The three papers together follow the overarching research question how corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) and consumers’ psychological conflicts are connected.
First, Paper 1 describes a literature analysis, building the basis for Paper 2 and Paper 3, specifically, to understand the terminology and theoretical properties surrounding CSI as well as corporate social responsibility (CSR). The most important (abstract) ethics-related terms (e.g., CSR, green consumption, sustainability) used in the marketing ethics literature are therefore examined. The question which terms are used to which extent in influential marketing journals and how they relate to each other constitutes the basic research question of Paper 1 (‘Contemporary Usage of Marketing Ethics Terminology: A Concept Analysis’).
Second, Paper 2 (‘Fooling Yourself: The Role of Internal Defense Mechanisms in Unsustainable Consumption Behavior’) then exploratory addresses the role of consumers’ inner conflicts in the field of unsustainable consumption behavior – and in case of their indirect support of CSI behavior – by means of 20 in-depth interviews.
Third, Paper 3 (‘Cling Together, Swing Together? Corporate Social Irresponsibility: Do Consumers Feel Accountable for It?’) experimentally investigates the specific causal relationships of particular consumer conflicts on the basis of their perceived degree of moral responsibility.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Contemporary Usage of Marketing Ethics Terminology: A Concept Analysis (Paper 1)
3. Transition between Paper 1 and Paper 2
4. Fooling Yourself: The Role of Internal Defense Mechanisms in Unsustainable Consumption Behavior (Paper 2)
5. Transition between Paper 2 and Paper 3
6. Cling Together, Swing Together? Corporate Social Irresponsibility: Do Consumers Feel Accountable for It? (Paper 3)
7. General Discussion
Research Objectives and Themes
This work explores the connection between corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) and the psychological conflicts experienced by consumers. The central research aim is to understand how consumers justify unsustainable consumption and whether they feel morally responsible for corporate misconduct through three distinct but logically connected papers.
- Analysis of marketing ethics terminology and the development of a conceptual framework.
- Exploration of consumer defense mechanisms used to mitigate inner conflicts regarding unsustainable behavior.
- Experimental investigation into consumer moral responsibility for socially irresponsible corporate actions.
- Examination of the role of brand glorification and victim characteristics in moral responsibility.
Excerpt from the Book
Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI)
With regard to CSR, an essential problem is that positive and negative CSP are not on the same continuum (Wood 2010). Wagner, Bicen, and Hall (2008) argue that negative information (compared to positive information) is more intensively communicated in the media. In addition to that, consumers remember negative information longer than positive information. Finally, there is more talk about companies ‘doing bad things’. CSI seems to constitute an important factor for consumers’ decision making and a negative link between bad CSP and CFP has been found (Wood 2010). For instance, consumers negatively interpret CSI information while positive CSR information is only relevant for all those who are interested in the CSR theme (Sen and Bhattacharya 2001). Case studies such as BP (Friedman and Weiser Friedman 2010) also show the negative economic impact of CSI (i.e., BP lost much money because of its negatively judged behavior).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Provides an overview of the three papers and their logical connection regarding CSI and consumer psychological conflicts.
2. Contemporary Usage of Marketing Ethics Terminology: A Concept Analysis (Paper 1): A literature analysis of 868 articles to develop a conceptual framework of marketing ethics terms.
3. Transition between Paper 1 and Paper 2: Explains the rationale for selecting the term "unsustainable consumption" for the subsequent research based on the framework developed in Paper 1.
4. Fooling Yourself: The Role of Internal Defense Mechanisms in Unsustainable Consumption Behavior (Paper 2): An explorative study using 20 in-depth interviews to identify how consumers use defense mechanisms to manage conflicts arising from unsustainable consumption.
5. Transition between Paper 2 and Paper 3: Bridges the findings on inner psychological conflicts to the moral responsibility consumers may feel for third-party company actions.
6. Cling Together, Swing Together? Corporate Social Irresponsibility: Do Consumers Feel Accountable for It? (Paper 3): An experimental investigation of moral responsibility, utilizing third-party scenarios to test the impact of customer affiliation and brand glorification.
7. General Discussion: Synthesizes the findings of all three papers and discusses implications for marketing ethics and future research.
Keywords
Corporate Social Irresponsibility, CSI, Corporate Social Responsibility, CSR, Marketing Ethics, Sustainability, Consumer Behavior, Psychological Conflicts, Internal Defense Mechanisms, Moral Responsibility, Brand Glorification, Customer Affiliation, Attitude-Behavior Gap, Victim Proximity, Victim Controllability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the overarching research goal of this dissertation?
The dissertation aims to investigate the connection between corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) and the internal psychological conflicts consumers face when their consumption behaviors clash with their sustainability ideals.
What are the primary thematic pillars of this research?
The research focuses on the terminology of marketing ethics, the use of psychological defense mechanisms by consumers to justify unsustainable consumption, and the experimental assessment of consumer moral responsibility in third-party corporate scenarios.
What is the core research question driving these papers?
The overarching question is how corporate social irresponsibility and consumers' psychological conflicts are interconnected, and specifically, to what extent consumers feel accountable for companies' socially irresponsible behavior.
Which scientific methodology is applied throughout the work?
The work uses a quasi-cumulative approach, combining a bibliometric literature analysis (Paper 1), qualitative in-depth interviews (Paper 2), and three independent experimental laboratory studies (Paper 3).
What does the main part of the dissertation cover?
The main part encompasses an analysis of existing terminology in marketing ethics, an investigation of intrapsychic conflicts through consumer interviews, and an experimental testing of how brand identification and victim characteristics influence moral responsibility.
Which terms best characterize this work?
The work is characterized by terms such as Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI), moral responsibility, consumer psychological conflicts, defense mechanisms, and social identity theory.
How does brand glorification influence a consumer's feeling of moral responsibility?
The research finds that high brand glorification increases a consumer's feeling of moral responsibility when a company they are identified with acts in a socially irresponsible manner.
What role does the victim play in the consumer's perception of responsibility?
Study 2 and 3 show that victim proximity and victim poverty (and the resulting perception of victim controllability) significantly influence the consumer's empathic concern and, consequently, their perceived moral responsibility for the firm's actions.
- Citation du texte
- Diplom-Psychologe Alexander Stich (Auteur), 2018, Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Consumers' Psychological Conflicts, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/496200
