Bachelor Thesis, 15 credits, for a
Bachelor of Science in Business Administration:
International Business and Marketing
Spring 2016
What if ethical buying behavior leads to
boycotts?
The buying behavior of Generation Z
Filip Helmersson and Amanda Svensson
School of Health and Society
Author
Filip Helmersson and Amanda Svensson
Title
What if ethical buying behavior leads to boycotts?
The buying behavior of Generation Z
Supervisor
Karin Alm
Examiner
Jens Hultman
Abstract
The care for the environment has been a hot topic during the last fifteen years. Ecological and Fairtrade
products made from sustainable materials and methods can be found in almost every store. It seems
like awareness regarding our environmental impact has increased and therefore changed our purchase
behavior. The awareness has also created pressure on the companies to behave in an ethical manner,
if the consumers feel that their ethical needs are not acknowledged, they will tend to stop purchasing
products from that company. In this new aware society there is a new player that in a few years will
make up the new buying force. Generation Z is individuals born after 1995 and is expected to bring new
demands to the market. The purpose of this thesis is to study if ethical products and ethical
consumption have an effect on the buying behavior of Generation Z. To better understand if the ethical
awareness affect the purchase behavior of Generation Z and if they are willing to boycott companies
that misbehaves, theory within the fields of CSR, consumer behavior and ethical consumption has been
collected to form questions for a survey. The findings show that the ethical awareness do not affect the
purchase behavior of Generation Z, however there is discovered attributes such as ethical profile that
affect the frequency of purchases. The findings also show that Generation Z will actively boycott a
company if that company misbehaves.
Keywords
CSR, Ethical consumption, Generation Z, Consumer behavior, Boycott, Ecologic and Fairtrade
Acknowledgements
Firstly,wewouldliketothankoursupervisorKarinAlmforpushingustobebetterand
forherdedicationandexpertise.
Secondly,wewouldliketothankPernillaBroberg,PierreCarbonnier,TimursUmansand
JaneMattisson-Ekstamfortheirexpertiseinstatistics,surveymethodandlinguistics.
Thirdly, we would like to thank the teachers at Söderport and Wendes High School for
lettingusconductoursurveyandtherespondentsforansweringthesurvey.
Lastly,Wewouldliketothankbothourfamiliesandfriendsfortheirsupportduringthis
hecticspring.Weareallinthistogether!
Kristianstad,26thMay2016
FilipHelmersson
AmandaSvensson
Tableofcontent
1.Introduction................................................................................................................................7
1.1Background.........................................................................................................................................7
1.2Problematization............................................................................................................................10
1.3Purpose...............................................................................................................................................11
1.4Researchquestion..........................................................................................................................11
1.5Outline................................................................................................................................................12
2.Theoreticalframework.........................................................................................................13
2.1Corporatesocialresponsibility..................................................................................................13
2.1.1.Stakeholderpressure..........................................................................................................................14
2.2Consumerbehavior........................................................................................................................14
2.2.1Ethicalconsumption.............................................................................................................................16
2.2.2Generationaldevelopment...............................................................................................................17
2.3Conceptualframework..................................................................................................................18
3.Theoreticalmethod................................................................................................................20
3.1Researchethics,approachanddesign.....................................................................................20
3.2Choiceofmethodology..................................................................................................................21
3.3Choiceoftheory...............................................................................................................................22
4.Empiricalmethod....................................................................................................................24
4.1.Researchstrategy...........................................................................................................................24
4.2Theliteraturesearch.....................................................................................................................24
4.3Choiceofrespondents...................................................................................................................25
4.4Datacollectionmethod.................................................................................................................26
4.4.1Pilottest.......................................................................................................................................................26
4.4.2FieldCollection........................................................................................................................................26
4.5.Operationalization.........................................................................................................................27
4.5.1Dependentvariables............................................................................................................................27
4.5.1.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases....................................................................................................................28
4.5.1.2Boycott....................................................................................................................................................................28
4.5.2Independentvariables........................................................................................................................28
4.5.2.1Ethicalawareness...............................................................................................................................................29
4.5.3Controlvariables....................................................................................................................................29
4.5.3.1Gender.....................................................................................................................................................................29
4
4.5.3.2Education...............................................................................................................................................................29
4.5.3.3KnowledgeofCSR...............................................................................................................................................29
4.5.3.4Higherawarenessthanparents...................................................................................................................30
4.5.3.5Importantfactorswhenpurchasing...........................................................................................................30
4.5.3.6Trustablesources...............................................................................................................................................30
4.5.3.7Ethicalprofile.......................................................................................................................................................30
4.6.Dataanalysis....................................................................................................................................31
4.7.Statisticalloss..................................................................................................................................31
4.8.Reliability&validity.....................................................................................................................32
4.9.Generalizability..............................................................................................................................33
4.10.Ethicalconsiderations...............................................................................................................33
5.Analysis.......................................................................................................................................34
5.1Descriptivestatistics......................................................................................................................34
5.2Cronbach’sAlpha.............................................................................................................................35
5.3Testofnormality.............................................................................................................................37
5.4Spearman’scorrelationmatrix..................................................................................................37
5.5Multipleregression........................................................................................................................38
5.5.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases......................................................................................................40
5.5.2Tendencytoboycott.............................................................................................................................41
5.6Concludingdiscussion...................................................................................................................42
6.Discussionandconclusion...................................................................................................43
6.1Discussion..........................................................................................................................................43
6.2Thestudy’scontributions.............................................................................................................45
6.2.1Theoreticalcontributions.................................................................................................................45
6.2.2Empiricalcontributions.....................................................................................................................46
6.3Limitations........................................................................................................................................46
6.4Futureresearch...............................................................................................................................46
6.5Concludingcomments...................................................................................................................47
References......................................................................................................................................48
Appendix1–SwedishQuestionnaire....................................................................................52
Appendix2–EnglishQuestionnaire.....................................................................................56
Appendix3–Regression:frequencyofethicalpurchases.............................................60
Appendix4–Regression:tendencytoboycott..................................................................60
5
Listoftables
5.1Gender……………………………………………………………………………………………………..34
5.2Program…………………………………………………………………………………………………..34
5.3Descriptivestatistics……………………………………………………………………………….35
5.4Cronbach’salpha
5.4.1Ethicalawareness……………………………………………………………………………..36
5.4.2Tendencytoboycott1……………………………………………………………………….36
5.4.3Tendencytoboycott2……………………………………………………………………….36
5.4.4Ethicalprofile1…………………………………………………………………………………37
5.4.5Ethicalprofile2…………………………………………………………………………………37
5.5Testofnormality…………………………………………………………………………………….37
5.6Spearman’scorrelationmatrix………………………………………………………………..38
5.7Regressionfrequencyethicalpurchases…………………………………………………40
5.8Regressiontendencytoboycott………………………………………………………………42
6
1.Introduction
Global warming has been a hot topic for the last fifteen years and today Fairtrade food
andproductsmadefromecologicalmaterialscanbefoundinalmosteverystore.Itseems
like the awareness is increased due to companies’ active work with corporate social
responsibility(CraneandMatten2010).Consumersalsohavearesponsibilityandneedsto
makechoiceswhilepurchasinganditisdebatedifdifferentgenerationsmakepurchases
differentfromanethicalperspective(Crane&Matten,2010;Carrigan,Szmigin&Wright,
2004).Inthischapterthebackground,problematization,researchquestionandresearch
purposeofthisstudyisdescribed.Thepurposeofthissectionistogiveaninsightintothe
problemandanoverviewofthisdissertation.
1.1Background
Consumersarebecomingmoreandmoreawareofwhattheyconsumeandwhatkindof
impact their consumption have on the environment and the society at large (Crane &
Matten,2010).Inthe1970sFriedmandiscussedthebeginningofincreasingawareness
and consumers demand for companies to take larger responsibility. The corporate
climatewaschangedandcompaniesstartedtodevoteincreasinglymoreresourcesinto
a sustainable course of business and developed corporate social responsibility (CSR)
(Friedman, 1970). 40 years later Low and Davenport (2007) argue that consumers
knowmoreandareactivelymakingpurchasechoicesto“shopforabetterworld”.CSR
isnolongerjustcreatingvaluefortheshareholdersbutalsoforthestakeholders(Crane
& Matten, 2010). Stakeholders today can put more pressure on companies which has
ledtothattheyhavetobemorecarefulanduseethicsintheirbusinessstrategy(Crane
& Matten, 2010). Reasons for the increased CSR work can be consumers increased
awarenessofconsumersimpact,theirecologicalfootprint(Low&Davenport,2007).To
motivateconsumerstomaketherightchoicesisaquestionofhowtheirbehaviorisand
how they act regarding ethical products. According to Auger and Devinney (2007)
consumersin2007werecharacterizedasconsumerswhosaidthatCSRaffectedtheir
purchase behavior but when they actually made a purchase CSR was not noticeable.
From a corporate perspective in the beginning of the 1970s Friedman (1970) argued
thattopleasetheshareholdersethichadtobecomeapartofthecorporateclimatesince
the company with the better CSR activity would gain an advantage against their
7
competitors when competing for consumers and gain more profit, but also to respect
thelegalaspects(Friedman,1970).CSRdevelopedandfortyyearslaterdiscussesCrane
and Matten (2010) that the consumers are important in this relatively new CSR
environment. Since consumers are more aware of what they buy, they will do active
choices to avoid companies that offer products that do not live up to the ethical
standards that they expect (Crane & Matten, 2010). To make a better choice about a
purchase, information has to be collected, when consumers collect information about
products,theirattitudeandperceptionofthesocialcontextdevelopsandthebehavior
changes (Newholm & Shaw, 2007). According to Belk (1975) consumer behavior is
affectedofsituationalvariables,dependingonhowconsumersactindifferentsituations
their behavior changes. Hence the situation of global warming can have changed the
consumers’behaviorinpurchasesandbuyingdecisions(Belk,1975).
Thedefinitionofethicalconsumersisthattheyareknownforbuyingthegreenestand
mosthumanesolution,theyalsoconsiderotherlivingbeingswhenpurchasing(Crane&
Matten,2010).FreestoneandGoldrick(2008)definetheethicalconsumerasaperson
whosupportsgreatergoodsthatmotivateconsumers’purchases.Theethicalconsumer
avoidsproductsthat:
‘‘endanger the health of the consumer or others; cause significant damage to the environment
during manufacture, use or disposal; consume a disproportionate amount of energy; cause
unnecessary waste; use materials derived from threatened species or environments; involve
unnecessary use or cruelty to animals [or] adversely affect other countries’’ . (Freestone &
Goldrick,2008,P.446)
NewholmandShaw(2007)arguethatethicalconsumptionstartedinthelastquarterof
the20thcentury.Today,ethicalconsumptionhasdevelopedanditcanbedescribedasa
consumercultureofethicalconsumersthatobtainanidentitythroughtheirpurchases,
which also is a part of their moral self-realization (Crane & Matten, 2010). The
consumption of ethical products and services has increased dramatically during the
21stcentury.In1999astudyconductedbytheInstituteofGroceryDistribution(IGD)
in 2008 showed that 25 percent of adults in the UK had made a purchase primarily
becauseofethicalreasons.Thesamestudyshowedthatthisnumberhadincreasedto
50percentamongadultsintheUK(InstituteofGrocerieDistribution,2008).Further
8
on, consumers need information to make a ‘’green decision’’, only then can they put
pressureonmanufacturesandretailers(Crane&Matten,2010).
The phenomenon of ethical consumption might take a new form in a couple of years.
Becker writes for Veckans Affärer the 24th February 2016 that the buy force is
estimated to shift to the younger generations as soon as 2018. The company KPMG
explains in their KPMG View (2016) that the new generation that will make up the
futurebuyingforceisGenerationZborn1995orlater,whichisthegenerationthatwill
takeoverfromtheMillenials.MillenialsisdescribesasthelategenerationYthatisborn
between1982-1994andisknownforbeingengagedinthesociety(KPMGView,2016).
Because of this upcoming shift in the buying force, Generation Z becomes the largest
stakeholderanditis,thereforehighlyrelevanttoidentifythedifferentgenerationsand
theircharacteristics(Schlossberg,2016).FurthermoreTwenge,FreemanandCampbell
(2012) claim that Generation Y unlike Generation Z is showing a declined interest in
saving the environment, showing less concern for others and possesses lower civic
engagement.
Changes regarding behavior have been noticed among teenagers born 1995 or later
compared to earlier generation (KPMG View, 2016). Generation Z will do things in a
different way than Generation Y would have done. Generation Z is characterized by
ErnstandYoung(2015)asconsumersthathaveexperiencedalotintheirbrieflifetimes
andhaveencounteredpolitical,social,technologicalandeconomicalchanges.Theyare
more self-aware and are thereby putting larger emphasis on their role in the world
since they understand their responsibilities and want to improve in the larger
ecosystem (Ernst and Young, 2015). Schlossberg (2016) writes in the article “Teen
Generation Z is being called 'millennials on steroids,' and that could be terrifying for
retailers”forBusinessInsiderUKontheeleventhFebruary2016thattheGenerationZ
areindividualsbornintheInternetage.TheInternetageenablesthemtoaccessand
spread information quicker than any generation before them and therefore making
them a new challenge for companies to handle. Generation Z is a challenge since it
appears that they have a changed behavior compared to earlier generations
(Schlossberg, 2016). The changed behavior can lead to changes in consumption
behavior of the teenagers that just reached age of majority. Regularly there is an
9
uncertaintyofhowthenewgenerationwillreactonethicalpurchasessincethepriceis
not an equally dominant factor, they have higher expectations, no brand loyalty and
caremoreabouttheexperience(Schlossberg,2016).
1.2Problematization
PreviousresearchdiscussesthatCSRisanimportanttopicandthatitwillhaveaneven
greater impact in the future (Klein, Smith & John 2004; Crane & Matten, 2010;
Eisingerich,2011).CSRhasdevelopedfrombringingvaluetoshareholderstoacertain
action performed by companies that consumers value as an important factor when
deciding which products to buy (Friedman, 1970 and Crane & Matten, 2010). Giesler
and Veresiu (2014) state that CSR is the reason for the rise of popularity in ethical
productsandanincreasedawareness.Eisingerich,Rubera,SeiferandBhardwau(2011)
agreewithGieslerandVeresiu(2014)andcontinuebyarguingthatconsumersintheir
day-to-dayconsumptionaremoreawareandmakedecisionsfrommoreenvironmental
and social concerns. The awareness and knowledge of environmental causes make
consumersimportantsincetheymakethechoiceswhenpurchasing.CraneandMatten
(2010) state that the ‘’consumers are king’’, without supporting consumers the
companycansufferabadimageandnosoldproducts(p.68).
CraneandMatten(2010)explainsthatethicalconsumptioncanbeanumbrellatermfor
responsestocompanieswithpoorsocial,ethical,orenvironmentalrecords.Itisknown
that ethical consumers will buy products, which are the greenest or offers the most
humanesolutionandtheymostlyfocusonthelargerissuesconcerningtheirpurchase
(Godson, 2013). Crane and Matten (2010) argue that the personal moral beliefs and
valuesareconsideredtobethechoicetomakeconsciousdecisionssuchaschoosinga
fairtrade labeled chocolate instead of a non fairtrade chocolate. Crane and Matten
(2010)continuesbydiscussingthatethicalconsumerscanbeextremeintheirbehavior
andactouttheirdisappointmentthroughboycottingtoopenlyshowtheircommitment
for environmental awareness. Klein et al. (2004) discussed the consumers’ reason for
boycottingasacontributiontothesocietybuttofeelbetteronanindividuallevel.The
powerthatboycottinghavecanstrengthenCraneandMattens’(2010)argumentofthe
concept that consumers actions towards companies are important. They continue by
stating that the ethical consumer considers other living beings in the decision-making
10
and he or she values the companies’ impact highly (Crane & Matten, 2010). Due to
increasedethicalconsumptionitisinterestingtoseeiftheknowledgeincreasesdueto
time. The earlier generations X and Y is well researched in the fields of CSR and
consumer behavior, but how will the next generation namely Z act upon future
purchasesfromanethicalperspective.GenerationZissaidtobemoreself-awareand
maintain understanding of their role in the world, therefore it is important for
companies to understand Generation Z before they control the market (KPMG View,
2016).
Thediscussionabovedemonstratesthatcompaniesknowabouttheearliergenerations
butaretheyreadyforhowthenewGenerationZwillfunction.Existingresearchargues
that the awareness of ethical consumption is increased and develops due to time, in
alignment with the statement; awareness could be even bigger in the coming
generations(Eisengerichetal.,2011;Giesler&Veresiu,2014).Thereforethereisagap
intheresearchofhowthenextgenerationispredictedtoactuponethicalconsumption.
There are different traits that characterize Generation Y and Generation Z and make
them more or less interesting to investigate. The attributes of Generation Y are well
researched and they are defined as a generation that does not care that much about
saving the environment, even if they are said to be more social aware (Twenge et al.,
2012;Parment,2013).ThereforeitisinterestingtotrytounderstandhowGenerationZ
functionsandhowtheyarepredictedtofunction.Thediscussionabovehasresultedin
thefollowingpurposeandresearchquestion.
1.3Purpose
Thepurposeofthisthesisistostudyifethicalproductsandethicalconsumptionhave
aneffectonthebuyingbehaviorofGenerationZ.
1.4Researchquestion
How will ethical products such as Fairtrade and ecological products affect the early
GenerationZs’buyingbehavior?
11
1.5Outline
This thesis consists of six sections. The first section presents the background and
problematization,whichresultsinapurposeandresearchquestion.Thissectionsends
withtheoutlineofthethesis.InthesecondsectionthehistoricdevelopmentofCSRis
presented followed by stakeholder pressure and consumer behavior. The section
continues with a presentation of ethical consumption and generational development.
The second section ends with a brief summary and a presentation of the conceptual
framework, where the formulation of hypotheses is presented. The third section
presents the research ethics, approach and design, which is followed by the choice of
methodology and choice of theory. In the fourth section the empirical method is
presented. The section contains the research strategy, literature search, choice of
respondents, data collection method and an operationalization of the concepts. It is
followedbydataanalysis,reliabilityandvalidity,generalizabilityandthesectionends
with ethical considerations. The fifth section presents the results from the survey and
theempiricaldataisanalyzed.Thissectionalsopresentsthetestingofhypothesesand
itendswithasummaryoftheresults.Thesixthandfinalsectionofthisthesispresents
a discussion and conclusion, as well as the contributions. The section ends with
limitations,suggestionsforfutureresearchandconcludingcomments.
12
2.Theoreticalframework
Inthissectionthetheoreticalframeworkispresented.Thetheoreticalframeworkincludes
thehistoricaldevelopmentofCSRanditsdefinition,followedbythedevelopmentofethical
consumptionandconsumerbehavior.Theprogressofgenerationalchangesinconsumer
behaviorisalsopresented.
2.1Corporatesocialresponsibility
ThehistoryofCSRisnotrelevantfortheanalysisitself,butitisimportanttoknowand
understand the changes in the development of the concept CSR. Corporate social
responsibilityasaconceptwasintroduced1970byMiltonFriedman,whoarguedthat
thesocialresponsibilitiesofbusinessesonlywereinusetoincreaseprofitandcoverthe
legalaspects.Theresponsibilitiesonlysupportedtheshareholderstogainmore,while
theenvironmentwasnotinfocus(Friedman,1970).NineyearslaterexplainedArchie
B.Caroll(1979)thethree-dimensionalmodelofsocialresponsibilitiesthatcompanies
hadtowardssociety.Themodelconsistedoffoursteps;thetwofirststepsofthefigure
are based on what society required as economic and legal responsibilities. The third
stepiswhatsocietyexpectsfromcompaniessuchasethicalresponsibilities.Thefourth
step is discretionary responsibilities, which at time was uncertain since it was
voluntary. In 1991, Caroll refined the model and the fourth step discretionary
developedandbecamephilanthropy,whichisdesiredbysociety.Themodelbecamethe
pyramid of corporate responsibility with steps of what is required, expected and
desired by the society. The pyramid showed that the stakeholders have an important
role in CSR (Caroll, 1991). The development of the fourth step may suggest that the
interest and awareness for CSR has increased over time, since it is something that is
desired by society. Another twenty years later Aksak, Ferguson and Duman (2014)
arguethatCSRischangedduetocontext,eraandculture,thereforeitisachallengeto
define.CSRimpliesseveralapproachesandisdifferentdependingonwherecompanies
work,whomtheywanttoreachouttoandwhichagegrouptheywanttoattain.Inthis
thesis CSR will be defined as what companies do to make the society better, or what
they try to do (Crane & Matten, 2010. Due to increased awareness and consumer
shoppingforabetterworlditisdemonstratedthatCSRhashadanimpact(Eisingerich
etal.,2011).
13
2.1.1.Stakeholderpressure
Inthepasttheshareholderswerethedominantpartythatcompanieshadtoanswerto,
butwiththeincreasedethicalconsumption,consumershavebegantotakeupmoreand
more demanding space as stakeholders (Jamali, 2007). According to Spiller (2000),
therearesixmainstakeholdergroups,whicharecommunity,environment,employees,
customers, suppliers and shareholders. These six groups have then been assigned
severalkeybusinesspracticesthatareimportantforeachstakeholder.Theconsumers,
accordingtoSpiller(2000),haveseveraldemandingfactorssuchastruthfulpromotion,
consumer dialogue and most relevant to this thesis, environmentally and socially
responsible product composition. Other connected stakeholders such as environment
include waste management, energy conservation and environmental requirements for
suppliers. The community is another stakeholder, which demand generous financial
donations, support for education and job training programs, support for the local
community and disclosure of environmental and social performance (Spiller, 2000).
Withseveralstakeholderstorelatetoitisdifficulttoevaluatewhichstakeholderisthe
most important one to please (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001). Carrigan and Attalla (2001)
continuebysayingitisdifficulttomakereliableethicaljudgmentsthatavoidharming
stakeholdersinterestortoachieveequalgoodforallstakeholders.CarriganandAttalla
(2001) continue with this statement by saying that all stakeholders matter but the
difficultyliesinbalancingtheimportanceofeachindividualstakeholder.Tobattlethis
problem, companies have begun to selectively prioritize their different stakeholders
according to instrumental and/or normative considerations. This is also due to
companies’limitationofresources,thusavoidingproducingeverytypeofethicalvalue
foreverystakeholder(Jamali,2007).Inthisthesistheconsumeristhemostimportant
stakeholder,thereforethefollowingwillexplainconsumerbehavior.
2.2Consumerbehavior
Fahy and Jobber (2012) state the importance for companies of understanding the
consumer and to understand the consumers’ behavior is beneficial to know how
consumers make purchases. Consumer behavior is studied from economical,
psychological,sociologicalandculturalperspectives(Fahy&Jobber,2012).Smith,Van
BaarenandWigboldus(2005)arguesthatconsumers’behaviorsismodifiedduetothe
situationstheyareactinginandthattheyareunconsciousofhowtheymakedecisions
14
ofwhattopurchase.Theycontinuebydiscussingthattheawarenessofwhatproductto
purchase depends on the price and what value it bring the consumer. To make a
decisiontheconsumerprocessinformationfromearlierpurchasesandknowledge.To
makeapurchaseisalsoasocialgameofseeingwhatothersdoandwhichbrandsare
accepted by society (Smith et al., 2005). In consumer behavior the act of mimicking
othersisanimportantfactor,itcanbewhatcelebritiesarebuyingorwhatsomeonein
the local store buys (Smith et al., 2005). According to Fahy and Jobber (2012)
consumerswillseekforinformationbeforeapurchasesinceitisimportanttomakethe
rightchoices.FahyandJobber(2012)agreeswithSmithetal.(2005)thatitdependson
whatkindofpurchaseitis,forexampleahabitualpurchaseisdeemedlessimportant
regardingethicalconcerns.Thelevelofinvolvementisalsoasignificantfactorthatin
situations can be seen as an extreme behavior, which can result in boycotts (Fahy &
Jobber, 2012). Further, consumers have a responsibility since they can demand more
and pressure companies to do better; therefore their behavior is important for
companies(Crane&Matten,2010).
Kleinetal.(2004)discussthatanincreasedinvolvementincompanies’actionssuggest
that consumers can use more extreme methods to show their disagreement to
companies and their products, one way is through boycotting. The authors define
boycotting as a part of consumer behavior and it occurs when companies fails at
sustaining a sufficient consumer focus. There are four factors that make consumers
boycott; the first is the desire to make a difference. This factor is to make the firms
changetheirtargets,behaviorandbeliefthateachboycottercancontributetoachieve
the collective goal. The second factor is self-enhancement that focuses more on the
individual boycotter to boost the self-esteem and make themselves feel good about
them, also to be admired by other consumers. The third factor is counter arguments
that inhibit boycotting and highlights that the cost of helping others increases and
helping decreases. Embedded in the third step are the free riders that believe their
partition will not have an impact and change the company so they choose to not
participate. The last and fourth factor is the cost of boycotting, which is whether
individualslooseorwinwhentheyboycottcertainproductsthathavebeenincludedin
theirusualconsumption.Kleinetal.(2004)continuesbysayingthatconsumerswitha
stronger relation to the company with bad social responsibility are more likely to
15
boycott.CraneandMatten(2010)andKleinetal.(2004)areinanagreementthatthe
consumershavethepowertomakeachange.Kleinetal.(2004)alsoclaimsthatwomen
aremoreinclinedtoboycottproductsiftheyarenotsatisfiedwiththeirethicalneeds.
DuetogreaterpublicattentiontoCSR,consumersarefunctioningasamechanismfor
socialcontrolandthededicationhasledtoahigherrelevanceforboycotts.Femalesare
not only more willing to boycott products, they are also more concerned about CSR
issuesandethicscomparedtomales(DelMarAlonso-Almeida,Navarrete&RodriguezPomeda, 2015; Arlow, 1991). Crane and Matten (2010) states that the consumers are
king and they can affect the companies to be more CSR oriented. Öberseder,
SchlegelmilchandGruber(2011)contradictsthatconsumersdonotcareifcompanies
have CSR or not but that firms are increasingly engaging in their work with CSR and
howtocommunicateittoconsumers.CSRonlyplaysaminorrolewhenconsumersare
deciding what to purchase, despite their interest in making the world better. Lee and
Shin (2010) disagree and state that consumers understanding of CSR will affect their
purchases.Öbersederetal.(2011)arguethatifconsumersareawareofwhatCSRis,it
can lead to a changed behavior in the decision making process and products from
sociallyresponsiblecompanieswillbepurchased.Ingeneral,consumersarenotaware
of what CSR is and there is lack of understanding. According to Auger and Devinney
(2007)consumersareawareofethicalpurchasesandCSR,theyevensaythattheyare
willing to pay more for it, but it is not shown in their purchase behavior. Further, the
authors state that individual consumers have an important role through their daily
buying decisions (Auger & Devinney, 2007). The consumers’ way of affecting a
company’s responsibilities is to pressure the company and demand more ethical
productsthereforethenextchapterwilldescribeethicalconsumption.
2.2.1Ethicalconsumption
Ethicalconsumptionischoosingthemosthumanesolutionofproductsapproachandto
notharmotherlivingbeings(Crane&Matten,2010).Arecentstudyconductedin2015
by Shaw, McMaster and Newholm showed that the respondents cared about ethical
issues in their everyday life and shopping. This mindset among consumers has been
present during several years; a study conducted in 1996 found out that 50 percent of
consumers would stop doing business with a company if the company behaved in an
unethicalway(Carrigan,Szmigin,&Wright,2004).Thisshowsthatconsumershasbeen
16
actively aware that some companies behave in an unethical way and that they would
makeanactivechoicewhenpurchasing.However,consumers’statethatethicsmatter
whenmakingapurchase,ithasbeenshownthatethicscouldbecompromisedifthey
desire to buy a particular product (Carrigan, Szmigin, & Wright, 2004). According to
Irwin (1999), this does not occur due to neglect for ethics, it is merely a conflict
between how much the consumer desires a certain product and how much the
consumeriswillingtobendtheethics.Thiscouldbeduetoadesireforlowerpricesor
brandedfashion,thustrumpingtheethicaldesire(Irwin,1999).PelligrinoandFarinelli
(2009) state that additional attributes such as ethical purchases are made for safety,
taste and environmental protection. Even if the consumer cares about ethics when
making purchases, studies have shown that the consumer needs to have a direct and
personal link to a specific ethical problem before they indulge in an ethical purchase
behavior(Boulstridge&Carrigan,2000).Anotherstudyconductedin2001showedthat
respondents were tolerant of poor ethics if those particular ethics were viewed as
normal in the host country. With this mindset, consumers could accept that factory
workers abroad earn below the subsistence level, if that is considered normal in that
particularcountry(Carrigan&Attalla,2001).Althoughsomecompaniesareeffectiveat
writing and communicating their ethical progression, a research has shown that
consumers do not rely on a company’s own statements (Carrigan, Szmigin, & Wright,
2004). Carrigan et al. (2004) continues by saying that company literature, PR and
advertising are seen as less credible sources for ethical consumers. Crane and Matten
(2010)addressthattheethicaldecision-makingcandependongeneraleducationand
upbringing, it is argued to be unclear but differences exist. Ethical consumers can be
both old and young; therefore will the next chapter present the generational
development.
2.2.2Generationaldevelopment
InaccordancewithEisingerichetal.(2011)theawarenessofethicalconsumptionhas
increasedovertimeandtounderstandwhy,ithastobeknownhowearliergenerations
have acted. Parment (2013), researched the generation Baby boomers, which is
individuals born 1945- 1958. The author later compared the baby boomers with
generation Y, which contains individuals born 1977-1989. The segmentation of
generations can be different. Eastman and Liu (2012) define the Baby boomers as
17
individuals born between 1946-1964, Generation X born between 1966-1985 and
GenerationYbornbetween1986-2005.InthisthesistheyearsofgenerationYissetto
begin 1982 and end at 1994, where Generation Z then will take over (KPMG View,
2016).
The generation segments are distinguished by different characteristics, the Baby
boomerissaidtobeindependentandindividualistic(Eastman&Liu,2012).Generation
X is described as highly educated and with knowledge of technology. Generation Y is
claimedtobethefirsthigh-techgenerationandasmoresociallyaware(Eastman&Liu,
2012).Twengeetal.(2012)disagreesthatGenerationYwouldbemoresociallyaware
and argues that the commitment of helping the society will decrease with the later
generations,thereforetheyarecallinggenerationYthe‘’GenerationMe’’.Twengeetal.
(2012)continuesbydiscussingifthenextgenerationwillbe‘’GenerationWe’’butitis
stillunknownhowGenerationZwillactandthereareonlypredictions.Freestoneand
Goldrick(2008)statesthatconsumersarereadytoputtheirmoneywherethemorals
aresincetheyarehighlyawareoftoday’sethicalissues.Parment(2013)claimsthatthe
purchase behavior of the individual is correlated to which generation they belong.
Twengeetal.(2012)writesthattheconcernforotherssuchashavingempathyforoutgroups, make charity donations, the importance of having a job worthwhile to society
have declined slightly. He concludes by stating that the future generation Z can have
threeoutcomes,thecontinuingofGenerationMe,nochangeoranewGenerationWe.
2.3Conceptualframework
Our chosen theory has steered the formulation of the hypotheses below. The
hypotheses in their turn will determine the empirical material collected. Lee and Shin
(2010) state that consumers understanding will affect the consumers purchase
behavior. Shaw, McMaster and Newholm (2015) showed that the respondents cared
about ethical issues in their everyday life and shopping. The mindset that ethical
awarenessaffectstheconsumptionbehaviorofindividualshasbeenshowninprevious
studies,suchasastudyconductedin1996,whichshowedthat50percentwouldalter
their consumption pattern with respect to ethical issues. All these theoretical
standpoints make it appropriate to ask if Generation Z´s ethical awareness will affect
theirpurchasepatternofethicalproducts.Therefore,thefollowinghypothesishasbeen
18
constructed:
Hypothesis 1: Increased ethical awareness will not affect Generation Z´s consumption of
ethicalproducts.
The level of involvement is a significant factor that in situations can be seen as an
extreme behavior, which can result in boycotts (Fahy & Jobber, 2012). Further,
consumershavearesponsibilitysincetheycandemandmoreandpressurecompanies
to do better; therefore their behavior is important for companies (Crane & Matten,
2010).Kleinetal.(2004)discussthatanincreasedinvolvementincompanies’actions
suggestthatconsumerscanusemoreextrememethodstoshowtheirdisagreementto
companiesandtheirproducts,onewayisthroughboycotting.Asshowninthetheory
thereisatendencytoboycottifthecustomersdonotagreewithacompaniescourseof
actionortheirproducts.Therefore,itisrelevanttoinvestigateifGenerationZbehaves
inasimilarwayiftheydisagreewithacompany.Asaresultthefollowinghypothesis
hasbeenconstructed:
Hypothesis2:GenerationZconsumerswillnotboycottaproductifthecompanybehaves
inanunethicalway.
19
3.Theoreticalmethod
Thissectiondiscussesresearchethics,ourapproachandstudydesign.Thisisfollowedbya
discussionofourchoiceofmethodologyandtheory.
3.1Researchethics,approachanddesign
Thisstudywillbebasedonasurveythatwillbeconductedonindividualsbornin1997.
Theethicalreasonbehindthischoiceisthatindividualsbornin1997arethelatestage
groupthathasreachedtheageofmaturity.Whenindividualsreachtheageofmaturity
theycandecideiftheywishtoparticipateinasurvey.Ifthesurveyistobeconducted
onyoungerindividuals,thelegalguardiansmustmakethedecisionsastowhetherthe
children participate in the survey or not. As established by Denscombe (2014) it is
important that researchers respect the relevant laws and ethics while conducting a
study.
Thepurposeofthisthesisistostudyifethicalproductsandethicalconsumptionhave
aneffectonthebuyingbehaviorofGenerationZ.Bymakinghypothesesandtestingif
thereisacorrelationbetweenethicalconsumptionandage,itisnecessarytoemploya
deductiveapproach.PatalandDavidsson(2011)supportthisviewarguingthatscience
is expected to explain the cause-effect relationship and theory is the basis of
establishingsuitablehypothesesthatcanbetestedusingscientificmethods.
Theresearchdesignisdesignedtoprovideananswertotheresearchquestionandto
fulfillthepurposeofthestudy(Bryman&Bell,2015).Theresearchdesignthatwillbe
usedinthisstudyisacross-sectionaldesign,alsocalledasocialsurveydesign.Sinceit
isasurveywherethecollectionofdatawillbeconductedformorethanonecase,thus
making the survey according to a Cross-sectional design (Bryman & Bell, 2015). This
Cross-sectional design is also appropriate for this thesis since the study researches
several classes of teenagers that were born in 1997, these students are studying
business,society,orvocationalprogrammes.Thesurveyisperformedondifferentdates
buttherespondentsanswerthequestionnaireononeoccasiononlyaccordingtowhen
the classes were available. In accordance with a cross-sectional design the samples
werethuscollectedatthesametimesincethequestionnairewasansweredoncebythe
teenagers born in 1997. The answers were then compiled and possible relationships
20
between variables will be analyzed (Bryman & Bell, 2015). The research design is
based on whether it is a qualitative or a quantitative research. The following section
introducesourmethodology.
3.2Choiceofmethodology
At the beginning of a research project all researchers must analyze which research
approachthatwillbebesttofulfillthepurposeandthereforechoosebetweenusinga
quantitative or qualitative method. Bryman and Bell (2015) distinguish between the
methodsbystatingthataquantitativemethodemploymeasurementsandaqualitative
methoddoesnot.Ethicalconsumptionhasearlierbeenresearchedwiththeaidofboth
aqualitativeandaquantitativemethod.
Bryman and Bell (2015) argue that a quantitative method allows the researcher to
categorizepeopleanddefinedifferences,alsomeasuretheirattitude.Sincethepurpose
of this thesis is to study if ethical products and ethical consumption have an effect on
the buying behavior of Generation Z, it is appropriate to define and measure their
attitude and therefore, a quantitative research strategy is optimal for this study. The
surveywillbeconductedonteenagersborn1997.Allteenagerswillbeanonymousand
inaccordancewithaquantitativemethodthesamplewillbeanalyzedobjectively.Asa
counter argument the researcher still makes a selection of what will be analyzed
(Bryman & Bell, 2015). A quantitative method is useful for sampling and analyzes
greater data sets, which is appropriate for this study since a greater data set will
provideabroaderviewoftherespondent’sattitude(Bryman&Bell,2015).
One other argument for this study to use a quantitative research method is that
quantitativeresearchcanbeusedtogeneralizeandrepresentalargergroup(Bryman&
Bell,2015).SinceitisGenerationZthatistheselectedsampletheresultscanaimtobe
generalized with a quantitative method. Another reason for using a quantitative
approach is that the study can easily be replicated where researchers wish to study
anotherorthesamegeneration(Bryman&Bell,2015).Thereisalsothepositiveeffect
of gathering material in an objective way; viewing the material objectively maximizes
the chance of describing the material as closely to reality as possible (Bryman & Bell,
21
2015). To make the study credible the material needs to be based on theory. The
followingsectionpresentsourchosentheoryanditsrationale.
3.3Choiceoftheory
Bryman and Bell (2015) argue that concepts and theories are the start point of a
researchprojectandthattheresearchermaycollectdatatounderstandtheconnection
betweendifferentconcepts.Existingtheoriesareintroducedandexplainedinorderto
give the reader a clearer view of the concepts that is studied. CSR and consumer
behaviorwillbethemaintheoriesthatarebroughttogetherandconstitutetheconcept
ofethicalconsumption.CSRgivesmoreofafirm’sperspectiveonsocialresponsibilities
sinceitisastrategyforcompanies.TounderstandCSRfromaconsumer’sperspective
theconsumerbehaviorhavetobeequallyimportant.Thefirm’sperspectiveonCSRwill
not directly be discussed in this thesis. To understand CSR its history needs to be
discussed,thereforeFriedman’s(1970)theoryofCSRasastrategytomakeprofitand
Carroll’s (1979; 1991) model of what the society demands and desires. An historical
perspective is not relevant here. However, the evolution of CSR is important as
awarenessisraisedovertime(Eisingerichetal.,2011).Stakeholdersaretheoneswho
canputpressureonthecompanyandthemostimportantstakeholderinthisthesisis
theconsumer.
Consumer behavior is discussed and defined in order to understand how consumers
makepurchasesandwhatinfluencesthemtobuyacertainproduct.Generalknowledge
ofconsumerbehaviorissignificantforunderstandingethicalconsumerismandhowthe
ethicalconsumersfunction.Itisalsoofinteresttounderstandconsumerbehaviorwhen
tryingtoimposetheirwill.ForthisreasonwedrawattentiontotheworkofKleinetal.
(2004),whosetheoryofwhyconsumersboycottcertainproductsishighlyrelevantto
thepresentstudy.Weapplytheirtheoryconcerningethicalconsumptionandconsumer
behaviortoGenerationZtoseehowtheyarethinking.
Theevolutionofhowgenerations’ethicalawarenesshasdevelopedisasubjectthatis
limitedresearched.Thenewergenerationsissaidtobemoreethicalawareaccordingto
someresearches(Eisingerichetal.,2011;FreestoneandGoldrick,2008;Twengeetal.,
2012). Further information about Generation Z has been gathered through popular
22
press as The Economist and Veckans Affärer. The categorization of the generationgroups varies, which makes the categorization difficult. In this study Generation Z is
said to contain individuals born 1995 and forward based on the popular press KPMG
ViewbyKPMG(2016).Therearemostlypredictionsregardinghowthenextgeneration
will act compared to earlier generations. The collection of data to analyze the future
buyingforceispresentedinthenextsectionempiricalmethod.
23
4.Empiricalmethod
This section presents the research strategy, choice of respondents and data collection
method are presented they are followed by a demonstration of the operationalization of
the concepts, data analysis, reliability and validity, generalizability and ethical
considerations.
4.1.Researchstrategy
Research strategies come in several forms. Denscombe (2014) claims that there is no
right or wrong research strategy: a strategy can only be evaluated in relation to the
purpose of the study. Bryman and Bell (2015) argue that the research strategy is
dependentonhowthestudyisdesigned;thechoicespresentedareexperimental,crosssectional, longitudinal, case study and comparative. How the design is performed
indicatesifthestudyisaquantitativeoraqualitativeone.Denscombe(2014)presents
an alternative to the research strategies, which are survey, case study, experimental,
ethnographic,phenomenological,groundedtheory,actionresearch,systematicresearch
summary and method combinations. After reading about the several options one
particularstrategywaschosen.Wehaveoptedforaquantitativesurveysinceitisbest
suitable strategy for answering our purpose. Bryman and Bell (2015) describe the
strategy as a social survey carried out at a single point in time. Denscombe (2014)
describes a survey differently, presenting it as a way to measure aspects of social
phenomenaortrendsfollowedbythecollectionofdatathatleadstotheselectionofa
theory. Further, the research strategy does not only refer to the research philosophy,
approach, design and methodology described in section three above, but also a
presentationoftheresearchprocessasawhole.Thisisfollowedbyadescriptionofthe
researchprocess.
4.2Theliteraturesearch
To build a relevant and reliable theoretical framework the literature search has
primarilyconsistedofscientificarticles.Theresearchprocessstartedwithanextensive
searchofrelevantliteratureandscientificarticleswerefoundprimarilyinKristianstad
University’s search engine Summon@HKR. This uses several article databases. Our
focus has been on peer-reviewed articles. The key terms used were CSR, ethical
consumption, consumer behavior, stakeholder pressure and ethical consumer. These
24
were then used in combination with other search terms such as generational
differences, consumer pressure, ethical products, boycott and power of consumers to
findresearchpossibletoexplainifethicalproductsandethicalconsumptionaffectthe
buying behavior of Generation Z. The key terms have been used on their own and in
combination to provide a wider context of CSR, consumer behavior and ethical
consumption. A mixture of old and new articles has been searched for to get a wider
understandingoftheusedconcepts.Sinceethicalawarenessissuggestedtohavebeen
increasedovertimebotholdanewarticleshavebeenhelpful.Duringtheexplorationof
articlesallsourcesfoundwerecriticallyjudgedtothebestofourability,whichledto
the rejection of a number of sources on the grounds of the relevancy for our study,
numberofcitation,ifitispeerreviewedandwherethearticlehasbeenpublished.The
followingpresentsthechoiceofrespondents.
4.3Choiceofrespondents
According to Statistics Sweden 82 855 children were born in 1997 in Sweden, in this
study 108 individuals have responded (Statistics Sweden, 1998). The study is
conductedonSwedishteenagersborn1997,sincetheseareapartofgenerationZand
theyrecentlyreachageofmajority.Thereasonforchoosingteenagersborn1997isthat
theywererelativelyeasytoreachoutto sincetheystillareinHighSchoolanditwas
possibletovisittheHighSchoolsandmakethesurveyfacetoface.Denscombe(2014)
explains this procedure as a method, which enables the researcher to gather more
answers.Thesampleshouldbeabletorepresentthepopulation,butthereisnodefinite
answertohowbigthesamplemustbe(Bryman&Bell,2015).Thisstudyisbasedon
teenagersthatstudiesattwoofKristianstad’sHighSchoolsatSöderportandWendes.
Thesamplecoversbothvocationalanduniversitypreparatoryeducationstogetawider
understandinginattitudestowardsethics.SinceHighSchoolsinKristianstadhavebeen
usedthesamplingmethodcanbeidentifiedasconveniencesampling.Theconvenience
samplingimpliesthatthesampleiseasilyaccessedfortheresearcherbutitcancause
difficultiestogeneralize.Theprocessofreceivingresponsesfromthe108teenagershas
ledtothefollowingchapterwerethedatacollectionmethodwillbepresented.
25
4.4Datacollectionmethod
The first step in the data collection processwas to call and email High Schools within
Kristianstad and Hässleholm County. The subject of the thesis was described, which
university and which program we as authors study at. The High Schools were then
asked if a survey could be conducted during class time and only in classes containing
3rdyearstudentswhichiscontainingstudentsbornin1997.Weacknowledgethatthe
respondentgroupmayconsistofteenagersbornin1996and1998,beyondthedesired
targetgroupofteenagersbornin1997.Thisisduetostudents’abilitytoskiporrepeat
a year in school. It proved difficult to obtain any real commitments from the High
Schools since the responsible party was hard to locate. As a result, personal visits to
someschoolswereconductedinthehopeofgettingabetterresponse.Itproveddifficult
toconductsurveysonseveralHighSchoolssincethestudentshadnationaltestsduring
thattimeandalotofotherstudentshadaskediftheycouldconductasurveyduringthe
sameperiod.Twooutofthefiveschoolsagreedtocollaborate.Oneschoolallowedthe
surveytobepostedontheinternalnetworksothatthestudentscouldansweronline;
theothertwoschoolsweretoooccupiedtoallowasurveytobeconducted.Themain
goal was to conduct the survey in classrooms since it allows for better attention;
dedication and therefore more answers could be collected (Denscombe, 2014). Since
the teaching language in Swedish High Schools is Swedish, the survey was written in
Swedish(Appendix1)andthentranslatedintoEnglish(Appendix2).
4.4.1Pilottest
Before conducting the survey in the classrooms, a pilot test was completed with 3
individuals that match the research group of Generation Z. In this pilot test vague
questionsweredetectedandcouldbealteredsothattherespondentscouldunderstand
them better. A meeting was then scheduled with a lecturer at Kristianstad University,
who has considerable experience from conducting surveys. This meeting revealed
several possible improvements such as changing most of the questions to conform to
theLikertscale,whichfacilitatesanalysis.
4.4.2FieldCollection
AtameetingwiththeprincipalofC4HighSchool,anagreementwasreachedandthe
survey would be released on the schools Internet platform for students, however, the
26
survey was never released on the platform even though it was sent to the principal.
There was also a discussion with a teacher at the hairdresser program at Milner high
school. Unfortunately, a time for conducting the survey could not be found due to the
student’shecticschedule.DiscussionswereconductedwithprincipalsfromHässleholm
technical High School and Österäng High School since those schools have science
programs.However,thestudentsattheseschoolsweretobusywithnationaltestsand
other surveys. The survey was constructed on the premise that every school would
attend,thereforethesurveycontainsprogramsthatisnotrepresented.
Onthe29thAprilthefirstsurveywasconductedinoneclassonSöderportHighSchool.
Before the survey was answered, the students were informed about the topic of the
thesis, that the survey was voluntary and that every individual answering was
answeringthesurveyanonymously.Aftertheinformation,thesurveywashandedout
to the students and they could begin answering the questions. After the survey was
collected, a brief reminder of that the respondents could email if they wished to read
the completed thesis. On 3rd May a class was visited at Wendes High School and the
sameprocedureofexplainingtothestudentsaboutthetopic,voluntaryandanonymous
participation was followed. On 4th May, Söderport High School was visited again and
threedifferentclassesweresurveyed,thesameprocedureofexplainingtothestudents
aboutthetopic,voluntaryandanonymousparticipationwasfollowed.
4.5.Operationalization
Theprocessofoperationalizationimpliesconvertingconceptsintomeasures(Bryman
&Bell,2015).Thisstudyusesaself-completionquestionnairewherethequestionsare
constructed as indicators for being able to measure the chosen concepts. Most of the
questions measures attitude with the help of a Likert-scale. Bryman and Bell (2015)
describes the Likert-scale as a cluster of attitudes that can be investigated, in our
questionnaireaseven-pointscaleisused.Thefollowingwillpresenttheoperationalized
conceptsofthisstudyintheformofdependent,independentandcontrolvariables.
4.5.1Dependentvariables
The dependent variables in this study is how frequently the individual teenager and
theirfamiliespurchaseethicalproductsandthetendencytoboycott.
27
4.5.1.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases
The ethical consumer is said to consider each purchase, think about the impact they
haveandtoreducetheirecologicalfootprint(Low&Davenport,2007).Tobeanethical
consumer it is required that the consumer chooses the products that is most humane
and have least impact on other living beings (Crane & Matten, 2010). The process of
identifying the consumption of the individual teenager and of their families was
measured by asking how often they made purchases of ecological or/and Fairtraide
products.Itwasestimatedbyaseven-pointLikert-scalewhereonerepresentedrarely
and seven represented often. The frequency has been measure on both an individual
andafamilylevel.Thefamilylevelisusedsinceconsumerbehaviorisaffectedbywhat
othersdo,akindofmimicking(Smithetal.,2005).Howoftenthefamilymakesanethic
purchase was also added since most of the teenagers still live with their parents. The
teenagers and the parents can affect each other to make better choices. The
measurement will be positive towards ethics if the teenager and the family is
purchasingecologicalandFairtradeproductsfrequently,closertooften.
4.5.1.2Boycott
Theseconddependentvariableisthetendencytoboycott.Kleinetal.(2004)claimthat
this extreme method can convey the consumers’ disagreement to companies. The
consumershavethepowerandcanthereforechoosetonotbuyproductsfromacertain
companyiftheybehavebadly.Ifthepersonhasmoretendenciestoboycott,theperson
is meant to be more positive to ethics. The measurement is based on three questions
that mention scenarios where the individual have to estimate their attitude from the
seven-point Likert-scale where one represent disagree and seven represents agree. If
theteenageranswersagreeitismeasuredasmorepositivetendencytoboycott.
4.5.2Independentvariables
The dependent variable in this study is ethical awareness, which is divided in four
differentalternatives;poorworkingconditions,poormanufacturing,animaltestingand
environmentalhazardousspraying.
28
4.5.2.1Ethicalawareness
PelligrinoandFarinelli(2009)statethatattributessuchasethicalpurchasesaremade
for safety, taste and environmental protection. Therefore, four questions were
constructed which aimed to investigate how different safety and environmental
protectionattributesaffectedapurchasemadebytherespondents.Thesefourfactors
were; poor working relationship, poor manufacturing process, animal testing and
environmental hazardous spraying. The four factors were later constructed into one
variable, which measure ethical awareness. A higher score indicates a more positive
attitudetowardsethics.
4.5.3Controlvariables
The control variables in this study are important factors when purchasing both ethic
andnotethicproducts,howethicaltheteenagersare,gender,education,whichsources
theytrust,iftheteenagersknowwhatCSRisandiftheyaremoreawarecomparedto
theirparents.
4.5.3.1Gender
The first control variable that will be used is gender, since researches argues that
womenindulgemoreinboycottthanmen(Kleinetal.,2004).Itisalsosaidthatwomen
care more of CSR and ethics compared to men (Del Mar Alonso-Almeida et al., 2015;
Arlow, 1991). This could affect the answers and should, therefore, to be taken into
account. The question was dichotomous and the respondent could chose from girl or
boy.
4.5.3.2Education
Education will be used as the second control variable since it can influence the
individual on ethical decision-making. Morals can be changed due to upbringing and
general education, it is argued that it is unclear but differences can appear (Crane &
Matten,2010).Sinceeducationcanaffecttheanswers,thevariableisimportanttotake
intoconsideration.Thealternativegivencanbeseeninappendix2,question2.
4.5.3.3KnowledgeofCSR
Öbersederetal.(2011)statesthatifconsumersareawareofwhatCSRisitcanleadtoa
changed behavior in the decision making process and products from socially
29
responsible companies will be purchased. Therefore, the question asking the
respondentsiftheyareawareofCSRwasadded.Therespondentscouldchosebetween
yesorno.
4.5.3.4Higherawarenessthanparents
FreestoneandGoldrick(2008)statesthatconsumersarehighlyawareoftoday’sethical
issues. Additionally, Eisingerich et al. (2011) states that the awareness of ethical
consumption has increased over time. Twenge et al. (2012) discusses if the next
generation will be ‘’Generation We” Therefore the question of how the respondents
viewedthemselvesrelativetopreviousgenerationswereaddedintothequestionnaire.
ThequestionwasaddedintheformofLikertscale,whichenablesabetterdepiction.
4.5.3.5Importantfactorswhenpurchasing
Importantfactorswhenpurchasingecologicalproductsaresupportedbytheoryinthe
sense that Irwin (1999) states that lower prices and branded fashion are two factors
thatcoulddetermineifaecologicalpurchasesaremadeornot.PelligrinoandFarinelli
(2009) state that additional attributes such as ethical purchases are made for safety,
taste and environmental protection. These theoretical standpoints developed the
factors; price, quality, environmental impact, if it looks good, taste, which are used in
thequestionnaire.Onewasrepresentedoflessimportantandsevenimportant.
4.5.3.6Trustablesources
Carrigan, Szmigin, & Wright (2004) states that consumers do not rely on a company’s
own statements such as; company literature, PR and advertising. In reference to this
theory the trustworthiness of several sources were tested in the questionnaire. These
sourcesaremedia,companymarketing,familyandcelebrities.Onewasrepresentedof
lessimportantandsevenimportant.
4.5.3.7Ethicalprofile
ThelastcontrolvariablethatisusedistheethicalprofilewhereTheEthicalPositioning
Questionnaire (The EPQ) by Donelsen R, Forsyth (1980) has been helpful. The EPQ
consistoftwentystatementswheretherespondentshavetoestimateiftheydisagreeor
agreeonaseven-pointscale.Inourquestionnaire5statementswereusedandtheyare
30
constituted in question 16-20 (Appendix 2), these statements measures how ethic the
teenagersare.ThehighernumberoftheLikert-scalepresentstherespondentsasmore
positivetowardsethicsofquestion16-18.Thelasttwoquestionsofthequestionnaire
wereconstructedtomisleadtherespondents.Forthesequestionsthelowernumberof
theLikertscalerepresentsamorepositiveattitudetowardsethics.Thecontrolvariable
ethicalprofileisimportantforthestudysincethereisanabsenceofhowGenerationZ
isasethicalprofiles.
4.6.Dataanalysis
To analyze the data the statistical computer program SPSS was used. Firstly, a
Cronbach’salphatestwasdonetotesttheinternalreliabilityofthemeasures.Secondly,
a factor analysis was done to check if the questions are grouped in the right
components. Thirdly, a Spearman´s correlation matrix is used to find statistically
significant relationships between variables. The data is assumed to be non-normal
distributedduetothesamplesize.Finally,thehypothesesaretestedbymultiplelinear
regressions.Thehypotheseswillbeconsideredsupportedifthestatisticalsignificance
isp<0.10,whichoftenisusedinbusinessandadministrationresearch(Pallent,2013).
4.7.Statisticalloss
At the start of this study three hypotheses was formulated. The analyzed results from
SPSS showed that hypothesis three could not be answered, it was therefore, decided
thatthethirdhypothesiswouldberemoved.Theformulationwas:
• GenerationZwillnotdisregardethicsiftheydesiretobuyaparticularproduct.
Theproblemwithansweringthishypothesiswasthatthemeasurementsdidnotfitin
the context, so it was counted as a statistical loss. None of the formulated questions
were able to measure the third hypothesis, since they were formulated to measure if
ethicsisnotimportantwhenmakingpurchasesofaspecificproduct.
31
4.8.Reliability&validity
Reliabilityimpliesthatthestudyshouldgivethesameresultsifthesamesamplewas
administratedatsecondoccasion,whichwouldincreasethestabilityofthecompleted
survey(Bryman&Bell,2015).Italsoreferstothequestionstrustworthinessandhow
theanswersaremeasuredasifthechosenmeasurementsaresuitablefortheexamined
concepts (Djurfeldt, Larsson & Stjärnhagen, 2010; Bryman & Bell, 2015). Due to the
time limits during this study there is no possibility to conduct a replication. Validity
refers to the study of conceptual and theoretical relevancy, how well the questions
answer what is studied (Djurfeldt, Larsson & Stjärnhagen, 2010). In other words how
wellameasureofaconceptreallymeasuresaconcept(Bryman&Bell,2015).
In accordance with Denscombe (2014) the sampling should reflect the population for
thebestresult,thereforethesamplingshouldberandomlyselected.Thisstudyisbased
on convenience sampling. Convenience sampling makes it more difficult to generalize
andthereliabilitycanbeconsideredaslessreliable.Theselectionofrespondentswere
teenagers born 1997 and we are aware that the classes that were surveyed can have
consistedofteenagersborn1996and1998also.Therequirementforparticipatingthe
study was that the respondents had reached the age of majority. This can have
decreased the reliability since the examined sample is teenagers born 1997 selected
from Generation Z. Further, the respondents can have overestimated their attitude
towardsethicstoappearasamoreethical,ifthisisthecasetheresultcanhavebeen
affectedandthereliabilitywouldbedecreased.Ifaretestwouldhavebeenmadelike
Bryman and Bell (2015) suggest, the respondents would have knowledge of the
questioninadvanceandtheresultwouldbemisleading.
All 108 answers from the questionnaire have been collected and compiled manually,
thushavetheexcelfilebeencontrolledatseveraloccasionstoavoiderrors.Outofthe
108 answered questionnaires 106 have been completed and two were incomplete. To
assure the reliability of the measurements, they will be tested with Cronbach’s Alpha
before the analysis and the combination. Bryman and Bell (2015) describes it as
internal reliability, to investigate if the questions from the survey measure the same
concept,theresultofCronbachsalphaispresentedinTable5.4.1-5.4.5.Anacceptable
32
value of Cronbachs alpha should be higher than 0.7, thus is values below this also
acceptediftheyarenottosignificantlydeviant.
4.9.Generalizability
Thegeneralizationofthefindingsfromthisstudywillbelimitedduetogeneralizability
being restricted to the studied population (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Since the study is
conductedonindividualsbornin1997,thefindingscanonlybegeneralizedforthatage
groupandnotforGenerationZatlarge.Thesampleisalsoaconveniencesample,which
isproblematictogeneralize.Furthermore,sincethestudyisconductedinSwedenand
on Swedish individuals born in 1997, the findings can only be generalized to the
Swedishcontext.
4.10.Ethicalconsiderations
The ethical considerations in this thesis are based on four principles claimed by
Denscome (2014). The first principle is protection of the respondents, which includes
that the individuals will not be physical, psychological or personally harmed by
participating.Further,therespondentsshouldbeabletobenefitfromparticipatingin
thesurveyandwasthusofferedtoreceivethecompletedthesis.Inaccordancewiththe
first principle the respondents remained anonymous through the study and treated
accordingly to research ethics. The second principle is voluntariness, all of the
respondents were informed that to participate was voluntarily. The third principle is
thattheresearchwouldworkinanhonestandopenmannergiventhestudy,therefore,
a small presentation of the purpose was presented before the questionnaire was
handed out. The variables and findings have been objectively evaluated in an honest
manner.ThelastprinciplebyDenscombe(2014)istofollowthenationallaws,which
havebeentakenintoconsiderationwhenselectingthesample.Allrespondentshadto
have reached age of majority to participate without legal guardians permission. The
nextsectionwillpresenttheanalysisofthestudyandthetwohypotheses.
33
5.Analysis
In this section the outcomes of the survey are presented. First, a presentation of the
descriptivestatisticsisgiven.Thenthedependent,independentandcontrolvariablesare
presented. It is followed by the results of the correlation and linear regression test. This
chapterendswithasummaryoftheresults.
5.1Descriptivestatistics
In the following section descriptive statistics will be presented to enable a greater
understandingoftheconductedstudy.108respondentsansweredthesurveyfromthe
5 different classes that were visited. Out of 108 respondents, 106 surveys could be
collectedwithcompleteanswers.Twosurveyswereincomplete.Thetwosurveysthat
wereincompletearestillpartofthefinaldataanalysissincetheyonlyrepresent1.8%
oftheselectiongroupandwillthereforenothaveanegativeimpact,whichwouldjustify
aremovalofthosetwosurveys.Theyarestillincludedsincetheyhaveagreatimpacton
someimportantvariablessuchasEthicalprofileandthetendencytoboycott.Asseenin
table5.1,72oftherespondentswerefemaleand36oftherespondentsweremale.This
meansthattwothirdsoftheentirerespondentgroupisfemale.
Table&5.1&Gender
Frequency
Girl
72
Boy
36
Total
108
Percent
66,7
33,3
100
Therespondentswerethencategorizedintogroupsdependingonwhichprogramthey
studyattheirschool.Therespondentscouldchoosefromfivedifferentprograms.Three
different programs were represented. The programs children & leisure and society
were combined into the section other, as seen below in table 5.2. This was done to
createamorequantitativevariable.
Table&5.2&Program
Frequency
Other
44
Economy
64
Total
108
34
Percent
40,7
59,3
100
Intable5.3descriptivestatisticsfordependent,independentandcontrolvariablesare
presented. The minimum ranges from 1 to the maximum of 7, with small variations
depending on if the question used a Likert scale or not. The minimum of the control
variable ethical profile stands out with a minimum of 2.67, which indicate that the
ethicalprofileoftherespondentsishigh,evenatitslowestpoint.
Table&5.3&Descriptive&Statistics
N
Individual.frequency
106
Tendency.to.boycott
108
Ethical.awareness
106
Price
107
Queality
107
Environmental.impact
106
Looks.good
106
Taste
107
Ethical.Profile
108
Gender
108
Program
108
Media
108
Company.Marketing
108
Family
108
Celebrity
108
Minimum
1
1,67
1
1
1
1
1
1
2,67
0
0
1
1
2
1
Maximum
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
1
1
7
7
7
7
Mean
3,29
4,9877
3,1958
4,7
5,79
4,53
3,12
5,74
6,1204
0,33
0,59
3,39
3,4
5,4
2,97
Std..Deviation
1,597
1,23208
1,52167
1,844
1,499
1,774
1,829
1,65
1,0663
0,474
0,494
1,49
1,516
1,353
1,513
Themeanofthevariablesrangefrom1to7,exceptfromthecontrolvariablesgender
and program, which do not use a Likert scale. The variable ethical profile has the
highest mean of 6.1204, which indicate that the average ethical profile of the
respondentsisveryhigh.
5.2Cronbach’sAlpha
TheCronbach’sAlphameasurestheinternalreliabilityamongseveralquestions.When
computingseveralquestionsintoone,theCronbach’sAlphawillshowifthosequestions
measure the same thing and if it therefore can be used as a single variable. The first
Cronbach’s Alpha test was tested on question 4, which had four different factors
affecting if the respondents made a purchase or not. The variables poor working
relationships, poor manufacturing process, animal testing and environmental
hazardoussprayingweretestedtoseeifthesevariablescouldbecomputedintoone.As
35
shown in table 5.4.1, the Alpha value for these four variables were ⍺=0.899, which
indicate that the four variables could be computed into one single variable measuring
ethicalawarenessamongtherespondents. 5.4.1%Cronbach's%Alpha%Ethical%awareness
Cronbach's+Alpha
N+of+Items
0,899
4
The next set of questions that were tested with Cronbach’s Alpha was question 11
through 14. Question 11 measured the respondent’s perception of their ethical
awarenesscomparedtotheirparents.Questions12to14wereconnectedwithboycott.
The test was first done on the four questions together and as seen in table 5.4.2 it
resulted in the ⍺=0.553, which indicate that the four questions do not have internal
reliabilitytomeasurethetendencytoboycott.
5.4.2%Cronbach's%Alpha%Tendency%to%boycott%1%
Cronbach's+Alpha
N+of+Items
0,553
4
5.4.3%Cronbach's%Alpha%Tendency%to%boycott%2
Cronbach's+Alpha
N+of+Items
0,61
3
The test was then made on question 12 through 14. As seen in table 5.4.3 the ⍺=0.61
which indicate that the questions have a higher internal reliability. This enabled the
questions to be computed into one variable measuring the tendency to boycott. Thus
thetesthavealowervaluethanusuallyisaccepted,weasauthorsdecidedtouseitfor
measuringthetendencytoboycott.
The final set of questions tested with Cronbach’s Alpha were question 16 through 20
whicharequestionsregardingethicalstandpoints.Thetestwasconductedwiththefive
questionsandasseenintable5.4.4theCronbach’sAlphawasatalowresult,⍺=0.472,
whichindicatethattheinternalreliabilityamongthefivequestionsislow.
5.4.4$Cronbach's$Alpha$Ethical$profile$1
Cronbach's+Alpha
N+of+Items
0,472
5
5.4.5$Cronbach's$Alpha$Ethical$profile$2
Cronbach's+Alpha
N+of+Items
0,783
3
36
The test was conducted again on question 16 through 18 to see if those questions
measured the same thing. As seen in table 5.4.5 the ⍺=0.783, which indicate that the
three questions are internally reliable and the questions could be computed into one
variable measuring the respondents ethical profile. Question 19 and 20 was
misunderstoodandarethereforeseenasastatisticalloss.
5.3Testofnormality
To test if the data collected are normally distributed or not, a test of normality was
conducted.Asseenintable5.5thetestofnormalityshowedthatthevariableindividual
frequencyhasap-value=0.0<0.1=⍺,whichindicatethatthevariableisnotnormally
distributed.
Table&5.5&Test&of&Normality
Kolmogorov(Smirnova
Statistic
df
Individual9frequency
0,152
106
Tendency9to9boycott
0,083
106
Sig.
0
0,072
Shapiro(Wilk
Statistic
0,918
0,973
df
106
106
Sig.
0
0,029
Thetablealsodisplaysthetestthatshowsthatthevariabletendencytoboycotthasapvalue = 0.072 < 0.1 = ⍺, which indicates that the variable is not normally distributed.
Both these variables have a high number of respondents, which normally gives an
abnormaldistribution.
5.4Spearman’scorrelationmatrix
Spearmancorrelationmatrixspecifiescorrelationcoefficientsthatindicateifthereisa
relationship between two variables (Pallent, 2013). The indication explains if the
correlationcoefficientsrelationshipispositiveornegativeandthenumericvaluesshow
thestrengthoftherelationship.Thecorrelationcoefficientsinthisstudyarepresented
intable5.6.Thesignificantlevelusedinthisstudyis10percent,tofindindicationsof
relationships.
37
5.6$Spearman's$correlation$matrix
1
2
3
1 Individual3Frequency
2 Tendency3to3boycott
,463**
3 Ethical3Awareness
E0,058 E0,096
4 Price
E,234* E0,154
0,056
5 Quality
0,115
0,06
E0,062
6 Environmental3impact ,443** ,342** E0,046
7 Looks3good3
E0,074 E0,114
0,105
8 Taste
E0,009 E0,101
0,011
9 Ethical3Profile
,243*
,338** E0,167
10 Gender
E0,116
E0,09
0,047
11 Program
0,029 E0,177
0,125
12 Media
0,091
0,159 E0,072
13 Company3Marketing
E0,05
0,093 E0,082
14 Family
E0,036
0,12
0,015
15 Celebrity
E0,08
E0,17
0,065
**3Correlation3is3significant3at3the30.013level3(2Etailed).
*3Correlation3is3significant3at3the30.053level3(2Etailed).
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
,221*
E0,008
0,125
,308**
E0,109
0,054
E0,161
E0,021
0,02
0,135
0,052
,253**
E0,044
,416**
E0,143
,207*
0,133
0,164
0,188
0,122
E0,007
0,067
0,038
0,142
E0,156
E0,116
0,188
0,087
E0,006
0,056
0,149
E0,042
E0,044
E0,147
0,14
0,06
E0,07
0,162
E0,086
0,006
E0,079
0,101
0,057
0,044
E0,013
E,277**
E,210*
0,075
0,074
,267**
E0,004
,227*
E0,145
E0,012
E0,016
E,272**
E0,06
E0,165
E0,036
E0,046
,431**
,301**
,311**
,335**
,266**
0,166
15
The correlation matrix shows a significant positive relationship between the
frequenciesofhowoftentheindividualmakesanethicalpurchaseandthetendencyto
boycott.Itisalsoshownwhethertheindividualhaveanethicalprofile.Thefrequencyof
ethicalpurchasesisalsosignificantpositivecorrelatedwithenvironmentalimpact.The
tendencytoboycottshowsasignificantpositiverelationshiptowardsethicalprofileand
environmental impact. The price of ethical products is significant positive correlated
withqualityandtaste.
Negative relationships shown in the correlation matrix is that there is a significant
negativerelationshipbetweenpriceandonhowoftentheindividualmakepurchasesof
ethical products. The frequency of how often the individual make ethical purchases
show a significant negative relationship towards environmental impact. Further, the
correlation matrix shows significant positive and negative relationships between
controlvariables,thesecorrelationindicationsshownorelevancyforsupportingornot
supportingthehypotheses.Thecorrelationmatrixwillnotbethebasefortestingthe
hypotheses;insteaditwillbebasedonamultiplelinearregression,whichispresented
in the next section. The significant level for testing the hypotheses will be set at 10
percent.
5.5Multipleregression
Multiple regression is a collection of techniques to explore relationships between
dependent and independent variables (Pallent, 2013). The techniques are based on
correlationsandallowseveralsetsofvariablestobeinvestigatedatthesametime.The
38
multipleregressionwillshowinformationofthemodelasawholeandeachvariable’s
contributiontothemodel(Pallent,2013).
Inthisstudyastandardmultipleregressionisappliedwhichallowsfortheindependent
and control variables to be entered simultaneously into the equation. This study will
presenttworegressionssincethedependentvariablesofthetendencytoboycottand
how often the individual purchase ethical products are examined. It is suitable with a
standardmultipleregressionsincethesampleisofsufficientsizeandthescoresisnot
skewed.Thedependentvariablehowfrequenttheindividualmakesanethicalpurchase
islessskewedthanthetendencytoboycott.Itisalsoimportantthatmulticollinearityis
checked for. Multicollinearity can occur between independent variables and control
variablesbutalsobetweenthecontrolvariablesthemselves.Allmodelspassedthetest
of multicollinearity, since the VIF for how frequent individuals purchase ethical
productsliesbetween1.057and1.792seeappendix3.Forthetendencytoboycottthe
VIF lies between 1.052 and 1.802 see appendix 4. VIF values over 2.5 indicate
multicollinearity(Djurfeldt,Larsson,&Stjärnhagen,2010).
Beforetestingthehypotheses,allvariableswerecontrolledtoevaluatetherelevanceof
including or excluding them from the analysis. The control variables that remain are
price, quality, environmental impact, looks good, taste, ethical profile, gender,
education, trust to media, company’s marketing, family and celebrities. The excluded
onesaretheknowledgeofCSRandiftheteenagersconsiderthemselvesasmoreethical
aware then their parents. The dependent variables that remain are frequency of the
individuals ecological and Fairtrade purchases, and the tendency to boycott. The
dependent variable frequency of the family’s purchases is excluded. The excluded
variableswillnotbepresentedinthecontinuingofthisthesis.
Thehypothesestestedare:
•
Hypothesis 1: Increased ethical awareness will not affect Generation Z´s
consumptionofethicalproducts.
•
Hypothesis 2: Generation Z consumers will not boycott a product if the company
behavesinanunethicalway.
39
5.5.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases
The result of the multiple regression on the dependent variable how frequent the
individuals make ethical purchases is presented in table 5.7. Standardize Beta is
preferredtouseinsteadoftheunstandardized.ThestandardizedBetaisconvertedto
thesamescalesothevaluescanbecompared(Pallent,2013).
5.7Regressiontest.Frequencyofethicalpurchase
StandardizedCoefficients
Beta
t
Sig.
Constant
0,389
0,698
Ethicalawareness
0,033
0,373
0,71
Price
-0,261
-2,783
0,007
Quality
0,155
1,355
0,179
Environmentalimpact
0,361
3,637
0
Looksgood
-0,1
-1,094
0,277
Taste
0,098
0,941
0,349
EthicalProfile
0,188
1,949
0,054
Gender
-0,007
-0,078
0,938
Program
0,048
0,508
0,613
Media
0,035
0,332
0,741
CompanyMarketing
-0,126
-1,194
0,236
Family
-0,03
-0,301
0,764
Celebrity
-0,067
-0,67
0,505
AdjustedR²:0,254
VIFHighest:1,792
F-value:3,671
*p<0,05
**p<0,1
***p<0,001
To evaluate the model the adjusted R square is controlled. Adjusted R square is used
insteadofthenormalRsquaresinceitgivesamoretruevalueofthepopulation.When
testing the dependent variable frequency of ethical purchases 25.4 percent of the
variance is explained by the independent and control variables. The Coefficients
indicate which variables make a contribution to the dependent variable and the Beta
value indicates which variable that has the strongest unique contribution on the
dependentvariable.
The Beta value in this table indicates that the variable environmental impact has the
strongestuniquecontributiontothedependentvariablewithastandardizedBetavalue
40
of 0.361. The significant value of the variables contributing to the dependent variable
indicatesthattherearethreevariablesthathaveastatisticallysignificantcontribution
on the dependent variable. The first variable contributing is price with a significant
value of 0.007. The second variable contributing is environmental impact with a
significant value of 0.0. The third variable contributing is ethical profile with a
significant value of 0.054. The model including all of the independent and control
variables is significant at p < 0.05. Hypothesis one states that an increased ethical
awareness would not affect Generation Z’s consumption of ethical products. However,
theethicalprofilehasapositiveeffectonthefrequencyofethicalpurchases,whereas
the ethical awareness has no effect on consumption of ethical products. Therefore,
thereissupportforhypothesisoneanditisaccepted.
5.5.2Tendencytoboycott
Theresultfromthemultipleregressionofthetendencytoboycottispresentedintable
5.8.
5.8Regressiontest.Tendencytoboycott
Constant
Ethicalawareness
Price
Quality
Environmentalimpact
Looksgood
Taste
EthicalProfile
Gender
Program
Media
CompanyMarketing
Family
Celebrity
AdjustedR²:0,21
VIFHighest:1,802
F-value:3,102
*p<0,05
**p<0,1
***p<0,001
StandardizedCoefficients
Beta
t
Sig.
2,423
0,017
0,048
0,539
0,591
-0,119
-1,239
0,218
0,201
1,71
0,091
0,212
2,092
0,039
-0,131
-1,413
0,161
-0,082
-0,764
0,447
0,285
2,879
0,005
0,012
0,12
0,905
-0,152
-1,575
0,119
0,111
1,033
0,304
-0,062
-0,576
0,566
0,078
0,769
0,444
-0,161
-1,581
0,117
41
ThevarianceinadjustedRsquareinthedependentsvariabletendencytoboycottis21
percent explained by the independent and control variables. When looking at the
variables separately it is shown that the highest Beta value is found at the variable
ethical profile, with a Beta value of 0.285. Also shown in table 5.12 is the significant
value that indicates which variables have a statistically significant contribution to the
dependent variable. For the dependent variable tendency to boycott, there are three
uniquevariablesthatcontributetothedependentvariable.Thefirstvariableisquality
with a significant value of 0.091. The second variable is environmental impact with a
significantvalueof0.039.Thethirdvariableisethicalprofilewithasignificantvalueof
0.005.Themodelincludingtheindependentvariableandallofthecontrolvariablesis
significant at p < 0.05. Hypothesis two claims that Generation Z consumers will not
boycottaproductifthecompanybehavesinanunethicalway.Sincetheonlyvariable
measuringbadbehaviorfromcompaniesisenvironmentalimpact,whichissignificant
inthemodel,thehypothesistwoisnotsupportedandshouldberejected.Thefollowing
willgiveaconcludingdiscussionofthissection.
5.6Concludingdiscussion
Thissectionhasanalyzedtheresultsfromthesurvey,whichhaveresultedinfindings
thatethicalprofilehavethehighestmeanandtwothirdsoftherespondentsaregirls.
The regression test showed that hypothesis one is accepted and it can not be proven
that ethical awareness have an affect on the purchase behavior of Generation Z. The
regression test conducted on hypothesis two showed that hypothesis two is rejected
since it can be shown that unethical behavior performed by companies can affect the
tendency of boycott by Generation Z. Even if one hypothesis is accepted and one
hypothesisisrejected,therearemanyofthefindingsthatareofsignificanceandshould
be considered as findings of interest. Generation Z is considered to have high ethical
profiles,ethicalawarenesshadnosignificantimpactandtheyarereadytoboycottifa
company not behave in an ethical manner. These findings were then connected to
theorytherefore,willthenextsectiondiscussthefindingsandconcludethethesis.
42
6.Discussionandconclusion
In this final section a summary of the thesis and its findings are presented. It is followed by
the contributions. The section ends with limitations, suggestions for future research and
concluding comments.
6.1Discussion
Thethesisaimsatansweringtheresearchquestion:howwillethicalproductssuchas
FairtradeandecologicalproductsaffecttheearlyGenerationZs’buyingbehavior?Past
research has been used to conceptualize the consumption of Generation Z and their
behaviortowardsethicalproducts.TheresultsfromthesurveyshowsthatGenerationZ
isconsideredtohavehighethicalprofiles,whichindicatesthattheycarefortheimpact
the product they purchase have on the environment. The minimum value of ethical
profileis2.67outof7,whichgeneratesameanof6.1204outof7asshownintable5.3.
Thetendencytoboycottalsoindicatedvaluesabovemean.GenerationZ’smeanofthe
tendency to boycott is 4.9877 out of 7, which indicates that they are more ready to
boycott.
Theresultsaboveledtoasupportforthefirsthypothesis,thustheyarenotanethical
awaregeneration,whichcontradictsthatGenerationZshouldbethemostethicalaware
generation so far (Eisingerich et al., 2011). They are not affected to have a changed
buyingbehaviorforconsumptionofethicalproducts.Twengeetal.(2012)arguedthat
thenextgenerationcouldhavethreeoutcomesGenerationMe,nochangeorGeneration
We. The findings indicated that Generation Z highly care for ethics. According to
Twengeetal.(2012)individualswithhighercareforotherswillconsumemoreethical
products. The results show the opposite, Generation Z has high ethical concerns but
they do not show it in their consumption. Le and Shin (2010) claimed that an
understanding for CSR and ethical issues would increase the ethical consumption.
Ethicalawarenessdidnotshowsignificanceinthemodel,whichcanbeanexplanation
forwhyGenerationZdoesnotconsumemoreecologicalandFairtradeproducts.Auger
andDevinney(2007)arguedthatconsumersexpressthemselvestobemoreethicalbut
they do not show it when they make purchases. Further, the teenagers may bend the
ethics to make their purchases okay to not be ethical, which our study disagrees with
43
sincetheirethicalprofileishighandtheydocareforethics(Irwin,1999).Öbersederet
al.(2012)statethatiftheindividualreallywantsaproduct,ethicalissueswillnotbethe
firstpriority.Inagreementwiththisstudyahigherpricehasanegativeimpactonthe
frequencyofethicalpurchases.ToanswerTwengeetal.(2012)ofwhichoutcomethe
futurewillhave,themodelindicatesaGenerationWe.Thehighresultofethicalprofile
implies that Generation Z care for other and will chose the most humane solution
possible,whichagreeswithourresults(Crane&Matten,2010;Twengeetal.,2012).
Thesurveyalsoresultedinthatthetendencytoboycottwasincreasediftheindividual
were considered to have a higher ethical profile. The second factor that contributed
positively to the model was environmental impact. So Generation Z would boycott a
productifthecompanybehavedinanunethicalmanner,whichistheoppositeofwhat
washypothesized.However,themodelwithindependentandallcontrolvariableswere
significant at p< 0.05. The data collected resulted in findings that indicate that the
tendencytoboycottwasincreasingiftheindividualwereconsideredtohaveahigher
ethical profile. This is in line with Fahy and Jobber (2012), who state that the level of
involvement is a significant factor, which can result in boycotts by Generation Z. The
second factor that contributed positively to the model was environmental impact. It
showed that the greater the environmental impact is, the greater is also the tendency
forboycott.Thisindicatesthatifacompanybehavesinanunethicalway,GenerationZ
will boycott. These findings contradict the hypothesis that stated that Generation Z
wouldnotboycottifacompanybehavedinanunethicalway.However,weareinline
withKleinetal.(2004)findingssincetheystatethatconsumersaremoreinvolvedin
companies’actionandwillthemselvestakeactiontosuchextremelengthsasboycotting
iftheythinkthatacompanybehaveinanunethicalway.Theauthorsalsodescribethe
fourfactorsofboycotting.Thesefourfactorshavenotbeensupportedbyourstudy.Our
findingsalsoagreeswithCraneandMattens(2010)statementthatconsumersaremore
aware of what they buy, they will do active choices to avoid companies that offer
productsthatdonotliveuptotheethicalstandardsthattheyexpect.Thefindingsand
Crane and Mattens statement disagrees with Öberseder et al. (2011) who says that
consumers do not care if a company has CSR or not. Klein et al. (2004) claims that
dedicationhasledtohighertendencyforboycotting,whichourstudysupports.Further,
44
DelMarAlonso-Almeidaetal.,(2015)statesthatfemalesaremoreopentoboycottthan
males,however,thiscouldnotbeprovenwithourstudy.
Oneofthebiggestfindingmadeinthisstudyisthehighvaluefromtheethicalprofile
variable.InthebeginningofthisstudyweasauthorsthoughtthatGenerationZwould
be careless of ethics. The results from the survey have shown how wrong we were.
Since the mean of the ethical profile showed 6.1204 and is considered very high. The
ethical awareness however, had no significant impact on Generation Z’s purchases.
Researchesarguedthattheethicalawarenesswouldbeincreasedovertime,butstillthe
meanwas3.1958(Eisingerichetal.,2011;Giesler&Veresiu,2014;Twengeetal.,2012).
Further,GenerationZwillboycottproductsiftheirdemandisnotethicalsatisfied.That
theyarewillingtoboycottalsocontributestotheethicalprofileandmakeGenerationZ
tohaveastrongethicalprofile.Theyareincontrastnotwillingtopayhigherpricesfor
ethicalproducts,sinceahigherpriceaffectthefrequencyofethicalpurchasesnegative,
thusitisarguedthatconsumerswouldpaymore(Auger&Devinney,2007).Toanswer
theresearchquestion,GenerationZarenotwillingtopaymoreforethicalproductsbut
theywillboycottifacompanybehavesinanunethicalmanner.Inthefuturecompanies
will therefore have to offer more ethical products with a lower price if they want
GenerationZasconsumers.
6.2Thestudy’scontributions
Thissubsectionispresentingthetheoreticalandempiricalcontributionsofthisstudy.
6.2.1Theoreticalcontributions
ThetheoreticalcontributionofthisthesisisanewviewonhowGenerationZ,namely
the future buying force will make ethical purchases. Several researches have been
madeonthepreviousgenerationsbutlessforthefuturebuyingforce(Parment,2013;
Eastman&Liu,2012).ThisstudyofGenerationZinSwedenthereforecontributeswith
a small insight of how Generation Z is as ethical consumers. It is shown that they are
engagedinthepurchasingprocess,sincetheywillboycottiftheynotaresatisfied.For
companies this will be an important factor since Generation Z will be the next buying
forceandtheconsumersareking(Crane&Matten,2010).Itisalsoshownthattheywill
notpaymoreforethicalproducts,eveniftheybelievethatmoreethicalpurchaseswill
45
giveagreaterrangeofecologicandFairtradeproducts.Twengeetal.,2012discussed
the future generation and to evaluate from the ethical profile variable that indicated
high values, the next generation seems like a Generation We. This contradicts what
Twengeetal.(2012)discussed,thatsocialawarenessandcareforothershaddeclined.
Further, since the hypotheses are only tested on teenagers born in year 1997 of
GenerationZ,thehypothesesmustbetestedfortheotheryearsofGenerationZaswell,
orforthegenerationaswholetomakeagreatercontribution.
6.2.2Empiricalcontributions
This study contributes to the research as a prediction for the future consumption of
ethical products through Generation Z, which has been less researched compared to
earlier generations like the Baby boomers, Generation X and Generation Y (Parment,
2013; Eastman & Liu, 2012). Due to the increased ethical awareness, the ethical
purchasesshouldhaveincreasedwithitandtheconsumerbehaviorshouldhavebeen
changed (Eisingerich et al., 2011). This study is a small step towards knowing if the
futurepurchaseswillcontainmoreethicalproductssincetheconsumersareconsidered
moreethicalaware.Thefollowingwillpresentlimitationsofthisstudy.
6.3Limitations
This study contributes with a better understanding of the purchase behavior of
Generation Z, but it is not without limitations. The first limitation is the selection of
respondents used in the survey. Since it is a convenience sample it prohibits the
findingstobegeneralizedintoagreatergroup.Thesecondlimitationisthatthestudy
only contains two hypotheses, with a greater number of hypotheses, a greater
understanding of Generation Z would be achievable. Since there are limitations with
thisstudythenextsectionwillbringupadvicesthatmightenablefutureresearchtobe
conductedmoreefficient.Thefollowingwillpresentsuggestionsforfutureresearch.
6.4Futureresearch
We recommend that if the research is replicated, the researchers could use a random
selectionofrespondents.Thiswouldenabletheresearcherstogeneralizetheirfindings
to a greater group. Future research can also conduct a qualitative method, and more
precisely, interviews, which would grant a deeper understanding of Generation Z´s
46
behavior. Researchers could also begin with interviews to get deeper understanding
and then form hypotheses that can be tested using a quantitative survey. Also, that
futureresearchisconductedonalltheagegroupsthatconsistwithinGenerationZ,not
only those born in 1997. These two combined will give a greater view of how
Generation Z behaves and indicate how they will behave regarding ethical purchases.
Thirdly, future research could compare generations. To research if the beginning of a
generation share similarities with other beginnings of other generations, also if that
shift between generations is similar or not. Lastly, future research can conduct
researchesthatexaminethesameselectioninafuturestagetoseeiftheirbehaviorare
accordingtotheirstatementsornot.Thisthesiswillbefinishedwithsomeconcluding
comments.
6.5Concludingcomments
ThisstudyshowsthatGenerationZisanethicalgenerationbuttheirpurchasebehavior
is not affected by their ethical awareness. Still they would choose a company that
behaves in a more ethical manner before an unethical, even in the extreme form of
boycotting.
47
References
Aksak, E., Ferguson, M. A., & Duman, S. A. (2015, December 10). Corporate social
responsibility and CSR fit as predictors ofcorporate reputation: A global perspective. Public
Relations Review , 42, pp. 79-81.
Arlow, P. (1991). Personl Characteristics in College Students' Evaluations of Business Ethics
and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics , 10 , pp. 63-69.
Auger, P., & Devinney, T. (2007). Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment of
preferences with Uncontrained ethicalintentions. Journal of Business Ethics , 76, pp. 361383.
Becker, C. (2016, February 24). Tre miljarder blir medelklass - snart sprids köpfesten över
hela
världen.
Retrieved
March
20,
2016,
from
Veckans
Affärer:
http://www.va.se/nyheter/2016/02/24/medelklassen-exploderar-i-tillvaxtlanderna---snartsprids-kopfesten-over-hela-varlden/
Belk, R. W. (1975, December). Situational Variables and Consumer Behavior. Journal of
Consumer Research , 2, pp. 157-164.
Bhattachary, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening Stakeholder–Company
Relationships Through Mutually Beneficial Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives.
Journal of Business Ethics , 85, pp. 257-272.
Boulstridge, E., & Carrigan, M. (2001). Do consumers really care about corporate social
responsibility? Highlighting the attitude- behaviour gap. Journal of Communcation
Management , 4 (4), pp. 355-368.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business Research Methods (Vol. 4th). Oxford , UK: Oxford
University Press.
Caroll, A. B. (1991, July/August). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward
the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons , pp. 39-48.
Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of ethical consumer - do ethics matter in
purchase bahviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing , 18 (7), pp. 560-578.
Carrigan, M., Szmigin, I., & Wright, J. (2004). Shopping for a better world? An interpretive
study of the potential ethical consumption within the older market. Journal of Consmer
Marketing , 21 (6), p. 401.417.
48
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A Three-dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance.
Academy of Management Review , 4 (4), pp. 497-505.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2010). Business etichs (Vol. 3). Glasgow, Great Britain: Oxford
university press.
Del Mar Alonso- Almeida, M., Navarrete, C. F., & Rodriguez-Pomeda. (2015, January).
Corporate social responsibility perception in business studetns as future managers: a
multifactorial analysis. Business Ethics: A European Review , 24 (1), pp. 1-17.
Denscombe, M. (2014). The Good Research Guide- for small-scale social research projects
(Vol. 3:1). Maidenhead, UK: Open International Publishing .
Dijksterhuis, A., Smith, P. K., Van Baren, R. B., & Wigboldus, D. H. (2005). The
Unconscious Consumer: Effects of Environment on Consumers Behavior. Journal of
Consumer Psychology , 15 (3), pp. 193-202.
Djurfeldt, G., Larsson, R., & Stjärnhagen, O. (2010). Statistisk verktygslåda samhällsvetenskaplig orsaksanalys med kvantitativ metoder 1 (Vol. 2). Lund, Sverige:
Studentlitteratur.
Eastman, J. K., & Liu, J. (2012). The impact of generational cohorts on status consumption:
an explantory look at generational cohort and demographics on satus consumption. Journal of
Consumer Marketing , 29 (2), pp. 93-102.
Eisingerich, A. B., Rubera, G., Seifer, M., & Bhardwaj, G. (2011). Doing Good and Doing
Better despite Negative Information?: The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in
Consumer Restistance to Negative Information. MIT Sloan Management Review , 14 (1), pp.
60-75.
Ernst & Young . (2015). What if the next big disruptor isn't a waht but a who? . Ernst &
Young LLP. Ernst & Young .
Forsyth, R. D. (1980). A Taxonomy of Ethical Ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology , 39 (1), pp. 175-184.
Freestone, O. M., & Goldrick, P. J. (2008). Motivations of the Ethical Consumer. Journal of
Business Ethics , 79, pp. 445-467.
Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its
Profits. The New York Times Magazine, .
49
Giesler, M., & Veresiu, E. (2014, October). Creating the Responsible Consumer: Moralistic
Governance Regimes and Consuer Subjectivity. Journal of Consumer Research , 41, pp. 840857.
Godson, M. (2013). Relationship marketing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Institute of Grocerie Distribution. (2008). Institute of Grocerie Distribution. Retrieved April
5, 2016, from http://www.igd.com/Research/Sustainability/Ethical-consumerism/
Irwin, J. (1999). Introduction to the special issue on ethical Trade-Offs in consumer decision
making. Journal of Consumer Psychology , 8 (3), pp. 211-213.
Jamali, D. (2007). A Stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: A fresh
perspective into theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics , 82 (1), pp. 213-231.
Klein, J. G., Smith, C. N., & John, A. (2004, July 3). Why we boycott: Consumer
Motivations for Boycott Participation. Journal of marketing , 68 (3), pp. 92-109.
KPMG View. (2016). KPMG View , 1, pp. 1-48.
Lee, K.-H., & Shin, D. (2010, October 26). Consumers’ responses to CSR activities: The
linkage between increased awareness and purchase intention. Public Relations Review , 36,
pp. 193-195.
Low, W., & Davenport, E. (2007). To boldly go... exploring ethical spaces to re-politicise
ethical consumption and fair trade. Journal of Consumer Behaviour , 6, pp. 336-348.
Newholm, T., & Shaw, D. (2007). Studying the ethical consumer: A review of research.
Journal of Consumer Behaviour , 6, pp. 253-270.
Pallent, J. (2013). SPSS survival manuala step by step guide data analysis using IBM SPSS
(Vol. 5). Boston: MA: Open University Press.
Parment, A. (2013). Generation Y vs. Baby Boomers: Shopping behavior, buyer involvment
and implications for retailing. Journal of Retailing adn Consumer Services , 20, pp. 189-199.
Patel, R., & Davidson, B. (2011). Forskningsmetodikens grunder. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Pellegrini, G., & Farinello, F. (2009). Organic consumers an new lifestyles . British Food
Journal , 111 (9), pp. 948-974.
50
Schlossberg, M. (2016, February 11). Teen Generation Z is being called 'millennials on
steroids,' and that could be terrifying for retailers. Retrieved March 9, 2016, from Business
Insider UK: http://uk.businessinsider.com/millennials-vs-gen-z-2016-2
Shaw, D., McMaster, R., & Newholm, T. (2015). Care and commitment in ethical
consumption: An exploration of the "Attitude-Behavior Gap". Journal of Business Ethics .
Spiller, R. (2000). Ethical Business and Investment: A Model for Business and Society.
Netherlands: Springer .
Statistics Sweden. (1998). Befolkningsstatistik 1997. scb.se.
Twenge, J. M., Freeman, E. C., & Campbell, K. W. (2012, March 5). Generational
Differences in Young Adults' Life Goals, Concern for others asn Civic Orientation, 19662009 . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 102 (5), pp. 1045-1062.
Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Gruber, V. (2011, June 12). ‘‘Why Don’t Consumers
Care About CSR?’’: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Role of CSR in Consumption
Decisions. Journal of Business Ethics , 104, pp. 449-460.
51
Appendix1–SwedishQuestionnaire
Etisk konsumtion
1. Kön
Tjej
Kille
2. Vilket program läser du?
Samhälle
Ekonomi
Natur
Barn och fritid
Frisör
Annat (specificera)
3. Vet du vad Corporate social responsibility (CSR) är?
Ja
Nej
4. Mina köp påverkas av ett företags.. (Ett svar per alternativ)
Starkt emot
Starkt för
Dåliga arbetsförhållande
Dålig
tillverkningsprocess
Djurförsök
Miljöfarlig besprutning
Annat (Specificera)
5. Handlar du ekologiskt/Fairtrade?
Ja
Nej
Vetej
52
6. Hur ofta handlar du ekologiskt/Fairtrade
Sällan
Ofta
7. Följande egenskaper är viktiga när jag handlar Ekologisk/Fairtrade (Ett svar per alternativ)
Inte alls
viktigt
Väldigt viktigt
Pris
Kvalité
Miljöpåverkan
För det ser bra ut
Smaken
Annat (specificera)
8. Handlar din familj ekologiskt?
Ja
Nej
Vetej
9. Hur ofta handlar din familj ekologiskt/Fairtrade
Sällan
Ofta
10. Följande egenskaper är viktiga när jag handlar (Ett svar per alternativ)
Inte alls
viktigt
Väldigt viktigt
Pris
Kvalité
Vad andra köper
Vad som är mode
Tillverkningsprocess
Smaken
Annat (specificera)
53
11. Jag tror att jag är mer medveten än vad mina föräldrar är när det gäller att handla ekologiskt och/
eller Fairtrade
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
12. Jag tror att om flera kunder hade valt att inte köpa produkter från oetiska företag så hade det funnits
mer ekologiskt och Fairtrade
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
13. Jag tror att det gör skillnad om jag väljer att handla varor som är ekologiska och/eller Fairtrade
märkta produkter
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
14. Jag kan tänka mig att undvika att köpa en produkt om den inte uppfyller mina etiska krav
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
15. Följande källor litar jag på när det gäller företags produkter (Ett svar per alternativ)
Instämmer
inte
Instämmer
helt
Media
Företagets
marknadsföring
En närstående
(Familj,släkt,vänner)
Kändis (Bloggare,artist
etc.)
Annat (Specificera)
16. Människor bör se till att deras handlingar aldrig avsiktligt skadar en annan människa
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
17. Om en handling kan skada en oskyldig, bör den inte genomföras
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
54
18. Det är aldrig nödvändigt att offra andras välmående
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
19. Vad som är etiskt varierar från en situation till en annan
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
20. Vad som är etiskt varierar från land till land
Instämmer inte
Instämmer helt
Tack för din medverkan!
55
Appendix2–EnglishQuestionnaire
Ethical consumption english
1. Gender
Girl
Boy
2. Which program do you study?
Society
Business
Science
Children and Leisure
Hairdresser
Other (please specify)
3. Do you know what Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is?
Yes
No
4. My purchases are affected by a companies.. (One respons per option)
Strongly
against
Strongly for
Poor working
relationships
Poor manufacturing
process
Animal testing
Environmental
hazardous spraying
Other (please specify)
56
5. Do you purchase ecological/Fairtrade?
Yes
No
Do not know
6. How often do you purchase ecological/Fairtrade?
Rarely
Often
7. The following attributes are important when I purchase ecological/Fairtrade (One respons per option)
Not at all
important
Very
important
Price
Quality
Environmental impact
Because it looks good
Taste
Other (please specify)
8. Does your family purchase ecological/Fairtrade?
Yes
No
Do not know
9. How often does your family purchase ecological/Fairtrade?
Rarely
Often
57
10. The following attributes are important when I make a purchase
Not at all
important
Very
Important
Price
Quality
What others purchase
What is fashion
Manufacturing process
Taste
Other (please specify)
11. I think that I am more aware than my parents regarding purchasing ecological/Fairtrade
Disagree
Agree
12. I think that if more people choose not to purchase products from unethical companies there would
be more ecological and Fairtrade
Disagree
Agree
13. I think that it makes a difference if I choose to buy products that are ecological and/or Fairtrade
Disagree
Agree
14. I would consider to avoid purchasing a product if that product does not meet my ethical demands
Disagree
Agree
15. I trust the following sources regarding companies products (One respons per option)
Disagree
Agree
Media
Company marketing
A relative
(Family,friends)
Celebrity (Blogger,artist)
Other (please specify)
58
16. People should make certain that their actions never intentionally harm another
Disagree
Agree
17. If an action could harm an innocent other, then it should not be done
Disagree
Agree
18. It is never necessary to sacrifice the welfare of others
Disagree
Agree
19. What is ethical varies from one situation to another
Disagree
Agree
20. What is ethical varies from one country to another
Disagree
Agree
Thank you for your participation!
59
Appendix3–Regression:frequencyofethicalpurchases
Regression)test:)Frequency)of)ethical)purchase)with)VIF
Standardized*Coefficients
Beta
t
Sig.
Constant
0,389
0,698
Ethical*awareness
0,033
0,373
0,71
Price
G0,261
G2,783
0,007
Quality
0,155
1,355
0,179
Environmental*impact
0,361
3,637
0
Looks*good
G0,1
G1,094
0,277
Taste
0,098
0,941
0,349
Ethical*Profile
0,188
1,949
0,054
Gender
G0,007
G0,078
0,938
Program
0,048
0,508
0,613
Media
0,035
0,332
0,741
Company*Marketing
G0,126
G1,194
0,236
Family
G0,03
G0,301
0,764
Celebrity
G0,067
G0,67
0,505
Adjusted*R²*:*0,254
VIF*Highest*:*1,792
FGvalue*:*3,671
*p<*0,05
**p<*0,1
***p<0,001
Collinearity*Statistics
Tolerance
VIF
0,946
0,831
0,558
0,742
0,877
0,669
0,784
0,797
0,829
0,66
0,66
0,745
0,74
1,057
1,203
1,792
1,348
1,141
1,495
1,275
1,255
1,206
1,515
1,515
1,342
1,351
Appendix4–Regression:tendencytoboycott
Regression)test:)Tendency)to)boycott)with)VIF
Standardized*Coefficients
Beta
t
Sig.
Constant
2,423
0,017
Ethical*awareness
0,048
0,539
0,591
Price
B0,119
B1,239
0,218
Quality
0,201
1,71
0,091
Environmental*impact
0,212
2,092
0,039
Looks*good
B0,131
B1,413
0,161
Taste
B0,082
B0,764
0,447
Ethical*Profile
0,285
2,879
0,005
Gender
0,012
0,12
0,905
Program
B0,152
B1,575
0,119
Media
0,111
1,033
0,304
Company*Marketing
B0,062
B0,576
0,566
Family
0,078
0,769
0,444
Celebrity
B0,161
B1,581
0,117
Adjusted*R²*:*0,21
VIF*Highest*:*1,802
FBvalue*:*3,102
*p<*0,05
**p<*0,1
***p<0,001
60
Collinearity+Statistics
Tolerance
VIF
0,95
0,832
0,555
0,746
0,889
0,668
0,78
0,801
0,825
0,662
0,656
0,744
0,738
1,052
1,203
1,802
1,34
1,124
1,497
1,282
1,249
1,212
1,509
1,525
1,344
1,354