What We Believe Is Not Always What We Do: An Empirical Investigation into Ethically Questionable Behavior in Consumption

This article presents the results of an empirical study which argues that ethical judgment is not sufficient, by itself, to explain ethically questionable behavior in consumption. The study adopts Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior and presents results from a self-completion survey questionnaire covering five scenarios describing ethical consumer dilemmas. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess measurement structures, and the proposed model was estimated using logistic regression. Three antecedents, namely Social Norm (an extension of the construct of Subjective Norm), Perceived Behavioral Control, and Perceived Unfairness are found to have a significant and positive impact on intention to engage in ethically questionable behavior. The finding that Perceived Unfairness has a significant impact is of particular interest, implying that the perception of an unfair relationship with a supplier will increase the probability that a consumer would consider behaving unethically. The results also suggest that intentions to engage in ethically questionable behavior vary across different situations. Firms seeking to proactively broach discourses with stakeholders will inevitably need and want to understand further the whole range of consumer perceptions toward business. In other words, to take note not only of what consumers believe in, but equally what they do and choose to act upon.