Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

When Going Green Backfires: How Firm Intentions Shape the Evaluation of Socially Beneficial Product Enhancements

George E. Newman, Margarita Gorlin and Ravi Dhar
Journal of Consumer Research
Vol. 41, No. 3 (October 2014), pp. 823-839
Published by: Oxford University Press
DOI: 10.1086/677841
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/677841
Page Count: 17
  • Download ($14.00)
  • Cite this Item
Item Type
Article
References
If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
When Going Green Backfires: How Firm Intentions Shape the Evaluation of Socially Beneficial Product Enhancements
Preview not available

Abstract

Many companies offer products with social benefits that are orthogonal to performance (e.g., green products). The present studies demonstrate that information about a company’s intentions in designing the product plays an import role in consumers’ evaluations. In particular, consumers are less likely to purchase a green product when they perceive that the company intentionally made the product better for the environment compared to when the same environmental benefit occurred as an unintended side effect. This result is explained by consumers’ lay theories about resource allocation: intended (vs. unintended) green enhancements lead consumers to assume that the company diverted resources away from product quality, which in turn drives a reduction in purchase interest. The present studies also identify an important boundary condition based on the type of enhancement and show that the basic intended (vs. unintended) effect generalizes to other types of perceived tradeoffs, such as healthfulness and taste.

Page Thumbnails