Relationship Commitment and Ethical Consumer Behavior in a Retail Setting: The Case of Receiving Too Much Change at the Checkout

Abstract

In this study, we conducted two experiments to examine the effect of relationship commitment on the reaction of shoppers to receiving too much change, controlling for the amount of excess change. Hypotheses based on equity theory, opportunism and guilt were set up and tested. The first study showed that, when the less committed consumer is confronted with a large excess of change, he/she is less likely to report this mistake, compared with a small excess. Conversely, consumers with a high commitment towards the retailer are more likely to tell when they receive too much change, especially when the amount is large. The second experiment provided an explanation for these findings: the less committed consumer is driven by opportunism, whereas guilt-related feelings play an important role in a high commitment relationship. These results have several implications for both retail management and future research.KEY WORDS: Amount of excess change received by retail shoppers, consumer ethics, equity theory, guiltrelated feelings, opportunism, passively benefiting at the expense of the seller, receiving too much change at the checkout, relationship commitment, relationship marketing, retailing, unethical consumer behavior

The Mediating Role of Anticipated Guilt in Consumers’ Ethical Decision-Making

“…By doing so, the present research gives empirical support to earlier made suggestions (e.g. Baumeister et al, 1994;Marks and Mayo, 1991;Steenhaut and Van Kenhove, 2005;Strutton et al, 1994;Tangney and Dearing, 2002) and confirms Vitell's (2003) pressing statement that factors other than ethical beliefs influence ethical behavioral intentions. More specifically, we established the anticipation of guilt feelings as a partial mediator between a consumer's ethical beliefs (anteceded by idealism) and ethical intentions.…”

“…Following the suggestions made previously about the potential positive impact of guilt in consumer ethics (e.g. Baumeister et al, 1994;Marks and Mayo, 1991;Steenhaut and Van Kenhove, 2005;Strutton et al, 1994;Tangney and Dearing, 2002) and in line with recent theoretical and empirical research supporting anticipated emotions as predictors of intentions to act (e.g. Parker et al 1995;Richard et al, 1996;Zeelenberg and Beattie, 1997), we hypothesize consumers' ethical intentions to be positively influenced by anticipated guilt.…”

“…inappropriate) alternative. Steenhaut and Van Kenhove (2005) identified a trade-off between an opportunistic drive and guilt-related feelings when considering a questionable behavior. Strutton et al (1994) put forward the potential impact of guilt when evaluating the possibility of engaging in an unethical activity.…”

“…In the context of ethically questionable consumer situations, the importance of anticipated guilt feelings has been suggested by few researchers (Marks and Mayo, 1991;Steenhaut and Van Kenhove, 2005;Strutton et al, 1994). Also in prior guilt research the potential impact of anticipated guilt when considering (un)ethical behavioral alternatives has been put forward as people appear to perform or avoid a stunning variety of actions because of the anticipation of guilt (Baumeister et al, 1994;Tangney and Dearing, 2002).…”

Moral disengagement, the dark triad, and unethical consumer attitudes

“…Neutralisation, false-returning purchased items as "faulty" or "unwanted" (associated with thrill-seeking and less self-consciousness), anticipated guilt following unethical consumer activity, and the influence of guilt and opportunism on receiving too much change at a supermarket checkout have all been examined (De Bock & Van Kenhove, 2011;Harris, 2008;Steenhaut & Van Kenhove, 2006;Steenhaut & Van Kenhove, 2005). Moore et al's (2012) systematic studies into moral disengagement in occupational settings measured Machiavellianism alongside measures of empathy and perspective-taking, finding these predictors associated with a greater ability to morally disengage, their effect was replicated across two studies, while a fourth study found Moral disengagement and the Dark Triad: 4 dispositional guilt negatively correlated with the propensity to morally disengage.…”