Effects of the qualification of animal welfare claims in market communication on consumer purchase intentions with and without time constraints: A dual processing perspective

IF 6.8 1区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Food Policy Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.foodpol.2024.102670
Tino Bech-Larsen, Klaus G. Grunert, George Tsalis
{"title":"Effects of the qualification of animal welfare claims in market communication on consumer purchase intentions with and without time constraints: A dual processing perspective","authors":"Tino Bech-Larsen,&nbsp;Klaus G. Grunert,&nbsp;George Tsalis","doi":"10.1016/j.foodpol.2024.102670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Claims about animal welfare and other sustainability characteristics are often used in market communication to promote food products. When such claims are suspected to be deceptive, accusations of greenwashing may appear. One method to counteract greenwashing is to substantiate the claims with additional information, i.e., with qualifications. However, the effectiveness of such qualifications has been critically debated. Based on two experimental surveys carried out in Denmark on animal welfare claims for pork and chicken and their qualifications, we show that such qualifications can both reduce and enhance consumers’ evaluation of the degree of animal welfare of the product advertised. In addition, we show that the effect of such qualifications on consumers’ purchase intentions depends on whether they process the information under a time constraint – as would be typical in everyday purchasing – or not. Contrary to common assumptions, we provide evidence that a time constraint can lead to consumer information processing becoming more focussed on the qualified claim, and that this claim then has more impact on purchase intention. We interpret these effects based on dual processing theory. The results have implications for the regulation of animal welfare claims and their qualifications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":321,"journal":{"name":"Food Policy","volume":"126 ","pages":"Article 102670"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919224000812/pdfft?md5=b05329329e13b61e8819eb3b2b770f82&pid=1-s2.0-S0306919224000812-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Policy","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919224000812","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Claims about animal welfare and other sustainability characteristics are often used in market communication to promote food products. When such claims are suspected to be deceptive, accusations of greenwashing may appear. One method to counteract greenwashing is to substantiate the claims with additional information, i.e., with qualifications. However, the effectiveness of such qualifications has been critically debated. Based on two experimental surveys carried out in Denmark on animal welfare claims for pork and chicken and their qualifications, we show that such qualifications can both reduce and enhance consumers’ evaluation of the degree of animal welfare of the product advertised. In addition, we show that the effect of such qualifications on consumers’ purchase intentions depends on whether they process the information under a time constraint – as would be typical in everyday purchasing – or not. Contrary to common assumptions, we provide evidence that a time constraint can lead to consumer information processing becoming more focussed on the qualified claim, and that this claim then has more impact on purchase intention. We interpret these effects based on dual processing theory. The results have implications for the regulation of animal welfare claims and their qualifications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在有时间限制和没有时间限制的情况下,市场传播中动物福利声明的定性对消费者购买意向的影响:双重处理视角
在市场宣传中,有关动物福利和其他可持续发展特征的说法经常被用来促销食品。当这些声称被怀疑具有欺骗性时,就会出现 "洗绿 "的指控。抵制 "洗绿 "的一种方法是通过附加信息(即限定条件)来证实这些声称。然而,这种修饰的有效性一直备受争议。根据在丹麦进行的两项关于猪肉和鸡肉的动物福利声明及其限定条件的实验调查,我们表明这种限定条件既能降低也能提高消费者对广告产品的动物福利程度的评价。此外,我们还表明,此类限定条件对消费者购买意向的影响取决于他们是否在时间限制条件下处理信息--这在日常购买中是很常见的。与通常的假设相反,我们提供的证据表明,时间限制会导致消费者在处理信息时更加专注于有保留的声明,而这种声明会对购买意向产生更大的影响。我们根据双重处理理论来解释这些效应。这些结果对动物福利声明及其资格的监管具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Food Policy
Food Policy 管理科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.60%
发文量
128
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: Food Policy is a multidisciplinary journal publishing original research and novel evidence on issues in the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of policies for the food sector in developing, transition, and advanced economies. Our main focus is on the economic and social aspect of food policy, and we prioritize empirical studies informing international food policy debates. Provided that articles make a clear and explicit contribution to food policy debates of international interest, we consider papers from any of the social sciences. Papers from other disciplines (e.g., law) will be considered only if they provide a key policy contribution, and are written in a style which is accessible to a social science readership.
期刊最新文献
Viewpoint: Toward a sustainable Green Revolution in sub-Saharan Africa: The case of maize and rice Expanding the phytosanitary exclusion zone for Mexican avocados: Market impacts and unintended consequences Small wins in practice: Learnings from 16 European initiatives working towards the transformation of urban food systems Information interventions and willingness to pay for PICS bags: Evidence from Sierra Leone Do moral constraints and government interventions promote the willingness and behaviors of food saving among urban residents in China? An empirical study based on structural equation model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1