Sunteți pe pagina 1din 10

This article was downloaded by: [University of Stellenbosch]

On: 06 October 2014, At: 05:39


Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Advertising
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujoa20

Factors Affecting Skepticism toward Green Advertising


Arminda Maria Finisterra do Paço & Rosa Reis
Published online: 18 Apr 2013.

To cite this article: Arminda Maria Finisterra do Paço & Rosa Reis (2012) Factors Affecting Skepticism toward Green
Advertising, Journal of Advertising, 41:4, 147-155, DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2012.10672463

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2012.10672463

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
FACTORS AFFECTING SKEPTICISM TOWARD GREEN ADVERTISING
Arminda Maria Finisterra do Paço and Rosa Reis

ABSTRACT: Despite the growth of green marketing, there is a shortage of studies on green communication. Thus, this
research aims to understand whether consumers who are concerned about the environment conserve resources and have
environmentally friendly buying habits and whether they are skeptical about the green communications conveyed by
companies. Using a proposal of a model about skepticism toward green advertising, several hypotheses are tested. The
results indicate that the more environmentally concerned an individual is, the more skepticism he or she will be toward
green claims exhibited on packages or featured in ads. In addition, results indicated no significant differences between
men and women regarding this skepticism.

During the past few decades, companies’ investments in envi- importance of this issue, the objective of the present research is
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

ronmental activities have drawn significant attention from the to understand whether consumers who are concerned about the
media (Iyer and Banerjee 1993) and society in general (Paço environment conserve resources and who have environmentally
and Raposo 2009). Indeed, the media have played a major role friendly buying habits are, in fact, skeptical about the commu-
in the widespread dissemination of environmental concerns. nication conveyed by green companies. If skepticism is found,
The massive media coverage of environmental disasters and it is necessary to reflect on the best ways to communicate such
conflicts helped to transform many specific problems into messages to avoid disappointing current green consumers and
major public issues (Qader and Zainuddin 2011). alienating other consumers.
As a result of the media focus on initiatives related to ecol- Thus, consumer ambivalence about environmental market-
ogy, environmental protection, environmental degradation, ing and advertising practices needs to be accessed. To Mohr,
and climate change, individuals are increasingly concerned Eroglu, and Ellen (1998), consumer reluctance toward envi-
about the planet. This general concern has increased levels ronmental claims is of great importance for public policymak-
of environmental awareness and changed the way people live ers, consumer researchers, and practitioners. The study of this
and the products they purchase. Green consumers’ orientation topic could contribute to gaining a better understanding of
has thus increased interest in the link between marketing, green consumers.
consumer behavior, and the environment (Awad 2011). The present research is based on a sample of Portuguese
However, despite the growth of green marketing, marketers individuals. In general, Europeans (in the 27 member countries
still do not have the adequate tools for evaluating the success of the European Union) attach great importance to environ-
of advertising relative to consumers’ attitudes, intentions, mental protection (96%), with almost everyone stating that
and behaviors. This is reinforced by Haytko and Matulich, the issue is very or fairly important to them. In Portugal, for
who state “previous research into consumers’ attitudes toward instance, this percentage was even higher—97% (European
green advertising and the environment has concluded different Commission 2008). However, regarding behaviors among the
results over time” (2008, p. 2). Portuguese population, Paço and Raposo state, “despite their
Along with the growth of green communication, the ques- support for policies designed to improve the environment,
tion of skepticism in relation to environmental appeals has [they] do not translate their concerns into actions. . . . Their
arisen. Given that skepticism diminishes the positive impact of participation is often based on protecting the environment by
communication, its analysis is relevant and may allow compa- saving electricity and water, which shows that these concerns
nies to design better communications and enhance their effects may be more closely related with economic factors than with an
among consumers (Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen 1998). Given the environmental consciousness” (2009, p. 375). Another study,
by Paço and Varejão (2010), about the factors affecting energy-
Arminda Maria Finisterra do Paço (Ph.D., University of Beira
Interior, Portugal) is a professor of marketing, Department of Busi-
ness and Economics–Research Unit NECE, University of Beira
Interior, Covilhã, Portugal. The NECE—R&D Centre is funded by the Multiannual Funding
Rosa Reis (M.S., University of Beira Interior, Portugal) is the Programme of the R&D Centres of the FCT (Portuguese Foundation
secretary to the director, Polytechnic Institute of Guarda, Guarda, for Science and Technology), Ministry of Science, Technology, and
Portugal. Higher Education, Portugal.
Journal of Advertising, vol. 41, no. 4 (Winter 2012), pp. 147–155.
© 2013 American Academy of Advertising. All rights reserved. Permissions: www.copyright.com
ISSN 0091–3367 (print) / ISSN 1557–7805 (online)
DOI: 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410410
148  The Journal of Advertising

saving behaviors reached the same conclusion. Furthermore, Banerjee, Gulas, and Iyer (1995) indicate that a green
in the Eurobarometer report (European Commission 2008), advertisement is the one that may clearly or implicitly ad-
Portugal presented very low values in the item connected with dress the link between a product and the environment; it
the purchase of environmentally friendly products. In general, should be able to encourage green lifestyles and improve the
75% of the respondents said they would buy environmentally socially responsible corporate image. Furthermore, according
friendly products, but only 17% had done so. to Carlson et al. (1996), green advertising is a way of promot-
This paper is structured as follows. It starts with a brief ing environmental awareness and stimulating the demand of
literature review in which green communication, advertising, green products. Awad (2011) suggests that green advertising
and skepticism toward environmental claims is discussed in and producers’ claims should be assessed not only in the final
the context of green marketing. Based on the theoretical foun- product, but also on the resources used in production, packag-
dation, a proposal of a research model of skepticism toward ing, distribution, and disposal.
green advertising is presented. The methodology section then Green advertising must be legal and honest, and consistent
follows describing how the research was conducted (sample, with environmental regulations and policies regarding fair
methods, variable measurement). Next, the results of the competition (Pranee 2010). Today, however, consumers are not
statistical analyses are presented with a commentary. Finally, only confused about green advertising claims but also distrust-
conclusions, limitations, and implications are discussed. ful of them (Iyer and Banerjee 1993; Shrum, McCarty, and
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

Lowrey 1995), becoming increasingly suspicious of everything


GREEN ADVERTISING related to green communication (Carlson, Grove, and Kangun
1993). This situation is aggravated by myths associated with
Companies can show environmental sensitivity by using several green products, as for example, their perceived inferiority in
strategies; one of these marketing tools can be environmen- terms of performance or lower level of scientific research for
tal or green advertising. Haytko and Matulich (2008) have product development (Grillo, Takarczyk, and Hansen 2008).
suggested that green advertising started during the 1970s Thus, in general terms, the credibility of green advertising
as a result of the recession, caused by high oil prices and the is considered to be relatively low and will depend on the par-
need to deal with environmental problems. Companies try- ticular “type of green” one is. Its nature is much more complex
ing to follow this green trend began to design and develop than the existing marketing literature suggests (Kilbourne
environmentally friendly products to achieve a competitive 1995). With the increase in environmental advertising, some
advantage based on this differentiating factor, and started critics have been pointing out that there is great confusion
seeking new ways to reach the public (Phau and Ong 2007). among consumers regarding the green claims of some products.
This was a way of responding to consumers’ and regulators’ The reasons for this include unclear meanings of claims and
environmental concerns (Zinkhan and Carlson 1995). As a no generally accepted definitions of expressions such as “bio-
result, marketing professionals started to integrate the claim degradable,” “environmentally friendly,” “ozone friendly,” and
“green/environmentally friendly” in communications and so on. Most of the time, consumers do not have the sufficient
green messages also started spreading across various commu- technical or scientific knowledge to understand the information
nication platforms, such as word-of-mouth, reference groups, underlying the environmental claims (Furlow 2010; Newell,
opinion leaders, media activities, advertisements, Internet Goldsmith, and Banzhaf 1998). If an environmental ad is
marketing, and mobile marketing. perceived as too technical or manipulative, it may hamper the
Since green advertising makes use of environmental claims, consumer’s effort to understand the message, resulting in an
it is necessary to understand what its meaning is. To Scam- advertiser’s failure to communicate with its public (Carlson,
mon and Mayer, “an environmental claim is a statement by Grove, and Kangun 1993).
a seller regarding the impact of one or more of its brand at- Despite some firms being sincere in their efforts to make
tributes on the natural environment” (1995, p. 33). Examples environmentally friendly products, others make ambiguous
of general environmental claims would include terms such as and confusing product claims, or even manufactured claims,
“environmentally friendly,” “safe for the environment,” and to appeal to green consumers (Carlson et al. 1996). Carlson,
“environmentally responsible.” Grove, and Kangun (1993) call this “greenwashing,” that is,
While traditional advertising has three functions (to in- advertising in which the green claims are misleading, insignifi-
form, remind, and persuade), green advertising aims to cre- cant, or even false. The potential for confusion and deception
ate awareness and positive attitudes toward environmentally may have severe consequences for companies; besides the legal
friendly brands and companies (D’Souza and Taghian 2005). and ethical aspects, misleading communications may damage
Pranee (2010) simply states that green advertising’s aim is to the brand and the organization, and at the same time, cause
inform clients about the environmental aspects of companies’ consumers to question corporate honesty when saturating them
products and services. with these kinds of claims (Furlow 2010).
Winter 2012  149

SKEPTICISM TOWARD Accordingly, Cohen (1991) states that misleading advertis-


GREEN COMMUNICATION ing harms more than just the individual who wrongly buys a
product he or she believes is green. This purchase may generate
Studies show that green consumers, and even individuals who considerable harmful cynicism about all environmental claims,
simply care about the environment, do not give much credence including responsible ones. Another very important aspect of
to ads and traditional advertising, which have virtually no green advertising is to ensure that environmental information
impact on the market; therefore, optimal marketing strategy is available for consumer use. If a consumer has doubts about
might be to start using unpaid media, because it is considered that information, the market system could collapse.
more credible (Ottman 1998). Due to the difficulty of regulating environmental claims
However, it may not be easy to integrate a green argument through marketing guidelines, self-regulation is a possible
into communication in a way that allows the message to reach solution. However, differing and ambiguous commitments
the audience. If the message is distorted, green consumers will of private sector industries as well as public sector regulatory
feel disappointed, may change brands, and as they are usually authorities have persisted over the years.
opinion leaders, may negatively influence other consumers
(Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey 1995). Even if information RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES
today is more consistent and less confusing than in the 1980s,
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

the variety of labels, packaging, and environmental appeals is Fishbein and Ajzen’s (1975) expectancy-value model of atti-
still confusing rather than informative to those who want to tude theory suggests that consumers will have a better attitude
join the green consumption movement (Ottman 1998). For toward products they perceive as more likely to have valued
instance, consumers are so confused by media terminology that attributes. In turn, in the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)
they are unable to distinguish such terms as “energy efficiency,” (Ajzen 1985), the central idea is that behavioral decisions
“smart energy,” or “energy conservation” (Murphy, Graber, and are not made spontaneously, but are the result of a rational
Stewart 2010). process in which behavior is influenced, although indirectly,
The difficulty in the determination of the “environmen- by attitudes, norms, and perceptions of control. Smith et al.
tal truth” promoted by companies has created a generalized (2008) state that several researchers have studied the extent
skepticism around green advertising (Carlson et al. 1996; to which self-identity might be a useful addition to the TPB,
Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen 1998; Zinkhan and Carlson 1995). arguing that it is reasonable to assume that there are certain
Environmentally friendly brands are facing significant barriers behaviors for which self-identity is a relevant determinant of
to communicate to this current leery, skeptical, and cynical intentions, and later of the behavior. Thus, the right advertis-
public and this can discourage the development/production ing campaign can help companies better position their brands
of green products. and influence perceptions and beliefs, which in turn will create
Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen (1998) clarify that skepticism can among consumers a certain predisposition to think and act.
be defined as a cognitive response that varies depending on the Based on the stated literature and given the necessity to
context and the content of communication, and may only reveal deepen current knowledge about the existence of a relationship
itself on certain occasions. Skeptics can be convinced about the between attitudes (environmental concern [EC]), behaviors
veracity of the message through evidence or proof. In contrast, (conservation behavior [CB] and buying behavior [BB]), and
cynicism is a personality characteristic that remains relatively skepticism toward environmental claims (SCE), a model illus-
stable through situations and time. Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen trating those links was established, as can be seen in Figure 1.
exemplify these differences saying, “an individual with a strong EC, CB, and BB are considered independent variables and SCE
predisposition to doubt the motives for a commercial message will be treated as a dependent variable.
(i.e., a cynic) would be more likely to doubt the substance of According to Ajzen (1988), an attitude can be defined as a
the message (i.e., skeptical) than a person with a low degree of disposition to respond favorably or unfavorably to an object,
cynicism” (1998, p. 33). This suggests it would be more dif- person, institution, or event. Hakkert and Kemp (2006) add
ficult to influence a cynical individual than a skeptical one. that an attitude is acquired through information and/or experi-
In fact, if consumers do not believe in the environmental ence with an object, is a predisposition to respond in a certain
benefits referred to in the ads and labels, the efforts in devel- way, and has to reflect a reliable pattern of positive or negative
oping green communications will be lost; moreover, skeptical reactions to that object. In this research, the attitude will be
consumers may unconsciously give up the chance to help the measured through the level of environmental concern.
environment by buying truly environmentally friendly prod- D’Souza and Taghian (2005) identified the disbelief that con-
ucts. As a result, this suspicion on advertising and other forms sumers sometimes demonstrate toward companies, products,
of marketing communications may diminish marketplace ef- initiatives, or green advertising campaigns. They concluded
ficiency (Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen 1998). that in general, consumers who are more environmentally
150  The Journal of Advertising

FIGURE 1 in terms of environmental behavior and in the purchasing of


Proposal of a Model About Skepticism green products. Based on these assumptions, two hypotheses
Toward Green Advertising were formulated, as follows:
Hypothesis 2: Consumers who demonstrate conservation behav‑
iors tend to be skeptical toward green advertising claims.
Hypothesis 3: Consumers who engage in green buying behaviors
tend to be skeptical toward green advertising claims.
Bearing in mind the significance of some demographic
variables, the inclusion of gender in this study also seems rel-
evant. Most studies focused in this area tend to point out that
women may have different attitudes toward green advertising
than men. For instance, Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey (1995)
found that for females, green buying behavior is positively
associated with “the belief that advertising is insulting . . . sug-
gesting that women who tend to buy green are more skeptical
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

concerned do not consider green advertising as convincing


toward advertising. . . . men’s skepticism towards advertis-
but rather exaggerated, suggesting that advertising should be
ing appears to be unrelated to their green buying behavior”
ethical, legal, true, and honest, and inform the public about
(1995, p. 80). Haytko and Matulich’s (2008) study indicated
the environmental aspects of the products offered.
that women tend to be more environmentally conscious and
Newell, Goldsmith, and Banzhaf (1998) tried to prove that
have more positive attitudes toward both advertising and
the higher the level of a consumer’s environmental concern, the
products designated as “green.” Based on this evidence, it is
more likely it would be that he or she would perceive claims as
proposed that:
misleading and false. However, in their specific research, they
concluded that the level of environmental concern had little Hypothesis 4: Women are more skeptical toward green advertis‑
effect on the degree of deception perceived in an ad. By this, ing than men.
the authors suggest the inclusion of the variable environmental
knowledge to study the ability to detect misleading claims. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Thus, it seems important to verify whether a positive or
negative relationship between environmental concern and Data were used from a questionnaire, which had already been
skepticism toward green advertising does exist, that is, does it designed and implemented for a wider international study.
hold that the more environmentally concerned an individual The survey took the form of a structured questionnaire,
is, the more skeptical he or she will be toward green claims? consisting mainly of closed questions, covering two main
Hence, we posit our first hypothesis: sections: attitudes/behaviors and generic variables related to
the respondents’ milieu and demographics. It was pretested
Hypothesis 1: Environmentally concerned consumers tend to be
by a group of 20 individuals to identify any language and
more skeptical toward green advertising claims.
comprehension problems.
The high degree of skepticism demonstrated by consumers A total of 320 questionnaires were randomly distributed to
toward environmental claims that appear in labels and in ads students attending a Portuguese university (the final sample
(influenced by the practice of “green washing” from some orga- consisted of 301 individuals). The sample comprises university
nizations that persist in disseminating incomplete or even false students, not just for a matter of convenience, but also because
information), limits some environmental behaviors related to this target group will play a crucial role in the development of
conservation activities (recycling, energy saving, preservation an environmentally conscious population, providing a possible
of resources, etc.) and green product buying (Mohr, Eroglu, “snapshot” of future society in terms of green behavior. This
and Ellen 1998). Consequently, Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey generation of young people is likely to be better informed
(1995) suggest that consumers interested in the purchase of about and concerned with social issues, particularly environ-
green products are generally skeptical toward advertising in mentalism. They also represent a significant part of the green
general. Laroche, Bergeron, and Barbaro-Forleo (2001) add market (Furlow and Knott 2009).
that consumers tend to form skeptical attitudes toward green The questionnaire was designed to include several scales
advertising, which can represent a type of risk avoidance in the (see the Appendix), all well established in the literature,
purchasing of green products. Thus, we would expect that the to enable information to be gathered about attitudes (New
lack of confidence in environmental claims would reveal itself Environmental Paradigm), behaviors (ENVIROCON and
Winter 2012  151

Ecologically Conscious Consumer Behavior), and perceptions Multiple regression analysis was carried out in addition to
about green advertising (Skepticism Measure). Finally, some the study of the determining coefficients and simple correla-
questions to gather demographic information (age, gender, tion. To see whether functional relationships could be inferred
course, and year of frequency) were included. between the dependent variable (SCE) and the independent
The scales make reference to four dimensions or constructs: variables (EC, CB, and BB), it was necessary to ensure that
the model assumptions were valid. Hence, verification was
• Environmental concern (EC) includes concerns related to
performed to see whether the errors reported an average null
the limits to growth, pollution, steady-state economy,
measurement and constant variance, whether they followed a
and resource conservation (Dunlap and Van Liere
normal pattern of distribution (by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov
1978). This scale was used in subsequent research
test), and whether there was error independence (using the
by Van Liere and Dunlap (1980) and Straughan and
Durbin-Watson test). As the model assumptions were verified,
Roberts (1999).
the model was deemed valid across all variables analyzed. The
• Conservation behavior (CB) is related to conservation
analysis performed is shown in Table 1.
activity and comprises a broad range of items: dispo-
Analysis of the determining coefficient, R2, in which
sitional activity, recycling of nondurable goods and
R2 = .141, enabled us to affirm that 14.1% of the variation
packaging, preservation of resources, attitude toward
in the dependent SCE variable was explained by the EC, CB,
packaging, and so forth (Pickett, Kangun, and Grove
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

and BB independent variables, with the remaining variation


1995).
explained by factors beyond the scope of the model. The simple
• Buying behavior (BB) covers topics such as purchasing
correlation coefficient (R = .375) demonstrated that there was
green products, the attention given to packaging, ener-
a positive, but low correlation between the variables; that is,
gy-efficient equipment, polluting or recycled products
they tended to vary in the same direction, meaning that, on
(Schuhwerk and Lefkokk-Hagius 1995; Straughan and
average, any rise in the independent variables caused a rise in
Roberts 1999).
the dependent SCE variable.
• Skepticism (SCE) measures skepticism toward environ-
To undertake analysis of model variance, an F test was ap-
mental claims in marketers’ communications regarding
plied with its associated determined p‑value of .000. Testing
perceived exaggerations, misleading/confusing informa-
of the regression coefficient b1 was provided by the t‑student
tion, and the perception of truth in ads and packages
test, which generated a p‑value of .000 for EC, .216 for CB,
(Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen 1998).
and .149 for BB. These results indicated that the independent
The data was statistically analyzed and interpreted using EC variable only significantly affected the dependent SCE
the statistical software SPSS, version 19.0. Descriptive analysis, variable. The value of the regression coefficient was negative
variance analysis, multiple regression, and correlation analysis (b1 = –.352) and represents a unit of variation in the EC varia-
were used. tion estimated for the SCE variation as 35.2%.
To test the last research hypothesis, an analysis of variance
RESULTS was performed to see whether there were significant differ-
ences between men and women concerning skepticism toward
The sample had an age average of 22 years (mode 20; stan- environmental claims (see Table 2).
dard deviation 4.731; minimum 17; maximum 50). Half The results indicated that there are no significant differ-
were male, and the majority studied business and economics ences between men and women regarding their skepticism of
(29.6%), sports (16.9%), and engineering (16.6%). About environmental claims exhibited in packages or ads. This was
28.9% were attending the first year in university, 38.2% the evidenced not only in each item of the scale individually, but
second, and 30.2% the third, mainly at the undergraduate also in the total construct. If we simply consider the analysis of
level (85.7%). the means, however, it is possible to see that men are slightly
To test the first three research hypotheses, multiple regres- more skeptical than women.
sion was used to analyze the effect of environmental concern
(EC), conservation behavior (CB), and buying behavior (BB) on DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
skepticism toward environmental claims (SCE). To check the
reliability of the scales, Cronbach’s α coefficient was estimated. This research sought out to analyze the relationship between
The usual threshold level is .7 for newly developed measures environmental concern (EC), conservation behavior CB, buy-
(Nunnally 1978). In our case, values ranged from .70 to .90: ing behavior (BB), and the skepticism toward environmental
EC = .807, CB = .712, BB = .895, and SCE = .707. Therefore, claims present in adverting (SCE).
the scales may be considered as reliable and have a good level The findings demonstrated that only 14.1% of the skep-
of internal consistency. ticism can be explained by the three variables of the model
152  The Journal of Advertising

TABLE 1
Multiple Regression Analysis (EC, CB, BB, and SCE)

Model R R2 R2adj σ[

.375a .141 .132 1.04114

Analysis of variance

SQ df QM F Significance

Regression 52.824 3 17.608 16.244 .000b


Error 321.940 297 1.084 — —
Total 374.764 300 — — —

Coefficients

Coefficient σ t Significance

Constant 6.153 .454 13.539 .000


EC −.352 .077 −6.325 .000
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

CB −.090 .082 −1.239 .216


BB .104 .067 1.478 .140
Notes: EC = environmental concern; CB = conservation behavior; BB = buying behavior; SCE = skepticism toward environmental claims.
a
Predictors: (Constant), BB, EC, CB.
b
Dependent variable: SCE.
α = .05.

TABLE 2
ANOVA (Skepticism Versus Gender)
Sum of Mean
Scale of SCE Mean/SD squares square F Significance

Most environmental claims on package M(3.326, 1.278) .139 .139 .078 .780
labels or presented in advertising are F(3.369, 1.388)
true. (R)
Because environmental claims are M(2.993, 1.580) 1.611 1.611 .669 .414
exaggerated, consumers would be better F(2.847, 1.524)
off if such claims on package labels or in
advertising were eliminated.
Most environmental claims on package M(4.306, 1.548) 4.825 4.825 1.844 .175
labels or in advertising are intended to F(4.052, 1.679)
mislead rather than inform consumers.
I do not believe most environmental M(3.556, 1.594) .041 .041 .016 .899
claims on package labels or presented in F(3.532, 1.595)
advertising.
Skepticism (total scale). M(3.545, 1.104) .679 .679 .542 .462
F(3.450, 1.131)
Notes: ANOVA = analysis of variance; R = reverse; M = male; F = female.

(EC, CB, and BB). This allows us to attest to the existence study, and at the same time, a future line of investigation
of a relationship between the variables EC, CB and BB, and whose aim would be to discover other variables that could
SCE. However, variations in SCE are not entirely explainable better explain skepticism toward green adverting in order
by EC, CB, and BB, which may represent a limitation of this to improve our proposed model. In fact, the more significant
Winter 2012  153

and higher correlation was between conservation behavior and variety of contexts, including one related to the environment.
buying behavior (.640), followed by the correlation between Thus, it can be argued that media exposure is an important
skepticism and environmental concern (–.366). predictor of purchase intention, and therefore, communication
The results of the multiple regression analysis point to the should be carefully planned to avoid causing skepticism and
acceptance of the first hypothesis formulated and to the rejec- reluctance among consumers.
tion of H2 and H3. For H1, the statistical test was significant, While green consumers may be more receptive to green
which indicates that the most concerned consumers are, in marketing and advertising than others, managers should be
fact, the most skeptical toward green communication. This is careful not to push them away by using ambiguous, confus-
in line with D’Souza and Taghian’s (2005) results: Consum- ing, or even false messages. However, Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen
ers who are more environmentally concerned do not consider (1998) state that skepticism is healthy to a certain point, that
green advertising convincing. This contrasts with Newell, is, the consumer should be skeptical about those areas where
Goldsmith, and Banzhaf’s (1998) finding that a consumer’s there is a potential to mislead. In this case, public policy action
level of environmental concern has little effect on the degree in the form of additional regulation or consumer education
of deception perceived in an ad. may be called for. Global governmental institutions should
The nonsignificance of the statistical tests performed to continue to be involved in regulating misleading advertising,
test H2 and H3 lead us to reject these. Thus, it seems that and in the development of more creative and effective solutions
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

behaviors related to environmental conservation activities and to the market dysfunction that may characterize this type of
buying behaviors are not good predictors of SCE. It would environmental regulation. This is also a wonderful opportu-
be expected that the skepticism toward environmental claims nity for companies, together with nonprofit organizations, to
would be related to environmental behaviors and the buying educate and train consumers in order to provide them with
of green products, which did not happen in this research. the tools that will allow them to distinguish between real and
However, Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey (1995) and Laroche, false environmental claims.
Bergeron, and Barbaro-Forleo (2001) found opposite results. Because this research is exploratory in nature, there are
Thus, this nonsignificant result of the relationship between some limitations that should be considered that may affect
environmental behaviors and skepticism toward green adver- the generalization of the findings. The first is the use of a con-
tising may indicate that consumers who are skeptical of such venience sample of university students. This comes with the
claims can, even so, perform and participate in green activities usual set of caveats, particularly in the study of the relation-
and buy environmentally friendly products. Mohr, Eroglu, and ship between environmental attitudes and buying behaviors.
Ellen (1998) state that many consumers are by nature skepti- Another possible limitation was the choice of the specific scales
cal of advertising claims unless they have reliable bases for used to measure the constructs of our research model.
evaluating the claims. In some cases, what seems to happen In terms of future lines of investigation, we recommend
is that consumers are not entirely influenced by companies’ investigating the development of a structural equation model
communication claims. that could reflect the relationships and interdependencies
To check the significance of gender in relation to skepti- among different constructs, as well as the study of skepticism
cism toward green advertising, an analysis of variance was in greater detail. Specifically, future research should seek to
carried out and the results point to the rejection of H4. In understand how skepticism might change according to the
contrast to Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey (1995) and Haytko type of media used in green communication.
and Matulich (2008), this research found no significant dif- All these results reinforce the importance of marketers’
ferences between men and women. Nevertheless, according understanding of the issue. They should ask: Why is there
to Shrum, McCarty, and Lowrey (1995), green advertising still skepticism? Why are so many people still suspicious of
should pay attention to detail, since green consumers do so. green claims?
Advertisements should display a true and accurate message,
with plausible arguments, using print media more than REFERENCES
audiovisual media to better target women, the group most
likely to buy “green.” Females usually believe that audiovisual Ajzen, I. (1985), “From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of
media, in general, and television, in particular, are less cred- Planned Behavior,” in Action Control: From Cognition to Be‑
havior, J. Kuhl and J. Beckman, eds., Heidelberg: Springer,
ible than other media.
11–39.
Related to the issue of type of media is media exposure. ——— (1988), Attitudes, Personality and Behavior, Stony Strad-
Qader and Zainuddin (2011) found that the repetition of a ford: Open University Press.
message, its consistency over time, and congruence can help Awad, T. A. (2011), “Environmental Segmentation Alternatives:
shift public opinion over the long term. In this way, all tacti- Buyers’ Profiles and Implications,” Journal of Islamic Market‑
cal processes can help to change attitudes and behaviors in a ing, 2 (1), 55–73.
154  The Journal of Advertising

Banerjee, S., C. Gulas, and E. Iyer (1995), “Shades of Green: A Murphy, R., M. Graber, and A. Stewart (2010), “Green Market-
Multidimensional Analysis of Environmental Advertising,” ing: A Study of the Impact of Green Marketing on Consumer
Journal of Advertising, 24 (2), 21–32. Behavior in a Period of Recession,” Business Review, 16 (1),
Carlson, L., S.J. Grove, and N. Kangun (1993), “A Content 134–140.
Analysis of Environmental Advertising Claims: A Matrix Newell, S.J., R.E. Goldsmith, and E.J. Banzhaf (1998), “The
Method Approach,” Journal of Advertising, 22 (3), 27–39. Effect of Misleading Environmental Claims on Consumer
———, ———, ———, and J.  M. Polonsky (1996), “An Perceptions of Advertisements,” Journal of Marketing Theory
International Comparison of Environmental Advertising: and Practice, 6 (2), 48–59.
Substantive Versus Associative Claims,” Journal of Macro‑ Nunnally, Jum C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, New York:
marketing, 16 (2), 57–68. McGraw-Hill.
Cohen, D.S. (1991), “The Regulation of Green Advertising: The Ottman, J.A. (1998), Green Marketing: Opportunity for Innovation,
State, the Market and the Environmental Good,” Pace Law 2d ed., Chicago: NTC Business Books.
Faculty Publications, paper no. 421, available at http:// Paço, A., and M. Raposo (2009), “‘Green’ Segmentation: An Ap-
digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawfaculty/421/ (accessed June 5, plication to the Portuguese Consumer Market,” Marketing
2012). Intelligence and Planning, 27 (3), 364–379.
D’Souza, C., and M. Taghian (2005), “Green Advertising Effects ———, and L. Varejão (2010), “Factors Affecting Energy Saving
on Attitude and Choice of Advertising Themes,” Asia Pacific Behaviour: A Prospective Research,” Journal of Environmental
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 17 (3), 51–66. Planning and Management, 53 (8), 963–976.
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

Dunlap, R.E., and K.D. Van Liere (1978), “The New Environ- Phau, I., and D. Ong (2007), “An Investigation of the Effects of
mental Paradigm,” Journal of Environmental Education, 9 (4), Environmental Claims in Promoting Messages for Cloth-
10–19. ing Brands,” Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 25  (7),
European Commission (2008), “Attitudes of European Citizens 772–788.
Towards the Environment Report,” Special Eurobarom- Pickett, G.M., N. Kangun, and S. J. Grove (1995), “An Examina-
eter 295/ Wave 68.2—TNS Opinion & Social, Brussels, tion of the Conservative Consumer: Implications for Public
March. Formation Policy in Promoting Conservation Behavior,”
Fishbein, M., and I. Ajzen (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and in Environmental Marketing: Strategies, Practice, Theory and
Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Reading, Research, Michael J. Polonsky and Alma T. Mintu-Wimsatt,
MA: Addison-Wesley. eds., New York: Haworth Press, 77–99.
Furlow, E.N. (2010), “Greenwashing in the New Millennium,” Pranee, C. (2010), “Marketing Ethical Implication and Social
Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 10 (6), 22–25. Responsibility,” International Journal of Organizational In‑
Furlow, N., and C. Knott (2009), “Who’s Reading the Label? novation, 2 (3), 6–21.
Millennials’ Use of Environmental Product Labels,” Journal Qader, I.K.A., and Y.B. Zainuddin (2011), “The Impact of Media
of Applied Business and Economics, 10 (3), 1–12. Exposure on Intention to Purchase Green Electronic Prod-
Grillo, N., J. Takarczyk, and E. Hansen (2008), “Green Advertis- ucts Amongst Lecturers,” International Journal of Business
ing Developments in the U.S. Forest Sector: A Follow-up,” and Management, 6 (3), 240–248.
Forest Products Journal, 58 (5), 40–46. Scammon, D., and R. Mayer (1995), “Agency Review of Environ-
Hakkert, R., and R.G.M. Kemp (2006), “An Ambition to Grow a mental Marketing Claims: Case-by-Case Decomposition of
Multidisciplinary Perspective on the Antecedents of Growth the Issues,” Journal of Advertising, 24 (2), 33–43.
Ambitions,” SCALES report, Zoetermeer, June. Schuhwerk, M., and R. Lefkokk-Hagius (1995), “Green or Not-
Haytko, D.L., and E. Matulich (2008), “Green Advertising Green? Does Type of Appeal Matter When Advertising
and Environmentally Responsible Consumer Behaviors: a Green Product?” Journal of Advertising, 24 (Summer),
Linkages Examined,” Journal of Management and Marketing 45–55.
Research, 7 (1), 2–11. Shrum, L.J., J.A. McCarty, and T.M. Lowrey (1995), “Buyer
Iyer, E., and B. Banerjee (1993), “Anatomy of Green Advertising,” Characteristics of Green Consumers and Their Implica-
in Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 20, Leigh McAlister tions for Advertising Strategy,” Journal of Advertising, 24
and Michael L. Rothschild, eds., Provo, UT: Association for (2), 71–82.
Consumer Research, 494–501. Smith, J., D. Terry, A. Manstead, L. Winnifred, and D. Kotter-
Kilbourne, W.E. (1995), “Green Advertising: Salvation or Oxy- man (2008), “The Attitude-Behavior Relationship in
moron,” Journal of Advertising, 24 (2), 7–19. Consumer Conduct: The Role of Norms, Past Behavior,
Laroche, M., J. Bergeron, and G. Barbaro-Forleo (2001), “Target- and Self-Identity,” Journal of Social Psychology, 148  (3),
ing Consumers Who Are Willing to Pay More for Environ- 311–333.
mentally Friendly Products,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, Straughan, R.D., and J.A. Roberts (1999), “Environmental
18 (6), 503–520. Segmentation Alternatives: A Look at Green Consumer
Mohr, L.A., D. Eroglu, and P.S. Ellen (1998), “The Development Behavior in the New Millennium,” Journal of Consumer
and Testing of a Measure of Skepticism Towards Environ- Marketing, 16 (6), 558–575.
mental Claims in Marketers’ Communications,” Journal of Van Liere, K.D., and R.E. Dunlap (1980), “The Social Bases of
Consumer Affairs, 32 (1), 30–55. Environmental Concern: A Review of Hypotheses, Expla-
Winter 2012  155

nations and Empirical Evidence,” Public Opinion Quarterly, Zinkhan, G.M., and L. Carlson (1995), “Green Advertising and
44 (2), 181–197. the Reluctant Consumer,” Journal of Advertising, 24  (2),
1–5.

APPENDIX
Environmental concern (EC)

Plants and animals exist primarily to be used by humans. (R)


We are approaching the limit of the number of people that the earth can support.
To maintain a healthy economy, we will have to develop a steady-state economy where industrial growth is controlled.
The earth is like a spaceship with only limited room and resources.
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 05:39 06 October 2014

Humans need not adapt to the natural environment because they can model it to suit their needs. (R)
There are limits to growth beyond which our industrialized society cannot expand.
The balance of nature is delicate and easily upset.
When humans interfere with nature, it often produces disastrous consequences.
Humans must live in harmony with nature in order to survive.
Mankind is severely abusing the environment.
Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs. (R)
Humankind was created to rule over the rest of nature.

Conservation behavior (CB)

How often do you separate your household garbage (i.e., glass, papers) for either curbside pickup or to take to the nearest recycling center?
How often do you use reusable containers to store food in your refrigerator rather than wrapping food in aluminum foil or plastic wrap?
How often do you conserve water while washing dishes?
How often do you conserve energy by turning off light switches when leaving a room, turning down the thermostat when leaving home, and so
forth?
How often do you conserve water while brushing your teeth, shaving, washing your hands, bathing, and so forth?
When disposing of durables such as appliances, furniture, clothing, linens, and so forth, how often do you either give that item to someone else,
sell it to someone else, or donate the item to a charitable organization?
How often do you refuse to buy products that you feel have extensive packaging?

Buying behavior (BB)

I try to buy energy-efficient products and appliances.


I avoid buying products that have excessive packaging.
When there is a choice, I choose the product that causes the least pollution.
I have switched products/brands for ecological reasons.
I make every effort to buy paper products made from recycled paper.
I use environmentally friendly soaps and detergents.
I have convinced members of my family or friends not to buy some products that are harmful to the environment.
Whenever possible, I buy products packaged in reusable containers.
I try to buy products that can be recycled.
I buy high-efficiency light bulbs to save energy.

Skepticism (SCE)

Most environmental claims on package labels or presented in advertising are true.


Because environmental claims are exaggerated, consumers would be better off if such claims on package labels or in advertising were eliminated.
Most environmental claims on package labels or in advertising are intended to mislead rather than inform consumers.
I do not believe most environmental claims on package labels or presented in advertising.

S-ar putea să vă placă și