ABSTRACT
During the COVID-19 pandemic, frenzied selfishness and panic buying have dominated headlines around the globe. When people hoard supplies, others (including the needy and vulnerable people) cannot find necessities. Despite repeated calls from leaders, people worldwide continue to hoard supplies, and millions of people ignore coronavirus concerns, including churches. Hence, the purpose of this study is first to investigate the impact of consumers' (non) religiosity on selfishness and, subsequently, the impact of selfishness on consumers' ethical beliefs. Secondly, we explore do people's religiosity matters? Are religious people more ethical and less selfish than atheists or vice versa? This study uses the convenience sampling approach to investigate consumers' ethical beliefs. The sample was collected through Amazon M-Turk and totaled 235 responses. The results show that consumers' intrinsic religiosity did not significantly influence consumers' selfishness. Furthermore, extrinsic religiosity and atheism positively influence consumers' selfishness. Finally, the results show that selfishness is prevalent in every group irrespective of the group's belief or nonbelief status. The results indicate that when exploring consumer ethics, the key measure should not only focus on consumers' religiousness or lack of religiousness but, instead, it should also include consumers' selfishness. This study offers several implications for non-profit organizations dealing with ethical issues, and secondly, the study will have implications for ethical education among religious or non-religious consumers. Originality/value-This is one of the first few studies investigating the impact of consumers' religiosity on selfishness. In addition, this study investigates differences between religious and non-religious consumers on consumer ethics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Purpose>The purpose of this study is to show that the spread of conspiracy theories has resulted in many tragic incidents, such as January 6 Insurrection at the US Capitol Building. Interestingly, many of the conspiracy theory followers are religious individuals. In response to this phenomenon, this study will investigate the impact of religious (un)beliefs on consumer ethics. Secondly, this study will investigate the mediating role of conspiracy theory on consumer ethics. Finally, this study will investigate the moderating role of ethical ideology (i.e. relativism) on the relationship between consumers’ (un)belief (e.g. religiosity and atheism) and consumer ethics.Design/methodology/approach>Overall, 328 participants living in the USA (32% female and 68% male) were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) in exchange for financial compensation.Findings>The results show the negative impact of a belief in a conspiracy theory. These conspiracy beliefs can skew any individual irrespective of their beliefs or unbelief. Religious leaders, policymakers and educators need to keep this in mind when designing a campaign to reduce unethical behavior. Everyone is prone to conspiracy theories.Originality/value>This is one of the first few studies exploring the impact of belief in conspiracy theories on consumers’ ethical beliefs. There are still limited studies investigating whether conspiracy beliefs lead individuals to engage in unethical behavior.
ABSTRACT
PurposeIn responding to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, drastic public health measures such as social distancing and lockdowns have been implemented across the globe to slow the spread of the virus. In the USA, the public's reaction to social distancing has been mixed, evident in a high number of people flocking to beaches, bars and shops as coronavirus cases soar. Public health officials have issued strong warnings about the danger people face but the problem persists. To fill this gap, informed by the theory of planned behavior (TPB), this research explores why many people refuse to practice social distancing.Design/methodology/approachTwo studies were conducted during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In the first study, a sample of 750 respondents was recruited from a US online consumer panel to complete a structured survey questionnaire. The data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. In the second study, an open-ended questionnaire was administered to 50 US online participants to further uncover people's in-depth perceptions and perspectives toward the pandemic and social distancing. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.FindingsThe results from the first study show that risk-taking attitude, authoritarianism and subjective norm are significant predictors of social distancing intention and behavior, through perceived severity of COVID-19. Four themes emerged from the second study, which are consistent with the proposed conceptual framework in the first study.Originality/valueTheoretically, the authors’ findings first contribute to the emerging marketing literature that focuses on creating sustained positive changes and improving the well-being of consumers, communities and societies. Secondly, their findings corroborate with previous findings documented in the social influence literature by showing that during the times of uncertainty and confusion such as COVID-19, social norms (not forced by laws and regulations) play the most critical role in influencing a voluntary, socially beneficial behavior (such as social distancing). Third, this study extends the application of the TPB into the realm of social distancing behavior. The three main components of the TPB, namely attitude, behavioral control and subjective norm, are shown to predict social distancing behavior. Practically, the results of this research have important implications for public health policies on how to encourage positive public health behavior amid pandemics such as COVID-19.