods (Uusitalo & Oksanen, 2004). Finally, the nonexistent guar-antee of product safety represents an issue (Tauxe et al., 1997). When consumers initial per-ceptions about ethically labeled products are negatively influenced by the aspects mentioned previously, consumers are likely not to consider these products to be part of their shopping basket as they do not necessarily like the product. Eventually, the purchase would come along with a seemingly greater risk than when purchasing regular products. Given the fact that most people are risk averse rather than venturesome, the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products declines.
All in all, it is assumed that a positive perception is likely to lead to a higher probabil-ity to buy ethically labeled products than are negative perceptions which come along with a higher perceived risk rather than benefits. The impact of the perception of Fair Trade and or-ganic labels on the likelihood to purchase them is assumed to be even more decisive under certain shopping motivations such as self shopping or gift shopping. This is because consum-ers ascribe importance to different product attributes dependent on their shopping motivation and have distinct motives when buying the product. The diverse shopping motivations and their impact on the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products are elaborated in the fol-lowing section.
2.2 Shopping motivations
12
2003). These shopping motivations in turn, underlie different shopping motives which are either utilitarian or hedonic. Whereas utilitarian shopping relates to the functional aspects of shopping, hedonic shopping is connected with a pleasing shopping situation, in which the consumer perceives the process to be fun and playful (Sarkar, 2011). Holbrook & Hirschman (1982) defined the rational consumer as a utilitarian shopper, who is seeking for convenience, quality, a reasonable price and focuses on the actual benefits of the product. Thus, shopping is seen as a functional process aiming to solve a certain problem. Hedonic shopping on the other hand, involves more emotional aspects, both physiological and psychological. Hedonic shop-ping is performed in situations, when high-involvement is present, thus when the consumer is deeply involved in the event of shopping (Hopkinson & Davashish, 1999).
In the research paper on hand, self shopping refers to the daily shopping situation of consumers and is therefore considered to be a utilitarian shopping motivation with the ulti-mate goal to satisfy ordinary self-needs such as hunger. Gift shopping on the other hand is of hedonic nature being geared towards pleasing someone else with a gift. In order to give a more in-depth understanding of gift shopping, a general overview of hedonic shopping moti-vations should be given.
13
evaluate the bought product. As such, the ultimate purchase intention of a good underlies dif-ferent ulterior motives based on whether a consumer is motivated to act more eccentric or egocentric. So far, the differentiation of these motives is already elaborated to a great extent by literature (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003 / Wofinbarger,1990 / Segev, Shoham, Ruvio, 2013).
The research paper on hand aims to elaborate whether the likelihood to purchase ethi-cally labeled products does correlate with the initial perception of these labels and the shop-ping motivation the consumer is exposed to. It should be examined whether consumers, per-forming gift shopping, put more emphasis on certain product characteristics than they do when performing self shopping and thus are more prone to buy ethical products. Dependent on how regular or ethical products are perceived, it should be elaborated whether a clear pref-erence for one of the product categories can be observed throughout the different shopping conditions. In order to do so, the condition of role shopping should be exemplified more ex-tensively.
Role shopping defines a motivation according to which the purchaser wants to please someone else with the purchase of a certain good (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003). As such, role shopping is equivalent to gift buying. According to Belk (1982), gift buying involves eco-nomic, social as well as self-expressive motivations. The latter two motivations can be re-ferred to the fact that the giver wants to make a symbolic statement to the receiver or their relationship with the present (Wofinbarger,1990) and to reach/maintain a certain standing. Thus, impression management plays an essential role. Impression management can be de-scribed as a process in which individuals try to influence the perception other people have about them (Schneider, 1981). These perceptions are of great importance, since they influence the way individuals see themselves and how they are perceived, treated and valued by others (Leary & Kowalski, 1990). When linking the impression management to gift buying, “[…] gifts given to other people can affect the giver’s impression by recipients, especially when the giving process is visible to people beyond the giver and the receiver. […]” (Segev et al., 2013).
14
(2003), who found a positive correlation between role shopping and the willingness to spend money. The high effort put into the purchase of gifts can be linked once again with the im-pression management as gift shoppers highly value the potential perception that the receiver will have about the giver. Furthermore, related to the impression management, the quality aspect of a gift also plays a crucial role in order to convey a certain self-image (Belk, 1982). Consumers pay more attention to good quality of the product when performing role shopping compared to when purchasing goods for themselves.
In the context of ethically labeled products, these findings may indicate, that consum-ers who perform gift shopping are more likely to purchase ethical products than when they act as self-buying consumers, taking into account that gift shoppers are considered to be more quality rather than price focused (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003). Eventually, the giver may want to influence the receiver’s perception about the giver, by presenting himself/herself as an eco-logical and social conscious person. By purchasing ethically labeled products, the buyer may think that the impression which others have about the giver can be influenced positively. The generosity aspect of gift shoppers can be covered by ethically labeled products, given the fact that these products are mostly offered with a price premium. Furthermore, since consumers perceive ethical products to be tastier and of higher quality compared to regular groceries (Lotz et al., 2013), the basic idea of gift buying, namely to please someone else, can also be covered.
To sum up, shopping motivations can be differentiated into both utilitarian and hedon-ic motives. In the research paper on hand, both motives are analyzed with self shopping being of utilitarian nature and gift shopping being of hedonic nature.
15
The hedonic shopping motivation which is object of investigation in this research pa-per is gift shopping. When pa-performing gift shopping, consumers highly think about how the receiver may evaluate the present and how this may influence the perception the receiver has about the giver. Ethical labels are likely to evoke certain perceptions in consumers’ minds which can cover certain desired perceived characteristics such as generosity and quality-focus. Derived from literature, one can claim that consumers tend to spend more effort, time and money when performing role shopping compared to self shopping and also put more em-phasis on the quality of the item. Thus, the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products when performing gift shopping can be assumed to be higher than when performing self shop-ping.
3. Conceptual framework
After giving an overview of the existing literature which is related to the topic on hand, the conceptual framework should be presented. Simultaneously, the hypotheses will be estab-lished.
Figure 1: Conceptual framework
percep-16
tions of these labels can be mixed and thus, may either be positive or negative. When having positive associations with ethical labels, consumers may think of these products to be healthi-er (Lee et al. 2013), suphealthi-erior in taste (Lotz et al., 2013) and safhealthi-er to consume (Schmidt, 1999). Given the fact that organic and Fair Trade products also become more and more fashionable, a lot of consumers purchase these products in order to uphold a trendy self-image (Hughner et al., 2007). On the other hand, however, some consumers may also link negative attributes with ethical labels. These negative perceptions can be of diverse nature: either because of in-sufficient information about the way of production (Naspetti & Zanoli, 2009) and thus uncer-tainty of the benefits of ethical products, a perceived lack of product safety (Tauxe et al., 1997) or the reluctance to purchase the product due to the price premium. These perceptions will inevitably affect the likelihood to purchase. If a consumer thinks about ethical products in a positive way, the probability that the consumer will actually purchase the good is assumed to be higher as opposed to when the initial attitude towards these products is negative. Even-tually, consumers want to purchase items which they like and come along with positive asso-ciations.
17
Based on these aspects, the following hypotheses can be established:
H1: Initial perceptions of ethical labels will influence the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products.
H2: Gift shoppers are more likely to purchase ethically labeled products than are self shop-pers.
H3: Initial perceptions of ethical labels will influence the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products, particularly when performing gift shopping.
a) Gift shoppers with positive perceptions of ethically labeled products are more likely to purchase these products than are self shoppers.
b) Gift shoppers with negative perceptions of ethically labeled products are less likely to purchase these products than are self shoppers.
4. Methodology
4.1 Design & stimuli
The research paper on hand aims to elaborate whether the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products does correlate with the initial perception of these labels and the shopping motivation the consumer is exposed to. Therefore, main effects of the variables will be ana-lyzed just as the interaction effect of both independent variables on the dependent variable
“Likelihood to purchase”. Three distinct but interlinked hypotheses were established, which should be analyzed with the study on hand.
18
is build on a 2x2 factorial design, meaning there are 2 independent variables with 2 levels each. Those independent variables are the following:
1. Perception of ethically labeled products: positive vs. negative 2. Shopping motivation: self shopping vs. gift shopping
The independent variables serve as the experimental manipulation in order to examine an effect on the dependent variable – “Likelihood to purchase” – when conditions change. Whereas the shopping motivation can easily be manipulated by exposing participants to dif-ferent cover stories (“Imagine you buy something as a gift/for yourself….”), the perception of ethically labeled products will not be subject to manipulation. This is because respondents are likely to have an already established image of ethically labeled products due to past experi-ences or gathered information, which is grounded in their minds and thus not easily changea-ble.
The study is designed as a questionnaire with two distinct versions taking into account the two different shopping motivations. In condition 1, the respondent is asked to imagine himself/herself to purchase a chocolate bar for the own consumption. In condition 2 the re-spondent has to answer the same questions under the condition of purchasing a chocolate bar as a gift for a friend. An introduction story for both conditions is created and repeated several times during the questions in order to make sure that the respondent is aware of the condition which is assigned to him/her. The introduction story also acts as a kind of cover story as it states that the questionnaire deals with the analysis of consumer shopping behavior. This is not entirely incorrect, however, the main interest of examining the perception of ethically la-beled products and its influence on the actual purchase throughout different shopping motiva-tion remains uncertain.
19 4.2 Data collection
In order to collect data for the topic on hand, an online survey was performed via Qualtrics. The reasons for doing so were diverse as online surveys come along with several advantages over traditional offline surveys. Among others, these advantages are the speed of data collec-tion, the high reach accessibility of potential participants, convenience for both the respond-ents as well the researcher plus the possibility of controlled sampling and data processing (Evans & Mathur, 2005).
Consequently, approximately 300 potential participants received the questionnaire ei-ther through private messages on the social media platform Facebook, E-mail or the German business platform Xing. Moreover, each potential participant was asked to spread the ques-tionnaire among further friends if possible. As such, most respondents were known by the researcher, thus the participants can be considered as a convenience sample rather than a probability sample, where random participants would be assigned to the survey.
In total, 221 surveys were started however only 121 were completed. This complies a dropout rate of 45,2%. As literature states, dropout rates may range from 30% (Bosnjak & Tuten, 2001 / Vehovar, Batagelj, Lozar Manfreda & Zalatel, 2002) up to 80% (O’Neil, Penrod & Bornstein, 2003 / O’Neil & Penrod, 2001). As such, a dropout rate of 45,2% can still be considered as not unusual.
In the framework of this research paper, the participants were randomly assigned to one of the two shopping conditions. 64 participants faced condition 1 – shopping for own consumption – and 57 participants were exposed to condition 2 – gift shopping. Thus, it can be concluded that both conditions were approximately equally represented in the study.
pur-20
chase ethically labeled products which are mostly offered with a price premium and thus are not easily affordable for all people.
4.3 Procedure
As stated before, two different surveys were used to gather data for the topic on hand. In order to have comparable results, the surveys did not differ regarding asked questions. Merely the conditions changed, being either self shopping or gift shopping. The surveys were structured as followed and can be further inspected in the appendix:
The first section is a static section in which the participants are introduced to the pur-pose of the study, namely the analysis of consumer shopping behavior. No special emphasis is put on ethical labels, in order not to influence the consumers in their answering. As already stated in the previous paragraph, this can be seen as a cover story for the survey.
Secondly, general data was enquired such as gender, age, profession and the existence of children in the household. Gender was asked in order to examine whether the final outcome is gender specific or can be seen as generally valid. The same holds true when it comes to age. Since the survey is based on a convenience sample, it is expected that most respondents are in their twenties, as the available sample, based on the researcher’s private contacts, is likely to unveil this age. Thus, it may be that the final outcome is limited valid for this specific age group only. Information about the profession was asked for making suggestions about the average budget disposable for the purchase of groceries. It is plausible that employed re-spondents may be able to spend more money on foods than are students. Thus, students may refrain buying organic and Fair Trade products because of financial restrictions. Further ques-tions in the survey deal with this issue. Lastly, families with children are considered to be prone to purchase ethically labeled products (Thompson & Kidwell, 1998), due to which the question about the current housing situation was asked.
vari-21
ous aspects which are taken into account before coming up with a purchase decision. Among others, the importance of price, quality, known brands and availability of sustainable labels are inquired. The importance of these attributes is measured on a 5-point-Likert scale reaching from “strongly disagree”(1) to “strongly agree” (5). This part of the study is essential for gathering data about what could influence the further answering of respondents. For instance, if a participant states that price plays an important role, the participant may also be less likely to state that he/she would like to purchase ethical products.
Subsequently, the participants of the study are exposed to six typical sustainability la-bels and are asked to check those lala-bels which are familiar to them visually-wise but also meaning-wise. This section serves as a pre-check in order to make sure that the respondents recognize the Fair Trade label which is displayed on the chocolate bar in the following sec-tion. Besides, the meaning of the labels should also be familiar to the respondent so that cer-tain perceptions (e.g. fair working conditions, better quality etc.) are likely to be evoked.
Followed by that, two chocolate bars are displayed simultaneously, with one being la-beled as Fair Trade whereas the other chocolate bar is a regular product (see appendix 3). The simultaneous display was chosen so as to simulate real life scenery, as consumers in a super-market are also exposed to several diverse labeled products at once. Besides the label, all fur-ther product package features are consistent for preventing respondents to favor one of both chocolate bars because of a more appealing design, flavor or the like. However, the price of both chocolate bars varies, with the Fair Trade product being priced 0,50 € higher than the regular product. Thereafter, participants are asked to describe their perception of both prod-ucts on a 5-point-Likert scale reaching from “strongly disagree”(1) to “strongly agree”(5). Issues, such as the perceived product quality, taste, safety, liking, willingness to pay, prefer-ence for one of the two chocolate bars over the other as well as the actual likelihood to pur-chase each product, are subject of this part.
Based on these questions, the independent variable “Perception of ethically labeled
products” as well as the dependent variable “Likelihood to purchase” can be generated. Statements concerning the “Perception” variable are the following:
1) “The product is of high quality.” 2) “The product tastes good.”
22
4) “The product is likely to be produced in a sustainable way.”
5) “I think chocolate bar 2 is superior in its products attributes to product 1.” The “Likelihood to purchase” variable will be covered by these statements:
1) “I like the product.”
2) “If confronted with both chocolate bars, I would prefer to purchase option 2.” 3) “I would like to purchase the product as a gift/for myself.”
In order to guarantee internal consistency as well as validity, each variable is calculated with the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient (Santos, 1999). The perception of ethically labeled products used an index comprising five items. Considering all five items, Cronbach’s Alpha attained a value of 0,669 which is sufficient for internal consistency. However, when deleting the item “I think chocolate bar 2 is superior in its products attributes to product 1.” α further increases up to 0,768. Thus, the initial assumption that the perception variable consists of five items has to be rejected. Instead, the “Perception of ethically labeled products” variable will be composed out of four items taking into account quality, taste, safety and sustainability. In order to create the new variable, the scores of all items were summed up and divided by four so as to get the mean of all four items.
The index for “Likelihood to purchase” encompassed three items including the liking, preference and the actual purchase wish which was evaluated on a 5-point-Likert scale with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest value. Once again, a reliability analysis was conduct-ed with an outcome of α=0,690. When deleting the liking item, Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient increased up to 0,803 what indicates a good internal consistency. As such, the “Likelihood to
purchase” variable was established using the mean of the remaining two items.
With M=3,98 (SD=0,5), the general perception of ethically labeled products is rela-tively high. The likelihood to purchase is rated slightly lower with M=3,07 (SD=1,07).
shop-23
ping whereas price is likely to be ranked at a lower level. Thus, it is assumed that the re-spondent would also be more likely to purchase the Fair Trade chocolate bar, provided that initial perceptions of the ethical product are biased positively.
The survey ends with a manipulation check. Two questions are added, one about the condition the respondent was assigned to (self shopping vs. gift shopping) and one about the differences between both chocolate bars (price and labeling). In this way it should be tested whether the respondents had the right shopping motive in mind, spotted the important differ-ences between the chocolate bars and set their answers respectively to that. If these questions are not answered correctly, the following procedure will take place: first, it will be checked whether the results represent an outlier from the average responses of other participants in the same condition. If yes, the questionnaire will be rejected. If not however, it can be assumed that the participant unconsciously checked the wrong box when answering this question. Con-sequently, the answers of the questionnaire can still be included in the analysis.
4.4 Measurement of variables
With respect to the mentioned hypotheses, diverse statistical analyses were applied.
Hypothesis 1 aimed to examine whether there is a relationship between initial percep-tions of ethically labeled products and the likelihood to purchase them. Therefore, a linear regression analysis was conducted. The output gave indication of whether a more positive perception is truly correlated with a higher likelihood to buy ethical products or whether no significant relationship between both variables can be noticed.
The second hypothesis stressed on the correlation between the shopping motivation and the probability to purchase ethically labeled products, independent from the perception of these products. For analyzing this relationship, two approaches were reasonable:
The first approach was based on an ordinary samples t-test. The output gave infor-mation about the average score assigned to the likelihood to purchase the Fair Trade chocolate bar in both the condition of gift shopping and shopping for own consumption.
Additionally, a linear regression analysis was performed. Previously the variable
24
self shopping and 1 being considered as gift shopping. Based on that a regression analysis indicated how the likelihood between both shopping motivations varied.
The third hypothesis emphasized, whether differences regarding the purchasing deci-sion can be noticed throughout both shopping conditions if the perception of ethically labeled products are either positive or negative. Literature states that gift shoppers are mostly more concerned about quality and also reveal a more generous behavior (Clarke & Belk, 1978). Does this mean that gift shoppers who perceive ethical products to be superior are more likely to buy the Fair Trade labeled chocolate bar compared to participants who were in the self shopping condition? On the other hand, does this also indicate that gift shoppers, who are more pessimistic about ethical labels, consider even less to purchase these products than are self shoppers with the same perception? In order to examine this question, a multiple linear regression analysis was performed.
In the first step the dependent variable “Likelihood to purchase” was interrelated with the independent variable “perception of ethically labeled products”. Secondly, a regression analysis between the dependent variable and the shopping condition was performed. Finally, both independent variables were to be interacted with each other (“perception of ethically
labeled products” * “shopping motivation”). If an interaction effect between both variables is present, the impact of one variable is dependent on the level of the other existent variable. In other words this means, if there is an interaction effect between the perception of ethically labeled product and the shopping motivation of consumers, the likelihood to purchase ethical products will be influenced accordingly.
25
Thus, one could deduce the effect of perception for an average value of “Likelihood to
pur-chase”.
Besides the analysis of the stated hypotheses, elaborating further main differences be-tween both shopping motivations was of interest. By doing so, more detailed assumptions regarding diverse behavior among different shopping motivations were able to be made. The outcome aimed to give an overview of the most relevant product attributes (price, quality, sustainability etc.) considered by consumers before coming up with a purchasing decision. Therefore, means, medians as well as a t-test were applied. The latter test compared both shopping motivations and identified whether or not these shopping conditions unveiled a sig-nificant difference from each other.
5. Results
5.1 Manipulation checks
In the study on hand, the independent variable “Shopping motivation” was manipulated by randomly assigning respondents to either the scenario of self shopping or gift shopping. In this way, it should be examined whether the likelihood to purchase ethical products varies not only dependent on the perception of these labels but also the shopping condition the consumer is exposed to. Eventually, according to literature, gift shoppers are more concerned about quality (Belk, 1982) and unveil a higher willingness to pay (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003).
26
noted. As such, the presence of outliers and a distortion of the outcome could be ruled out and consequently the 23 questionnaires were not rejected.
Furthermore, one of the chocolate bars was manipulated by putting a Fair Trade label on the packaging. Participants in the study were asked whether they are familiar with the label so as to evoke certain perceptions and expectations. 22 respondents stated that they are not familiar with the label. However, only 17 out of these 22 respondents said that they are not aware of the meaning of the ethical label. Thus, it can be assumed, that the remaining 5 re-spondents merely misunderstood the question about familiarity and were actually aware of the label itself and its meaning.
In order to detect whether or not the unfamiliarity with the Fair Trade label still led to a different perception of both chocolate bars, the answers given regarding product quality, taste and safety were matched with the average answers given by participants who stated to be familiar with the ethical label. The sole comparison of these values unveiled no significant difference between participants who were familiar with the Fair Trade label and participants who were not. In general, the 17 respondents who stated not to know the displayed ethical label, ranked the ethical chocolate bar at least equally high as the regular product with tenden-cy to give even higher scores for the Fair Trade product. This is in line with the general per-ception of ethical products (M=3,91, SD=0,54) to be superior to regular products (M=3,63, SD=0,57) leaving out the sustainability aspect in which the ethical product ranked higher as a matter of course. Thus, so as to keep the sample size moderately big and since the data of the 17 participants who were not familiar with the Fair Trade label did not contradict with the majority of all completed surveys, the data did not have to be rejected.
5.2 Test of hypotheses
In advance, three hypotheses were established:
H1: Initial perceptions of ethical labels will influence the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products.
27
H3: Initial perceptions of ethical labels will influence the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products, particularly when performing gift shopping.
a) Gift shoppers with positive perceptions of ethically labeled products are more likely to purchase these products than are self shoppers
b) Gift shoppers with negative perceptions of ethically labeled products are less likely to purchase these products than are self shoppers.
In order to analyze whether or not the perception of ethically labeled products influ-ences the likelihood to purchase these items, a linear regression analysis among all 121 partic-ipants was performed with “Perception of ethically labels” regressed on “Likelihood to
pur-chase”. The regression analysis was significant with R²=0,045, F(1,119)=5,56, p=0,02. The perception participants have about ethically labeled products does influence the likelihood to purchase, B=0,444, p=0,02. The higher the perception of ethically labeled products, the more likely consumers are to purchase these products. Thus, H1 can be approved.
Hypothesis 2 was analyzed with means of a samples t-test with “Shopping Motivation” and “Likelihood to purchase”. The aim was to figure out whether or not the average likeli-hood to purchase ethically labeled products of self shoppers is different from the average like-lihood to purchase this kind of products of gift shoppers. The independent samples t-test was significant, t(119)=-3,08, p=0,003. Thus, the average likelihood to purchase ethically pro-duced groceries of self shoppers (M=2,80, SD=0,96) differs from the average likelihood to purchase of gift shoppers (M=3,38, SD=1,11). As figure 2 shows, gift shoppers were more prone to purchase the ethically labeled chocolate bar than were self shoppers.
In order to further prove whether or not the shopping motivation influences consumer behavior to buy ethically labeled products, a regression analysis was performed with
28
Figure 2: Likelihood to purchase throughout different shopping motivations
The approval of the first and second hypothesis led to the question whether these out-comes are also in line with each other. Hypothesis 3 dealt with the question whether initial perceptions of ethical labels will influence the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled prod-ucts, particularly when performing gift shopping. In order to find evidence for that, a multiple linear regression analysis was conducted with “Shopping motivation”, “Perception of
ethical-ly labeled products” as well as the interaction variable “Perception*Shopping motivation” regressed on “Likelihood to purchase”. The model was significant, adjusted R²=0,098, F(3,117)=5,352, p=0,002, meaning that 9,8% of the total variability in the likelihood to pur-chase is explained by the perception of ethically labeled products, the shopping condition as well as the interaction variable. According to this model, the perception of ethically labeled products does influence the likelihood to purchase, B=0,438, p=0,08 with a cutoff-value of p≤0,1. Further, the shopping motivation does not influence the likelihood to purchase, B=0,451, p=0,76 nor does the interaction between both independent variables, B=0,035, p=0,92. This could be ascribed to multicollinearity, since the variance inflation factor of shopping motivation equaled 62,27 and for the interaction variable 62,89 with a maximum cutoff-value of 10 (Kutner, Nachtsheimer, Neter & Li, 2004).
In order to reduce multicollinearity and being able to interpret the outcome, the inde-pendent variable “Perception of ethically labeled products” was mean-centered (Aiken & West, 1991 / Cronbach, 1987). Thereupon, another multiple linear regression was run with the mean-centered perception variable, the interaction variable (“Mean-centered
percep-tion”*“Shopping Motivation”) as well as the dummy variable “Shopping Motivation” (self
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4
Self Shopping Gift Shopping
29
shopping=0, gift shopping=1) regressed on the dependent variable “Likelihood to purchase”. Multicollinearity was moderate now with a VIF=1,906 for both “Shopping motivation” and
“Interaction”. The model was significant, adjusted R²=0,098, F(3,117)=5,352, p=0,002. The shopping motivation does influence the likelihood to purchase, B=0,589, p=0,002 so does the centered perception, B=0,438, p=0,08 with a cutoff-value of p≤0,1. The interaction between both the shopping motivation and the centered perception of ethically labeled products how-ever does not unveil any significant influence on the likelihood to purchase B=0,035, p=0,924. The initial perception of ethically labeled products does not influence the likelihood of purchasing ethically labeled products dependent on the shopping motivation. As such, H3 can partly be rejected.
According to hypothesis 3, it was assumed that the perception of ethically labeled products in interaction with the shopping motivation has a significant impact on the likelihood to purchase. This is, if consumers have a positive perception of ethically labeled products, they are more likely to buy these products, especially in the gift shopping condition in order to convey a good self-image and handing over a perceived high quality present. On the other hand, if consumers associate ethical labels with more negative rather than positive attributes, consumers are assumed to be unlikely to purchase these products for the own consumption and even less likely to purchase them as a gift. This is because consumers do not want to hand over a present which they do not consider as good.
Figure 3: Likelihood to purchase with interaction effect
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5
self shopping gift shopping
Likelihood to purchase
30
Graph 3 outlines the outcome of the interaction effect. Whereas a positive perception of ethically labeled products in the gift shopping condition indeed leads to a higher likeliness to purchase these products (H3a), a negative perception in the gift shopping condition does not indicate a lower likeliness to purchase than in the self shopping condition (H3b). Even if the perception of ethically labeled products is negative, gift shoppers are still more prone to buy the Fair Trade labeled chocolate bar than are self shoppers. Thus, H3a can be approved, whereas H3b has to be rejected.
5.3 Additional results
In order to get an in-depth understanding of the potential main differences of both shopping motivations, each condition was further analyzed. By means of a ranking, scaled from 1 to 9, with 1 representing the most important aspect of a product and 9 being the least important aspect, respondents were asked to rank the attributes according to their perceived relevance.
64 respondents were exposed to condition 1, namely when considering purchasing a chocolate bar for the own consumption. With M=2,31, price played the most important role before coming up with a purchasing decision, closely followed by quality (M=2,77). The least important aspects were represented by the sustainability of products (M=6,11) as well as the impression others may have about the buyer as a consequence of the purchase (M=8.61).
In comparison to that, 57 respondents faced the gift shopping condition. The ranking only differentiated slightly from the self shopping condition regarding the most and least im-portant attributes. As such, when purchasing a gift, the majority ranked the quality of the product first (M=2,04). Distant from that, respondents perceived price to be an important as-pect with M=3,68. Least important was the asas-pect of the impression others may have about the buyer (M=6,35) as well as the sustainability of the product (M=6,56).
31
al., 2007). Gift shoppers on the other hand value product quality highest, whereas they care little about product safety or a sustainable way production of groceries.
In the previous analysis however, the perception variable also included aspects such as sustainability and product safety. As such, the perception variable encompassed attributes which are actually not important to most consumers in both the self shopping and gift shop-ping mode. This may have an impact on the outcome of hypothesis 3.
Variable Shopping for own consumption Gift Shopping
Importance Rank Mean SD Rank Mean SD
…price 1 2,31 1,68 2 3,68 2,06 …quality 2 2,77 1,62 1 2,04 1,45 …safety 5 5,47 2,09 7 5,89 2,22 …sustainability 8 6,11 1,94 9 6,56 2,12 …familiar brands 4 4,23 1,62 3 4,61 1,87 …familiar labels 6 5,64 1,89 6 5,72 1,93 …habits 3 4,05 2,39 4 4,82 2,53 …packaging 7 5,81 2,12 5 5,31 2,67 …impression 9 8,61 1,11 8 6,35 2,80
32
6. Discussion
6.1 Summary
The purpose of the study on hand was to examine whether the likelihood to purchase ethically labeled products is somehow correlated with the initial perception of these labels throughout different shopping motivations.
As analyses unveiled, the main effects between the independent variables and the de-pendent variable are significant. The first hypothesis, according to which the initial perception of ethically labeled products is correlated to the probability to purchase these groceries, could be approved. There is a positive relationship, meaning the higher the perception, the more likely consumers are to buy ethical products. Furthermore, the second analysis aimed to find evidence for the fact that gift shoppers are more prone to buy ethical products than are self shoppers. Both a samples t-test as well as a regression analysis proved this assumption to be correct and by that verified hypothesis 2.
The interaction effect between both independent variables on the dependent variable however, could not be approved entirely. The shopping motivation interacting with the initial perception of ethical labels, does not inevitably influence the likelihood to purchase these products. When the perception of ethically labeled products is positive, gift shoppers are in-deed more likely to purchase these products than are self shoppers. However, when having negative associations about ethical labels, the outcome is not as expected. In this case, gift shoppers are still more prone to actually consider the Fair Trade chocolate bar being part of their shopping basket than are self shoppers.
6.2 Theoretical implications
Sustainabil-33
ity plays an essential role in nowadays retailing environment and acts as a trigger for a lot of purchasing decisions throughout various industries.
The study on hand gave an idea about how ethically labeled products are perceived, and how this perception influences the likelihood to purchase these products throughout dif-ferent shopping motivations. This is in contrast to former studies, which mainly focused on the general perception of ethically labeled products without taking into account the circum-stances under which consumers purchase ethical groceries. Therefore, these studies lacked to draw any conclusion regarding what this indicates for the likeliness to purchase. As such, the study on hand added value to the existing literature, by not only taking into account the per-ception of ethically labeled products, but also the impact of this perper-ception on the likeliness to purchase throughout different shopping motivations. Based on that, practical implications for the retailing industry can be deduced.
When referring to former studies, consumers generally perceive ethically labeled products to be superior to regular products. This holds true especially regarding aspects such as taste, quality (Lotz et al., 2013), nutrition value (Lee et al., 2013), health in general (Schuldt, Muller & Schwarz, 2012) as well as product safety (Schmidt, 1999). Further studies unveiled that individuals perceive ethically labeled products to be safer to consume due to the omission of pesticides (Schmidt, 1999). The absence of pesticides is linked with the percep-tion of reduced individual health risk as well as an enhancement of the environment (Hamil-ton et al., 2003).
34
(presumed that financial restrictions, availability and other distractive conditions do not oc-cur).
Furthermore, gift shoppers unveiled a higher probability to buy the ethically labeled chocolate bar than did self shoppers. This can be attributed to the fact, that consumers who look for a present are more concerned about quality than price (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003). The study on hand supported this theory by unveiling that participants who were exposed to the gift shopping condition ranked quality by far the most important product attribute. It is likely that people mostly want to give away presents of which they are convinced of them-selves, also in order to make a good impression and being sure that the recipient likes the gift. Given the fact that the general perception of ethically labeled products is moderately high, approved by literature (Lee et al., 2013 / Lotz et al., 2013 / Schmidt, 1999) and also the out-come of this study, participants in the study seemed to make a good choice with the Fair Trade chocolate bar as a gift. Another aspect contributing to the fact that gift shoppers are more likely to purchase ethically produced products than do self shoppers, may be the price premium. As literature stated, price often acts as an indicator for quality (Rao, & Monroe, 1989). Given the fact that gift shoppers are generally more quality focused and generous (Ar-nold & Rey(Ar-nolds, 2003), the price premium may contribute to the increased likelihood to pur-chase. However, the latter aspect serves more as an assumption rather than a valid statement, since not enough emphasis was put on the price and label effect of ethically labeled products on the likeliness to purchase.
