Ethical sensitivity: Conceptualization and new scale development

Toti, Jean-François; Moulins, Jean‐Louis

doi:10.1177/2051570717716562

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Items are proposed in a 5-option Likert scale and are scored by 1-5, respectively. Toti & Moulins conformed the validity of this scale through EFA and reported the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the PES and IES as 0.88 and 0.84, respectively (25). Similarly, in the present study, by EFA and CFA, it was found that the scale had a two-factor structure.…”

Section: Ethical Sensitivity Scale (Ess)supporting

confidence: 82%

Personality and Morality: Role of the Big Five Personality Traits in Predicting the Four Components of Moral Decision Making

Abbasi-Asl

Hashemi

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The aim of the present study was to investigate the predicting role of the big five personality traits in the four components of moral decision-making. Method: The population of this descriptive-correlation study included all the students in the University of Mazandaran. The participants were 384 students selected by stratified random sampling. In order to collect data, the Mini-IPIP, Ethical Sensitivity Scale, DIT-2, Moral Identity Questionnaire and the Moral Courage Scale were used. The data were analyzed by SPSS-24.Results: According to the results of this study, neuroticism was a negative significant predictor of moral identity and moral courage, extraversion was a negative significant predictor of moral identity, openness was a positive significant predictor of moral identity, agreeableness was a positive significant predictor of moral sensitivity and moral identity and conscientiousness was a positive significant predictor of moral identity, and moral courage.Conclusion: According to the results of the present study, it can be stated that different personality traits can predict different aspects of moral decision making.

show abstract

Section: Ethical Sensitivity Scale (Ess)supporting

confidence: 82%

Personality and Morality: Role of the Big Five Personality Traits in Predicting the Four Components of Moral Decision Making

Abbasi-Asl

Hashemi

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After the evaluation of ethical claims in the advertisement, subjective ambivalence (M = 3.86; SD = 1.46; α = 0.935) and skepticism (M = 4.04; SD = 1.34; α = 0.933) were measured using the same scales as in study 1. We then used the six items to measure PBE (Brunk, 2012) (M = 4.681; SD = 0.86; α = 0.871); ethical sensitivity was measured using four items (Toti and Moulins, 2017) (M = 6.294; SD = 0.80; α = 0.876) and intention to purchase ethical products was measured using three items (Schmidt et al , 2018) (M = 3.5; SD = 1.47; α = 0.946). We measured all scales on a seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding how ethical claims in advertising affect subjective ambivalence toward buying ethical products

Toti,

Sánchez Romero

2023

EJM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of subjective ambivalence on ethical consumption behaviors and the role of ethical claims in reducing feelings of ambivalence toward buying ethical products. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted two studies. In study 1, the authors carried out an online survey with a sample of 230 French consumers. The authors applied structural equation modeling with Amos to test the relationships among skepticism, ambivalence and ethical consumption behaviors. Study 2 is an experimental design in which the authors manipulated ethical claims (low – few ethical arguments vs. high – many ethical arguments) in advertising (176 French panelists). The authors tested the relationships among consumer ethical sensitivity, perceived brand ethicality, skepticism, ambivalence and intention to purchase an ethical product, depending on ethical claims in advertising. Findings Study 1 shows that skepticism toward advertising of ethical products amplifies feelings of ambivalence and that ambivalence reduces consumers’ willingness to adopt ethical consumption behaviors. Study 2 shows that strong claims in advertising of ethical products reduce skepticism toward advertising of ethical products and feelings of ambivalence toward buying an ethical product through perceived brand ethicality, with consumers’ ethical sensitivity positively moderating these relationships. Research limitations/implications The two studies explore only one form of ambivalence (i.e. subjective), and the experimental study focuses on a single category of products. Practical implications The findings highlight the difficulties in promoting ethical products. Consumers need to know if a product is “really” ethical, as they may feel ambivalent toward that product. This paper shows that strong ethical claims in advertising ethical products significantly help to overcome this barrier. Originality/value Based on attribution theory and persuasion models, this research reveals how ethical claims in advertising affect feelings of ambivalence, which negatively influence consumers’ willingness to adopt ethical consumption. In addition, it follows a holistic approach to ethical consumption behaviors to explore consumers’ ambivalence.

show abstract

Consumer Disposition Toward Fairness in Agri-Food Chains (FAIRFOOD): Scale Development and Validation

Del Prete,

Golossenko,

Gorton

et al. 2024

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fairness in agri-food supply chains receives increasing consumer, industry, and political attention but is currently under-conceptualized and lacks appropriate frameworks for measurement. Therefore, building on a theoretically grounded conceptualization of consumer dispositions toward fairness in agri-food supply chains, we developed and validated a 14-item fairness measurement scale (FAIRFOOD). The scale comprises of four dimensions (economic, environmental, social, and informational) which are manifestations of the same construct (higher-order structure). We empirically validate the scale and its reliability using four studies and eight independent samples from Italy (n = 1386) and the UK (n = 1379). The findings reveal that FAIRFOOD is related, yet distinct from theoretically relevant constructs such as ethical consumption and pro-environment behavior. The FAIRFOOD scale is a strong predictor of outcomes such as willingness to purchase Fairtrade certified products, as well as boycott and negative Word of Mouth intentions if a brand treats other supply chain actors unfairly. Regarding business strategy, rather than focusing on one dimension of fairness independently, managers should adopt a holistic approach, devising initiatives that address all four dimensions in tandem.

show abstract

Ethical sensitivity: Conceptualization and new scale development

Cited by 11 publications

References 83 publications

Personality and Morality: Role of the Big Five Personality Traits in Predicting the Four Components of Moral Decision Making

Personality and Morality: Role of the Big Five Personality Traits in Predicting the Four Components of Moral Decision Making

Understanding how ethical claims in advertising affect subjective ambivalence toward buying ethical products

Consumer Disposition Toward Fairness in Agri-Food Chains (FAIRFOOD): Scale Development and Validation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About