Journal of Macromarketing 1984 Antil 18 39

Downloaded from jmk.sagepub.com by guest on January 30, 2013

Journal of Macromarketinghttp://jmk.sagepub.com/

Socially Responsible Consumers: Profile and Implications for Public PolicyJohn H. Antil

Journal of Macromarketing 1984 4: 18DOI: 10.1177/027614678400400203

The online version of this article can be found at:http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/4/2/18

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Macromarketing Society

Additional services and information for Journal of Macromarketing can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jmk.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jmk.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/4/2/18.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Dec 1, 1984

What is This?

http://jmk.sagepub.com/


http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/4/2/18.full.pdf

http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/4/2/18.refs.html

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://jmk.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://jmk.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://www.sagepublications.com/

http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/4/2/18

ociation found thatJanuary, 1976 3 7

natural resource issues-energy, water and toxic October, 1975 6 3waste, to name a few-will be the most worrisome January, 1974 46 1problem for state officials in the last half of the September, 1973 16 3decade. . .. Governorsand their aides mentioned July, 1972 5 6

Socially Responsible Consumers: Profile and Implications for Public Policy

John H. Antil

Socially responsible consumption is an important prerequisite to successful volun tary conservation programs. This article reviews past research describing the socially responsible consumer and provides a more comprehensive profile of these consumers. Implications for the formation of public policy are discussed.

The depletion and increasing scarcity of many natural resources, along with a deteriorating environment, have been and are likely to continue to be among the most pressing con cerns of our society. Although public percep tions have varied over the past several years, opinion polls have reported that energy and/or pollution are perceived to be among the most important national problems (see Table 1). Recently, a survey of the National Governors Ass

TABLE 1

ENERGY AND/OR POLLUTION MENTIONED AS MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM

PercentDate Mentioninga Rank

January, 1981 12% 3January, 1980 5 3May, 1979 33 2February, 1978 29 2March,1977 27 3

natural resources twice as often as the runner-up category, fiscal affairs. It was the No.1 future worry of state officials in all regions. (Wall Street Journal 1983a, p. 37)

Consequently, energy supplies and pollution control have become important issues in both national and local politics. The 1970s wit nessed enactment of several powerful environ mental control statutes covering, for example, clean air and water, noise and insecticide control, safe drinking water, toxic substances, and resource conservation and recovery. Yet in spite of these efforts, progress towards stemming the tide of environmental deterioration is at best debatable.

John H. Antil is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware. The author expresses his appreciation to the Center for the Study of Environmental Policy of The Pennsylvania State University and to the American Marketing Association for the financial and other assistance that made this research possible.

18 FALL 1984

aFigures represent percentage of respondents who mentioned energy and/or pollution to the question: 'What do you think is the most important problem facingthis country today?"

Source: Gallup 1977,1978,1979,1980,1981.

The most ambitious statutes have proved grandiose failures. Over half the population of the U.S. lives in areas that still violate the national air-pollution health standards, for example, and some of these regions may never comply. Some of the acts have produced environmental ills worse than the ones they addressed. (Fortune 1981, p. 235)

The cost of these efforts, whatever their effectiveness, has been staggering. Pollution control spending in 1979 was estimated at 48.5 billion dollars and even without new legisla tion, cumulative expenditures between 1979 and 1988 are estimated to be 735 billion dollars (in 1979 dollars) (Fortune 1981).

It can be argued that the United States' (as well as most free-world countries) efforts to


from the SAGE Social Science Collections. All Rights Reserved.



reduce energy consumption have been quite successful. Exxon has forecasted that energy consumption in the year 2000 will be 34 percent less than what its economists had predicted in1972 (Business Week 1981). But in spite ofpast success, most authorities would agree that the problems associated with adequate supplies of energy are far from being solved.

Practically all experts warn that the oil crisis isn't over, despite the current oil glut. There will be times, an industry man says, when "we can't supply everyone." (Wall Street Journal 1983, p. 1)

The U.S. is still very far from energy independence with oil imports amounting to about4.2 million barrels a day (Crider 1984). The sus ceptability of the U.S. to turmoil in the politi cally unstable Middle East has manifested itself in 1973, 1979, and again in 1980. Until this situation becomes much more stable orenergy independence is achieved, this vulnerability and uncertainty will likely continue.

Though the direction and nature is difficult to determine, the Reagan administration is still developing an energy policy that will likely be different from that of previous administrations. However, no matter what energy policies areadopted, conservation will apparently play a key role in their implementation. The mostrecent proposals have indeed placed conservation high on the administration's priority list (Wall Street Journal 1983c). James B. Edwards, Reagan's former Energy Secretary, has stated

I would assume-and everyone would agree, I think-that the cheapest way to get energy is to conserve. That would be my flrst building block of the kind of energy policy we need. I believe strongly in conservation. (Business Week 1981, p.69).

The logic for such an emphasis seems to be well justified by the estimates for potential energy savings. In 1979, the Department of Energy estimated conservation could save 1.5 million barrels of oil per day by 1990 (Cannon1981). Another study has estimated savingscould be as much as eight million barrels per day by 1990 (Stobaugh and Yergin 1979). At$29.00 per barrel the latter estimate, if achieved,would save Americans over 84 billion dollars in1990.

As in the past, American consumers arelikely to assume a key role in whatever direction national policy follows. Not only will their

preferences be considered (if for no other than political reasons), but even more important, their consumption behavior could determine the success or failure of whatever policies are im plemented. Of the total energy consumed in the United States, nearly a third is used by con sumers in their homes (20 percent) and automo biles (12 percent) (Milstein 1977). Estimates are that the potential for savings is great; the Department of Energy maintains that the aver age home could reduce energy consumption by60 percent (Business Week 1981). But for thesesavings to materialize, public policymakers must understand the position of the consumer in order to maximize the probability of developing successful policies and programs.

As Katona (1982) has written,

The introduction of many new government policies and the introduction of new products are similar in that it is the public response to them which deter mines the success or failure of either the policies or the business decisions. In order to assess the probable public response and to devise the steps promoting a favorable response, it is necessary to determine peoples' predispositions and attitudes. (p.39)

The government has basically three methods to influence consumer behavior-legislation, pricing, and encouraging voluntary cooperation; this article is primarily concerned with one of these: voluntary cooperation, or what may be termed socially responsible (SR) consumption.' What are the characteristics of the SR consumer? How prevalent are SR attitudes and behaviors? Is there any relevant research evidence that can assist in the formation of public policy? In this study, previous research is reviewed and meth odological problems that have led to inconsis tent results regarding the profile of these con sumers are discussed. Based upon improved methodology, a comprehensive profile of the SR consumer is presented. The results of this study in combination with previous research are then analyzed in terms of their implications for the formation of public policy.

WHAT DO WE "KNOW" ABOUT SOCIA LL Y RESPONSIBLE CONSUMERS?

Although "socially responsible consumption" and other similar terms occur frequently in the literature, there is little consistency among

IFor convenience, "socially responsible" will be referred to as "SR" for the remainder of this article.

JOURNAL OF MACROMARKETING 19



terminology and definitions (e.g., "responsible consumption," Fisk 1973 ~ "socially conscious consumer," Anderson and Cunningham 1972 and Webster 1975; "societal economics," Her berger 1975; "ecologically concerned consumer," Henion 1976). Despite varying semantics, how ever, each appears to be concerned with the same concept.

The present research has derived a definitionthat is most similar to that proposed by Henion (1976) and has defined socially responsible consumption as those behaviors and purchase decisions made by consumers that are related to environmental-resource problems and are moti vated not only by a desire to satisfy personal needs, but also by a concern for the possible ad verse consequences of their consequent effects.

Table 2 summarizes the most relevant research related to the SR consumer profile. A review of these studies reveals two significant problems. The most serious has been the variety and nature of the methodologies used to identi fy the SR consumer. These have ranged from classifying a consumer as SR if he/she reports purchasing one or more environmentally com patible products to the use of attitudinal scales. Though the dependent variables are intended to be quite similar, the nature of the various operationalization procedures clearly indicate that it is unlikely that these studies have been successful in isolating and measuring the same dependent variable. For example, one shouldnot expect concern for air pollution, use of arecycling center, or purchase of low phosphate detergent and lead -free gasoline to each be a measure of the same underlying construct. Much of this problem is related to incomplete conceptualization and/or operationalization of SR consumption. Most of the measurement procedures are designed to result in only a di chotomous classification (i.e., low vs. high); an unrealistic situation and a frequent problem encountered in consumer research. An accurate representation must allow for many degrees of socially responsible consumption behavior. These range from purchase behavior that shows very little concern beyond the immediate satisfaction of personal needs to behavior that clearly exhibits a concern for the effects of con sumption behavior on his/her environment and on society in general. Thus, contrary to most previous research, SR consumption is not abehavioral pattern that a consumer either has

20 FALl1984

or does not have, but is exhibited in varying degrees and must be conceptualized and opera tionalized as a continuous rather than a bivariate variable.

Confidence is further diminished by the lackof evidence supporting the reliability and validity of these measures. Seven of the sixteen studies (Van Liere and Dunlap 1981; Buttel and Flinn 1978, 1978a; Anderson and Cunningham1972; Constantini and Hanf 1972; Tognacci,Weigel, and Vernon 1972; Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed 1974) provided evidence of reliability and only two (Anderson and Cunningham 1972and Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed 1974) addressed the issue of validity.

A second major problem is related to thecomposition and size of the samples. Severalstudies have used relatively small samples from geographically limited areas and some have used respondents of predominantly one sex. Only Kinnear, Taylor and Ahmed (1974) used a na tional sample. Their research, however, was conducted in Canada and generalizing its results to the United States is questionable at best. The issue of sample selection has traditionally plagued consumer behavior research (Ferber1977), but the use of convenience samples in this area of research may be particularly prob lematic. Consumers in a given geographical area are bound to be biased by factors such as sensitivity to local-regional issues (e.g., nuclear plants, air and water quality), characteristics of college community samples (e.g., level of educa tion and degree of liberalism) and availability of gasoline during shortages.

In light of the above problems, the abilityto generalize and compare results is obviously greatly impaired. The results of these investi gations have provided conflicting evidence about the characteristics of the SR consumer and have prompted the need for reexamining results and procedures (Butte1 and Flinn 1978). Research results for age, income, and level of education clearly demonstrate this lack of consistency. Of the studies listed in Table 2, eight found level of education related to the dependent variable whereas six others did not; with regard to age, nine studies conclude that a relationship exists, but three others found no such relationship; and for income, three studies found a relation ship and five others did not.

Despite these uncertainties, at least one study has selected a sample based upon the following assumption:


c

c


Q)

E

.8

s

:J:(Ja:c( w enwa:I-

:f>

w

_.wa:u,o>

a:

:e:e:::>en

'S..•2.~!! Q

z


«

I

- -

J:

co

w en w cc z

....«

>w ~wccu,o

>cc«

;:)en

'0 c

o i'ia: i'0 ...! Q

i

0\0\

o\0

00

IT)e-0\

00r--0\

22 FALL 1984

w

o

i

c

.

i:;:,c'€§NW..J£«

Xl

t-

l:oC

«C w CI)

CCtZ

«w>..JWa::LL

>«CC

:E:E:lCI)

IJS

'i>i

i13j.S

~i

Ii:I'0..•2.~jG) Q

zI

t) CI)

coe--0'1...-4

Since the issue of ecology previously has been shown to be of concern primarily to members of the middle and upper class, women from these social strata were specjfically selected for this study. (Murphy, Kangun and Locander 1978, p.63)

It would appear that such criteria for sample selection are at best premature, and that addi tional evidence is necessary before such con clusions can be drawn. If this practice were to continue, results of future research could be misleading and counterproductive.

Given the current state of research, reliableconclusions about the characteristics of the SR consumer are not possible and one is forced to conclude we do not know a great deal about this segment of the population. The research reported here was specifically designed to address the most important methodological problems encountered in previous research thus making it possible to present a more reliable and comprehensive profile of the SR consumer.

STUDY DESIGN

Dependent Variable-SRCB Scale

Consumer researchers have paid too little attention to the development of reliable and valid measures specifically designed to measure the constructs of interest (Churchill 1979). Common procedure has been to borrow and use scales and measures from other disciplines or to adjust such scales and measures to "fit" the problem at hand. To avoid this problem, a socially responsible consumption behavior scale (SRCB Scale) was developed using validation procedures closely paralleling those suggested by Churchill (1979). The SRCB Scale is a con sumption-related, multi-item instrument (40 items) specifically designed to sample from the domain of SR consumption and to discriminate between individuals with varying levels of this trait. See Appendix B for a list of items com prising the SRCB Scale. (Details regarding the development of the SRCB Scale and evidence of its reliability and validity are provided in Appendix A).

Independent Variables

In total, ] 6 independent variables were selected for use in this study. Six of these can be termed individual difference variables, while

24 FALL 1984

the remairung ten are demographic variables. A description of these variables and the method of operationalization is present in Table 3.2

Psychographic Profile

Previous research has suggested that demographics alone have not proven to be adequate descriptors of SR consumers (Anderson and Cunningham 1972 ; Brooker 1976; Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed 1974; Webster 1975; Seme nik, Belk, and Painter 1981). Not only have the results of demographic analyses produced in consistent results, but the relationships when found have been in general very weak (see any of the studies listed in Table 2). To help com pensate for and supplement the data currently available, a psychographic analysis was included in the present study as a means to extend and improve upon current knowledge of the SR consumer. Because few lifestyle data are cur rently available describing the SR consumer, a psychographic analysis was viewed as a promis ing framework to provide a more in-depth and life-like view of this consumer segment. The item pool for this analysis contained 149 Likerttype items chosen from the various topic areas in the Well's AIO item library (1971). Among others, these topics include price shopping and bargain hunting, influence of and on others, leisure and entertainment preferences, self-concept and U.S. society. 3

Data Collection

After the research instrument was exten sively pretested using students and non-student adults, it was mailed in June 1977 to 1000 households who were members of a Market

2The independent variableswere selected primarily on the basis of their use in previous research. Most are of the type normally found in studiesattempting to profile a segmentof the population, While it would be possible to explain and hypothe size what relationship is expected to exist between these varia bles and socially responsibleconsumption, this has been omitted for two reasons. First, as previously discussed, there is con siderable inconsistency in past research that would dictate rather extensive discussionof each variable. Second, it is not the pur pose of this article to address why the sociallyresponsible con sumer is older or younger, high or low income, etc. The inter ested reader may want to refer to Tucker (1978), Van Liere and Dunlap (1980) and Semenik, Belk, and Painter (1981) for a dis cussionof some of these issues.

3Due to space limitations on the final questionnaire, ap proximately one-half of the availableitems were used. An effort was made to select a representative sample of items from each topic area in the inventory.

]~ ~~ j

:::-

~-,1::

- 0 :11'

....,

.~ - C

t- ~ ....

Gl ;;::

e

~~ ~ (I)> ...

:§_g ~ (I) ~ ~0:1

"Cbtl0:1 (I)~ >. 0- ,::

.c: ~e .0 .....

i .5.6 E~-5>. 'i:: . ..o.

~.

~ .....

.:: Gl.s:: ~,:: r.2~~ 0.2CD oS>'

~~ E~ .s::.~ '0 ..... -5>'

"ii ... ; a'~ btl~ ]~ 0. :::SGlO ~~

!r.20 .5 :::s .... 0 B ·8 ~ 0.

..... Gl....'.0 '::,:: >'0

8~ ooS

:~ao.... 30

.t:I>. 0:1

a ..B..>.,c

.... ~~,c ..... .... ~ >. .... 0 8t;0:I ~] ~g

,.g....0....Gl'~

""'0 0:I~.s

~~~ ~~ :::s e •

~~ ~ ';-:- ~,...:. oS~~.~ ,::= ~~ o >. ~

>. ... Cl E~ .8

-=~~.~'O .Bs::

.:::88. Qoc-E

:=:~~

e~'s~ .... oGl

5.G~l

..... "'".... 5 ...

l. ~I I .t::

~ C\

e-- Mo.. I

.... lI')

~~ I

W - '0 '0 '0

ca .-4 ~ Ib .... >. C

>. >. -11 ~ g~ ~

.... :::s ~

00

.... .... ....

\

-0

..J 'fi 'fi 'til C\

t-:::s ..... :::s :a ....

r:D

~ ! ]

<~ ~

:E :"

E'""'" "'"

a: a 't:I·~.S

If!~j:Q

f!I=Q .S i

> ... ,l..:::s C .:::s .S

a ~ ~ 0:1 d

t

-c

~

'::'0 <;' 8~ o g .... 5,::

e~~

:;:fG

~o~ .....5 5 >.~- ~£~~:::SGl ~. ~o S....:. ::I

0:1(1)0.' Gl.~ §.~M 8 'O'~:i ~~'Ofil~

oSfilQ Gl°.s~.t:Q) gj'r;; ~ e

~S(l)f;: Cflii e =.& 00 o ....5 '0 r.a '5: Q).... <Ii ~': 13 o· . = ... .s:: '0

~

W

«

<t ;- ~ t-'O .S '0C\ a ~

00:::s :::s 0 .s

,.9l1') ... cJ'O 8 lI') 't:I 't:I r..r

'fii ."s'" .8 a t)

~~r.2 ..~.o.

C\

....."'"

Z t-:_di (I) >.

~ 't(:II) '0 lSI 0:1

0 ~~p. '0 ~ Gl 0. ~ ~ 0. 0. ~Z (I)'til's 2~~ ,s s ,s ,s 0 ~

w .§~ ~ O+o>Gl

Cd 0

~ ~ .:.-. .:.-.

ICL ~~obtl~'3>

~ ";l S ~

("I') W

W_. z0

co

~~eo ~ 0 Q I=Q ~

LL

t- 0Z .s:i = .....0 ...:.Si=

cl:!,c "",Q)

.".'".>0:1(1)

(I) '0 .....'t:I

~a 6~ (I) .....

<t :'S

aiI

'0

~5

.~

~8~i "",.~ 0.t8~ .~6'.a rS_ Q)1:::

.0 ,::

t)~~e'O ~Gl>',::<;'

'E .~·e.s <Il B .... Gl,0'0

Gl

N .S 5 ~

.s~'E8a (I) ,::2 ~ >< btl <Il. 00 ~~ ....a ='g:«

::i Gl'::O .~ 'i' s>.~ ~'O~ ,::~ ~.g....c:~ .0..~. 2(I:)!<p.Iol3Gl

-.Gs

l,p:.:a,

"::"'. ~

<(IIi) 00

z oS°~ 1r3~~:; gjp.o.1=:,:: btl "'" .... .gf~

°f(l).s:: ~ Be0 c 'Og<li ~,::~Q,::"t

GlGl~.s e a ~'O • .s::.....'.O. t,.. 0,::'S~ gj iO

.2 ti ~ :::s....

- .... Gl':: . ·a2 Gl >. 0

i= s. ~1::G:5l_

~~ ~ ~g ~~:~~ fo! 8 ~> .$....£. 1 ~~ ..... j:Q.o .... 0:1 .,a..~-<. e 'Eel

« 'I;i,c "'" 0.'0 btl '::GlGlGl_p.

.-~

aa: ,c 8 = 0"C OM . ;a~

.... (I) U 0. .: 5 ~ ~ .s.S .£1~.c: ~ ~ c-i =8

w '81=1 ;;;-.... GlO~ .5 ..... Gl~·~ ~g t; r.2 f! 'E ;a::...S;i~~

0:1 ·8·5

ICL 0 2- (I).J:! s e,.g a g • Q~ ,c'::<Il(l)':: t:~a1~~8 0:1o~ = i_

0 ~j~~ ..... GlGl(l)O ~E 'i0~,c8<1i r.2 p.~ 13 '0 ~ f ~'O~~ e ~ .§'8"",Gl Gl- 5~a

..... = t:~_~~Cl ..... 0 .... = (I) ....:.;rE ~ (o;S Gl s=

Gl§.!Ci;' (I) 09+' ~.§-5 Gl'~ 0.>.. Gl<ll~ ...~..s- 0 Gl~'OGlr.2S ~~- <Il'~ '3 s"C ...... ~,:: . ~=><ogGl

o .~ 0 .... <Il i 5.5 ~'i'§ ~[

-~

g<Il:q=i i

~~~£e

==0,£ <Il(l)Gl

~.~~ 8.~,ce):::S0:l-5~5

gj ~a 2.5 e GlB 00

= 5~ ~l2 .....8&~ ~.fil~B gjQ)- > _a.r:: >..s::. S

=

~

>.

~ ~=

....8 e~ ~~~ ~~.s~e~ Gl _,c

Gl<llGlO

0.

::s e"6 ~ ~~ Z .~5o ° t-

....... ..-4 U'J ~

~Gl

c..j:Q 0.......t

:=

-<§

B~ .s=a5 :sa ::1::1 ....

t .8::si='B0 jU ~ 0·5a't:l ~.... ,:: 6i~ ;~ ..... ~CD ~ g

..1. 0 is ~.8 8.~ ~ s....

J5 t = >. .s:: ::I 0.= ::Ias ~ u ~ 1"6~~§'B

til ~(I)= '3 Q><)

= .~ Gl 0 "CI

u0

Q) .§ 5 ~ 0

.s::.Sj =- 0 i' e Gl

'3 btl .... S fQG<) ~~.sa ~..::: 8 s

.~ ~ ~ ."~'" ....

p:: tbe'5~o 8 e

8 ~ P1'1: Co:! "'" :e

Q C':I

t 8 = .s::.~.... 0

~8:::s== ·B S~ ~ u

0

Q)j:XI ~ Q .S'i-8:B 0

00 til 0:1


b b b

b

Facts, Inc. Consumer Mail Panel. The sample of 500 males and 500 females was selected from over 65,000 households used by Market Facts in mail surveys. The sample was balanced according to the latest census data according to four demographic variables: geographic region, annual household income, population density and degree of urbanization, and age of panel member. Usable questionnaires were returned by 690 respondents. In a comparison of re spondents to nonrespondents, no differences were found in the demographic variables that would significantly affect the analysis of results.

PROFILE OF THE SR CONSUMER

In order to determine the relationship be tween the several independent variables and SR consumption, bivariate and multivariate techniques were used. Multiple regression de termined the combined effects of the indepen dent variables and two bivariate techniques

(Pearson product-moment correlation and t-test of means) provided further insight into the extent of the relationships. The results are summarized in Table 4. (See Appendix A for a more complete explanation of the data analysis.)

DemOgraphic Variables

The most dramatic result of the analysis of the ten demographic variables was the absence of significant relationships. Only population density was found to be significantly related to SR consumption. Household size, socioeco nomic status, education (of respondent and spouse), occupation (of respond en t and spouse) and income were shown not to be related to SR consumption in any of the four statistical tests. The respondent's age and sex approached significance in product-moment correlations but lacked significance in any of the other tests. The correlation coefficients for these two varia bles were quite low (.05 and .06) and thus

TABLE 4

SUMMARY OF RE LATION BETWEEN INDEPENDENT VARIABLES AND SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR SCALE

Product- Multiple Regressions Hest Moment

(Partial F) M.~ Values Correlations Summary

V.iable 1 2 High Low J:Value (r) Determination

Perceived consumer beffectiveness 14.4\ 154.73b 17.69 12.91 18.44b .62b Positively related

Effort 26.82 105.18 103.40 58.01 13.89b .55b Positively relatedKnowledge .98 1.3~ 18.15 13.29 6.15d .26d Positively related Conservatism 1.58 3.1 27.21 28.41 1.84 - .06 Negatively related Traditional social

responsibility .78 .10 33.99 30.40 7.27b .29db

Positively related

Age .516 .92 3.70 3.48 1.17 .05 Not significant Household size .214 .26 3.02 3.04 .13 .01 Not significant Sex .12 1.53 1.41 1.47 .95 .06c Not significant Population density and

degree of urbanization .3~1 6.6b 2.16 1.93 2.64 b .09b Positively relatedEnvironmental concern 193.0

a 40.71 26.28 22.34 .73 Positively related

Socioeconomic status .04 19.46 19.53 .09 .01 Not significantEducation a

4.58 4.53 .33 .02 Not significantOccupation 7.76 7.89 .28 .01 Not significant Income 6.38 6.45 .21 .004 Not significant Education of husband 4.63 4.55 .46 .03 Not significant Occupation of husband 4.47 4.64 .41 .03 Not significant

n2 337 630R .65 .49r .80 .70

~ Not included in analysis. p <.01.

~ P <.05. p<.10.

26 FALL 1984

there is no evidence that these variables have any meaningful or practical relation to SR con sumption.

The fact that people residing in more densely populated areas are more likely to be SR consumers is not unexpected or surprising. Resi dents of larger urban areas are frequently exposed to poor quality air and water, noisepollution, litter, and waste disposal problems.This direct and frequent exposure likely contributes to their heightened concern for environmentally related problems.

It should be noted that this study is theonly one conducted in this country that found so little relationship between SR consumption and demographic variables. (Kassarjian [1971] also found no relationship to several demo graphics but his study focused only on concern for air pollution.) Perhaps the best explanation for this finding is that the present study wasthe only one to use a national sample of U.S. households.

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness

Although previous research has frequently identified perceived consumer effectiveness as a key variable related to SR consumption (Allen, Schewe, and Liander 1981; Allen 1980; Webster1975; Henion 1976; Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed 1974; Seligman, et al. 1979) the degree of association found in this research was excep tionally strong. The reasons for this are not readily apparent but a more in-depth under standing of this concept can help explain the extent of association. There appear to be two components to this individual difference varia ble. First, a consumer must be aware that a problem exists, and second, the consumer must believe that his/her individual effort will help contribute to the solution of the problem. Given the nature of environmental-resource problems, both of these criteria can under standably be miscomprehended by many con sumers. For example, over the years polls and research have consistently shown that a large percentage of Americans do not believe that an energy shortage exists (Milstein 1977, 1979). In the present research, nearly 41 percent of respondents did not disagree with the statement, "The 'energy crisis' has been promoted by big business and the government and actually does not exist." Further, it is reasonable to assume

that many consumers are only concerned and aware of those environmental problems that adversely affect their immediate environment. The fact that this research also found the more SR consumer to be more knowledgeable about environmental-resource problems and environ mentally compatible behaviors further supports this conclusion.

Likewise, many consumers do not believethat their personal behavior could possibly haveany effect on reducing environmental-resource problems (even if they fully realize the severity of the situation). In this research, 32 percent of the respondents did not disagree with the statement, "It is worthless for an individual consumer to try to do anything about pollu tion," and nearly 2S percent did not agree that "Each consumer's behavior can have an effect upon decreasing environmental deterioration and the depletion of natural resources." (The significance and implications of perceived con sumer effectiveness are elaborated upon in the final section of this article.)

Conservatism

Conservatism, as measured by the McClosky Conservatism Scale, shows a rather weak rela tionship to SR consumption. This is likely related to the nature of items contained in this scale, which concentrateson only one aspect of the broad domain of the conservatism-liberalism dimension, namely the desirability of change. This is obviously only one of several possible domains to which conservatism could be ex pected to be related. This fact, combined with the results obtained from the psychographic analysis (to be discussed in the next section), indicates that conservatism is inversely related to SR consumption. Both measures showed the more SR consumer to be less conservative, but not to the degree that they could be described as excessively liberal or radical. SR consumers appear to be open to new ideas but their overall profile does not indicate that they initiate social change or ideas contrary to present norms. Rather, high SR individuals appear to be among those who wait and follow the more radical changes in society after these new concepts have gained at least a certain degree of legiti macy. Thus, one should not expect the more SR consumer to be at the forefront of social change or even to be among those who actively attempt to influence the attitudes of others.


Effort

The amount of physical and psychological effort a consumer was willing to devote to behave in an SR manner was also found to be significant. The difference between mean effort scores for the high and low SR consumers was considerable, 58.0 versus 103.4 (p < .01).4 This behavior-related measure indicates that the more SR consumer makes a greater effort to behave in a SR manner. That is, the more SR con sumer performs not only "easy" SR behaviors, but is also likely to express his more positive SR attitudes in actions requiring more total effort. Though a very limited amount of re search has incorporated this variable, Seligman et al. (1979) found attitudes toward effort to be significantly related to energy consumption.

Environmental Concern

The fact that high SR consumers scored higher on a measure of environmental concern is not surprising. These concepts are closely related and one would expect a person to be an SR consumer if he/she is concerned about the environment. It is, however, important to note that this "attitudinal" concern about the en vironment is also expressed in terms of behavior. There was a high positive correlation between the SRCB Scale and scores on a self-reported Behavior Index (r = .56, p < .01). (See Table 3 for a description of this measure.)

Knowledge

There is little doubt that the more SR con sumer has considerably more knowledge con cerning environmental-resource problems and environmentally compatible behaviors. The difference in mean scores of the contrast groups on the Knowledge Scale was rather dramatic (18.17 vs. 12.43, p <.01). These results could have implications for the importance of having an informed and educated public. Even if a consumer desires to behave in an environmen tally compatible manner, if he/she does not

4For ease of communication, the terms "high SR" and "low SR" are frequently used throughout the remainder of this article. This should not be interpreted to mean there are only two groups of SR consumers, but that the higher (lower) one is on the SR continuum, the more likely he/she would exhibit this trait or behavior. See Appendix A for a discussion of how these groups are defined.

28 FALL 1984

have knowledge of the appropriate behavior, one cannot expect a consumer to voluntarily behave in an SR manner.f This lack of SR related knowledge has been found in several studies and each has similarly concluded the need for increased knowledge (Baird and Brier1981; Milstein 1977; Maloney, Ward,and Nicholas 1975).

Traditional Social Responsibility

Neither multiple regression indicated that traditional social responsibility was related to the dependent variable. However, the i-test and correlational measure showed that a significant relationship did exist (p < .01). Although this variable is apparently related to SR consump tion, the overall evidence suggests that it should not be viewed as a surrogate measure for SR consumption (as first used by Anderson and Cunningham 1972). In other words, although some of the characteristics of the traditional socially responsible individual are also common to the SR consumer, the overall relationship between these two variables is not strong.

Psychographic Analysis

The procedures used to analyze the psycho graphic data are described in Appendix A and a description of the factors and example items with results are listed in Appendix C.

In contrast to the demographic analysis, the psychographic analysis offers considerable information about the SR consumer. Indi viduals in the high SR group tended to be more involved in community and service organizations and to see themselves as more influential in their neighborhood. The high SR group is considerably more demanding and critical of the U.S. government and business and would like to see both of these institutions take a more active part in improving the plight of the con sumer. Low SR consumers are less concerned with the quality and need for improved con sumer products and believe they have less say in what the government does than those in the high SR group.

SOne should not conclude that increased knowledge neces sarily causes changes in SR behavior; it is possible that increased knowledge follows changes in behavior. Although this may be true in some or many situations, simple logic would still indicate that increased knowledge concerning SR behaviors would affect the actions of consumers predisposed to SR behavior but lacking the necessary information.

As might be expected, high SR consumers tend to be more concerned about health and are more likely to enjoy physical activities than those from the low SR group. A greater per centage of the high group enjoy gardening, fixing up their house, and working and exer cising in the outdoors.

One group of items is related to our society and can also be used as a subjective measure of the conservatism/liberalism of the contrast groups. Consumers in the high SR group appear to have a more liberal outlook on societal issues. They are more likely to be in favor of the women's liberation movement, more inclined to approve of the legalization of marijuana, and considerably less prejudiced towards those of a different race. Low SR consumers are more likely to believe that there is too much emphasis on higher education and are much more likely to disbelieve what they read in the newpaper.

High SR individuals have less desire to own abig, expensive car and are less inclined to want to drive a powerful car. This group also is more likely to believe that small, economical cars will be popular in the future and that economy is more important than power or size. These con sumers are also much more likely to use forms of transportation other than the automobile.

High SR consumers are more satisfied with their lives and jobs, and believe family income is high enough to satisfy nearly all important desires. They are more likely to believe they are happier now than ever before and are more likely to disagree that their lives are pretty dull. The high SR group also tends to be much more interested in culturally orien ted activities. They are more likely to enjoy reading, painting, and sculpture and to prefer magazines to tele vision, and classical to popular music. Thoseitems related to self-concept characterized the high SR consumer as being more confident in his/her personal ability, more likely to take direct action when he/she does not like some thing, and less likely to view him/herself as being a "swinger."

The high SR consumer is much differentfrom his/her low counterpart regarding bargain shopping and shopping behavior. Shopping at discount stores, being aware of specials, budget ing and using coupons are all seen as more im portant to the high SR consumer. This group is also more likely to be brand loyal, use publica tions like Consumer Reports and seek advice from friends about products to purchase.

Summary Profile

To summarize, this research would describe SR consumers as a group that transcends demo graphic and socioeconomic segments. 6 They are more likely to live in urban areas and tend to be involved in community activities, but are not any more socially active than the average con sumer. They are more liberal but not to the extent that they could be termed radical.Though they do tend to see themselves as being influential in their neighborhoods, they are not'strong leaders nor would they attempt to"push" their personal values or attitudes upon others. SR consumers could be termed "dis enchanted" consumers who are critical of busi ness and government, but do not appear to be more alienated or overly critical of society. They have a positive self-concept, believe they are personally competent, and tend to be more optimistic in their outlook on life and in particu lar towards the future. SR consumers tend to be more health conscious and physically active, enjoy cultural activities, and are bargain conscious shoppers. Finally, they are more concerned and knowledgeable about the en vironment and environmental problems and believe that their individual efforts can help reduce these problems.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY

The results of this study reinforce the belief that SR consumption is a complex varia ble with important implications for public policy decision-makers. As federal and state governments form and implement energy and environmental policies, two of the important questions that must be answered are: (1) what degree of voluntary cooperation can be expected from consumers, and (2) assuming it is a viable goal, how can public policy influence people to become more SR consumers?

One of the main purposes of this researchwas to investigate the extent of environmentally compatible attitudes and behavior. And as

6Although this research was not specifically designed to determine the size of the SR consumer segment, the results from this study indicate that a sizeable group of consumers express positive attitudes and engage in SR behaviors. Further support for an SR segment of significant size can be found in Henion (1972), Kassarjian (1971), and Crosby, Taylor, and Kinnear (1980).


an extension of this, to what degree can volun teerism be relied upon as a useful and reliable means to reduce environmentally related prob lems. Based upon the results of this investiga tion there is no doubt that many consumers have positive attitudes toward SR consumption. Using a procedure that constructs an intensity function from attitude scores it was found that81 percent of respondents had favorable atti tudes (Antil 1983). Also encouraging was the nature of voluntary behaviors reported. For example, 48 percent of all respondents reported switching products for ecological reasons; 82 percent said that if they understand the potential damage to the environment a product will cause, they will not purchase that product; nearly 22 percent reported they purchased a compact car because it was less polluting; and over 28 percent claimed they tried to use elec trical appliances before 10:00 a.m. and after10:00 p.m.? Similar conclusions regardingconsumers' Willingness to behave voluntarily in a SR manner have been found by Henion, Gregory, and Clee (1981); Walker (1980); Seligman et al. (1979); Arndt and Helgesen (1979); Henion (1972); Milstein (1979); andKassarjian (1971).

As encouraging as the above may appear, itwould be a mistake to assume that volunteerism alone is all that will be required to address adequately environment-resource problems. The other major options open to public policy makers=specifically, legislation and pricing-are obviously also required.

The present research suggests the necessityof such measures in at least one area. For example, four of the 34 correlation coefficients between the measure of SR attitudes andenvironmentally related behaviors were not statistically significant (p < .05). What makes this particularly interesting is that all of these items were related to the automobile. Consis tent with this are the data collected by the U.S. Department of Energy. This research has shown the greatest progress in conserving gasoline has been caused by more fuel-efficient cars and driving more slowly on highways, both of which are heavily influenced by federal legislation. On

7In an effort to reduce socially desirable responses, the 34SR behaviors were intermixed with 33 "dummy" behaviorsand included as the first section of the questionnaire thereby reducing the likelihood the respondent would be aware of the purpose of the research.

30 FALL 1984

the other hand, voluntary initiatives such as car pooling and use of public transportation have shown little progress (Milstein 1978). Thus, one could conclude that reliance on voluntary co operation will not by itself be sufficient to encourage auto-related SR behavior.

Indications are that voluntary conservation and cooperation from the consumer will assume a more prominent position in federal policy and programs. President Reagan has on several oc casions referred to a renewed need for volun teerism and community involvement as a means to compensate for the reduction in federal aid for social programs (Pett 1981). Similar emphasis may well become part of future energy and environmental policies. However, those pro grams that depend on consumer support will require a thorough understanding of consumer behavior and substantial supportive measures to enhance the likelihood of their success. The following are some suggestions and recommenda tions that relate to how public policy programs can be guided in their efforts to increase volun tary consumer support.

Two related variables-perceived consumereffectiveness and perception of a true need or motive for action-require serious attention and could represent the foundation on which com munication efforts can be based. For example, regarding awareness of an "energy crisis," this as well as several other studies have found that consumers do not perceive the present and long run situation as a true "crisis" (Milstein 1977,1979; Signore and Kassarjian 1981). Most con sumers seem to have adjusted to the rapid price increases (in fact, during gasoline shortages consumers appear to be primarily concerned with where they can buy gasoline, regardless of price) and are rarely faced with any real short ages or states of deprivation. The obvious im plication is that unless consumers are led to believe there is a need for adjusting their con sumption patterns, there is little motivation to voluntarily adjust their behavior and attitudes (Allen, Schewe, and Liander 1981; Semenik, Belk, and Painter 1981; Belk, Painter, and Semenik 1981; Allen 1980; Allen and Dillion1979; Henion 1976). One study that supportssuch an approach measured consumer reactions to various energy conservation messages and concluded that "until energy becomes a more important issue for the average consumer, itappears that energy conservation messages will

have marginal impact" (McDougall 1979 ,p. 15). Similarly, an even more emphatic conclusion was offered by Semenik, Belk, and Painter (1981).

Aside from any attempt to speculate regarding specific policy strategies though, the main con clusion is that this group [non-conservers] needs to be convinced of the existence of any energy prob lems. (p. 310)

Thus, the creation and stimulation of such a motive (i.e., belief that indeed a real problem exists) must be among the initial goals of any program designed to have a significant impact on consumer attitudes and behavior.

Assuming that consumers are convinced that environmental-resource problems are real and must be dealt with, they must still believe that their individual efforts will help reduce these problems. As was apparent from this research, the less SR consumers were much more likely to believe they could do very little to help solve these problems. Many consumers believe in the energy crisis and related problems but at the same time believe their individual efforts will not contribute toward the solution of these problems. One possible explanation for this is that these consumers shift the responsi bility for problem solution to aggregates such as government, big business (especially the oil companies), or other large groups that can be assigned responsibility for "causing" the prob lems (Belk, Painter, and Semenik 1981; Murray et al. 1974). Accordingly, this assignment of responsibility to others must be discouraged and consumers must be convinced that their personal efforts are necessary to resolve effectively these problems.

Because of low attitude-behavior correlations, previous research within this area of in quiry has concluded that simply trying to change consumer attitudes may have little effect on changing actual behavior (Murphy, Laczniac, and Robinson 1979; Ritchie, McDougall, and Claxton 1981). (See Seligman et al. [1979] for a noteworthy exception to this position.) How ever, it is well established that changes in the salience of important beliefs can affect attitudes and behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen 1975; Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). Thus, communication pro grams designed to emphasize specific important beliefs related to SR attitudes may well be useful. Perceived consumer effectiveness and

and belief in an "energy crisis" were found to be very significant factors related to SR con sumption, but these are not conservation atti tudes as such, but important beliefs related to SR consumption. Therefore, focusing communi cation efforts on these significant beliefs should help to influence both SR attitudes and actual consumption behavior.

Evidence of the importance of this approach in influencing energy consumption behavior has been found by Verhallen and Raaij (1981). Theauthors conclude from their research that

general attitudes toward energy conservation are not a significant determinant of energy-related household behavior. According to this study, energy conservation campaignsto change attitudes and, consequently, household behavior and energy use will be less successful. However, we expect that making the attitude measure more specific and including measuresof acceptance of one's own responsibility and perceived effectivenessof one's contribution as a oonsumer may improve the attitude behavior correspondence. . . . Consum ers will only act according to their attitudes when they feel personally responsible for energy prob lems, and perceive that their personal contribu tion to energy savingis effective. (p. 256)

Another variable, which can be much easier to cope with inasmuch as it does not necessarily involve changing consumer attitudes, is informing the consumer of environmentally compatible behaviors. No matter how much consumers desire to behave in an environmentally re sponsible manner, they may not have the knowl edge to do so. For example, results from this research showed that over 25 percent of re spondents did not know that showers normally use less hot water than baths; 34 percent did not know that flourescent lamps use less electricity than incandescent lamps; and nearly 36 percent did not realize that putting a brick in the toilet take will help conserve water.

Providing information to and increasing con sumer knowledge has been shown to signifi cantly reduce energy consumption (Gaskell, Ellis, and Pike 1981 ; McNeill and Hutton 1981), affect purchase of appliances (Anderson and Claxton 1981) and detergents (Henion 1972), and significantly change conservation attitudes and behaviors of high school students (Kushler and Jeppesen 1981). If one considers how effective the use of mass media can be in reach ing a large percentage of the population, it be comes even more evident that informing the


public should be a high-priority goal. An addi tional benefit of emphasizing consumer informa tion is that it can be accomplished not only by the public sector but also by the private sector. For example, the residential energy audits and a wide variety of other conservation promotion programs offered by public utilities for little or no charge to the homeowner have had a significant impact in both informing the public and reducing energy consumption ("Energy Conservation" 1981; Walker and Coney 1981). In addition, non-profit organizations such as the Sierra Club have also been instrumental in edu cating the public and, due to the voluntary nature of the organization, at a relatively low cost to the consumer. An added benefit to using such groups is the tendency of consumers to believe information offered by consumer organi zations more readily than that offered by busi nesses or the government (Milstein 1977).

A major component of implementing acommunication strategy is media selection and scheduling for the selected target market. Assuming that the most appropriate target is low-SR consumers, communication efforts are complicated by the lack of significant demographic differences between high and low SR consumers. It would be much easier to schedule and select media if, for example, low SR consumers tended to be younger or older, higher or lower income, male or female, etc. But because this is not the case, other types of discriminators and strategies must be used. For example, be cause it was found that a large proportion of low SR consumers stated that television was their primary source of entertainment, this medium should be given high priority. Also, due to lower preferences for magazines and newspapers (and a greater tendency for low SR consumers to disbelieve what they read in news papers), these media should be deemphasized.

The previous discussion includes only some of the variables shown in this research to have considerable potential to influence SR con sumption. These, as well as other attitudinal and behavioral variables should no doubt be seriously considered by the public sector. How ever, in addition to what variables should be considered, policy-makers should also be con cerned with the appropriate role for the govern ment and its agencies. The public is not adverse to the government (and business) assuming a role in solving environmental-resource problems

32 FALL 1984

(Weijo and Rudelius 1981; Dyer 1981; Bennett and Moore 1981). In fact, this as well as other research indicates that many Americans desire the government to take a more active role and assume more of the responsibility for leadership (Milstein 1977; Belk, Painter, and Semenik 1981; Walker and Coney 1981). Given the nature of many environmental-resource issues, the desire for more initiative and leadership from the government is understandable. For example, concerned residents in New England and other areas in the Northeast can do very little to reduce acid rain without the assistance of the government and/or its regulatory agencies. Similarly, air pollution from wood-burning stoves and furnaces has become such a major problem in the Northern U.S. that Oregon has become the first state to pass legislation requir ing new stoves sold after 1986 to meet clean burning standards (Wall Street Journal 1983b).

CONCLUSION

This research was designed to measure and describe the socially responsible consumer. The results show that SR attitudes do exist and that many consumers voluntarily behave in an SR manner. Although our environmental resource problems will not be solved through volunteerism, the concept is viable and should not be underestimated. Although no doubt a large proportion of our success in energy conser vation and pollution control has resulted from the pricing mechanism (and legislation), we should not disregard the present and future role of socially responsible behavior.

It has been shown in the literature thatbehavior can be influenced by multiple attitudes or motives tcf, Aizen and Fishbein 1980, Fish bein and Ajzen 1975, Ehrlich 1969, Wicker1969). For example, although saving money has likely been the primary motive influencing consumers to conserve energy, this research and other studies cited in this article present strong evidence that SR attitudes are also likely to be an important motive influencing con sumer behavior. Using energy as an example, it is conceivable that if world energy prices con tinue to stabilize and/or rise gradually-and indications are that they may-consumers will become accustomed to existing price levels and no longer reduce consumption out of a desire to save money (Willenborg and Pitts 1977 ; Pitts, Willenborg, and Sherrell 1979, 1981).

The renewed interest in large automobiles is evidence that this may already be happening. In such situations, the existence of strong SR

motives may be among the best methods to continue conservation and reduce our dependence on imported energy.

APPENDIX A

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA ANALYSIS

This appendix provides a more complete explanation of the research methodology and details of the data analysis.

SRCB Scale Development

Since accurate measurement of the depend ent variable-socially-responsible consumption was so critical to the success of this research, considerable effort was allocated to developing a quality measure.

To ensure that the scale was both a reliable and valid research instrument, several steps were taken. Initially, an item pool consisting of 138 positively and negatively worded statements was developed. Some items were selected from existing scales and others were developed by the author after reviewing the relevant literature. Fourteen of these items were eliminated be cause they were redundant, ambiguous, or not clearly positive or negative statements. The remaining 125 items were then pretested on a sample of 444 undergraduate and graduate students from a major Eastern university. Using both factor analysis and item analysis, 65 items were eliminated from the item pool.

The 59 remaining items were once again pretested on a different sample of 321 undergradu ate students. Primarily based upon item-total correlations, I 7 more items were dropped from the scale.

The third and final pretest was conductedusing 98 male and female non-student adults;some residing in Massachusetts and others in Vermont. Two items with item-total correla tions less than .3 were eliminated, leaving ascale of 40 items to be used as the final research instrument (see Appendix B).

The validity of SRCB Scale was assessed in several ways. A conceptual review of the items clearly indicated the scale had face validity. The factor analytical procedures used in the scale development process also indicated the scale possessed logical validity (as described by Kerlinger and Kaya 1970). The predictive validity of the sale was demonstrated through the use of the "known groups" technique (Kerlinger and Kaya 1970). This procedure requires comparing scale scores of one group known to possess a considerable amount of the trait under consideration to another group selected at random (or where possible, a sample known to possess a small amount of the trait). The "known group" selected in this study was a sample of active members of the Sierra Club. A comparison of their mean SRCB Scale score to that of the national sample was found to be significantly different (p < .01), thus supporting the predictive validity of the scale.

The most rigorous test of the validity of theSRCB Scale was accomplished using a variation of Campbell and Fiske's (1970) multitrait muItimethod procedure for construct validation. In essence, this method requires using at least two different methods of measurement and at least two different, but similar traits. The present study utilized three traits and threemethods. Through examining the correlations among these various trait-method combinations it was determined that the SRCB Scale demon strated acceptable validity.

Two measures of the scale's reliability wereobtained. Guttman's Lambda 3 index of relia bility was .930, and Cronbach's coefficient alpha index of reliability was .925. Considering the heterogeneous sample on which these values


were obtained, the SRCB Scale demonstrated excellent reliability.

The SRCB scale appeared to perform quitesatisfactorily. Using a five-point Likert-type scale and summing the responses from the 40 items, the range of scores for the national sample was from a low of 64 to a high of 200. The mean score was 144.4, while the median was 145. The standard deviation was 24.3, and the figure for skewness was -.295 and for kur tosis it was -.005. In total, these figures indicate that the scores were very close to being norm ally distributed.

For a more detailed description of the scaledevelopment and validation process see Anti!and Bennett (1979) or Antil (1978).

Psychographic Analysis

A three-step process was used to derive the psychographic profile. First, respondents were divided into two contrast groups, one repre sentative of high SR consumers (highest 20 per cent of scores on the SRCB Scale) and other representative of low SR consumers (lowest20 percent of scores). Next, a comparison was made of the contrast groups' responses on each psychographic item using a t-test of group means. This resulted in the selection of 76 items with significant (p < .10) differences inmean scores. Finally, a principal componentfactor analysis was performed followed by a varimax rotation to enhance the interpretabil ity of the factors.

In order to obtain a reasonable number ofinterpretable factors, several factor solutions were attempted. It was decided to eliminate 19 items that had factor loadings less than .3 on any factor (using both eight-and ten -factor solutions). With this change, a nine-factor solution was judged to fit the data best. Nearly all of the items loaded highest on that factor that also contained other conceptually related items. Eigenvalues ranged from 5.7 to 1.0, and the percentage of explained variance ranged from 29.3 to 5.3. (See Appendix C for a list of the factors and sample items.)

Multiple Regression

Using the SRCB Scale as the dependent variable, Table 4 (columns 1 and 2) summarizes the results for the two multiple regressions. Because five of the predictor variables were highly intercorrelated (the last five variables

34 FALL 1984

listed in Table 4), they were not included in the same regression equation because of the inter pretational problems associated with multi colinearity. To compensate partially for their exclusion, socioeconomic status (a composite measure of the respondent's education, income, and occupation) was included. Thus, the first equation included the eleven predictor varia bles remaining after the adjustment for multi colinearity. The second regression omitted socioeconomic status and environmental con cern. Socioeconomic status was eliminated be cause one of its components, occupation,caused a significant reduction in sample size.8

Environmental concern was also removed from the second regression, because six of the items in this ten item scale were also included in the forty-item SRCB Scale. Thus, it is questionable whether this variable should legitimately be included as an independent variable in the regression equation and may adversely affect the interpretation of results.

Tests of Means and Correlations

Pearson product-moment correlations and t-tests of means were used to supplement the information gained from the multiple regres sions. Interpretation of the results of these bivariate procedures is limited because these methods do not take into account any of the intercorrelations known to exist among several of the independent variables. However, despite this limitation, both procedures offer additional insights that assist in interpreting the data.

Table 4 (column 5) lists the results of thet-tests for each of the 16 variables. The t-values"Wereobtained by dividing respondent soores on the SRCB Scale into the same two contrastgroups as were previously used. A ttest was then performed using the mean value of eachindependent variable as calculated from each of the contrast groups.

The correlational measures listed in Table 4 (column 6) are the Pearson product-moment correlations between the measure of SR con sumption and the 16 independent variables. These measures are based on results from all respondents.

8Although occupation was divided into thirteen categories, respondents who were not employed or employed part time were assigneda value of 0 and were thus treated as missingdata. A significantproportion of these were housewives.

APPENDIXB

ITEMS ON THE SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR SCALE

People should be more concerned about reducing or limiting the noise in our society.

Every person should stop increasing their consumption of products so that our resources will last longer.

The benefits of modern consumer products are more important than the pollution which results from their production and use.

Pollution is presently one of the most critical problems facing this nation.

don't think we're doing enough to encourage manufacturers to use recyclable packages.

think we are just not doing enough to save scarce natural resources from being used up.

Natural resources must be preserved even if people must do without some products.

All consumers should be interested in the environmentalconsequences of the products they purchase.

Pollution is not personally affecting my life.Consumers should be made to pay higher prices for

products which pollute the environment.It genuinely infuriates me to think that the government

doesn't do more to help control pollution of theenvironment.

Nonreturnable bottles and cans for soft drinks and beershould be banned by law.

I would be willing to sign a petition or demonstrate foran environmental cause.

1 have often thought that if we could just get by with alittle less there would be more left for future generations.

The Federal government should subsidize research on technology for recycling waste products.

I'd be willing to ride a bicycle or take a bus to work in order to reduce air pollution.

I would probably never join a group or club which is concerned solely with ecological issues.

I feel people worry too much about pesticides on food products.

The whole pollution issue has never upset me too much since I feel it's somewhat overrated.

would donate a day's pay to a foundation to helpimprove the environment.

would be willing to have my laundry less white or bright in order to be sure that I was using a non polluting laundry product.

Manufacturers should be forced to use recycled materials in their manufacturing and processing operations.

I think that a person should urge her friends not to use products that pollute or harm the environment.

Commercial advertising should be forced to mentionthe ecological disadvantagesof products.

Much more fuss is being made about air and waterpollution than is really justified.

The government should provide each citizen with a list of agencies and organizations to which citizens could report grievancesconcerning pollution.

I would be willing to pay a 5 percent increase in mytaxes to support greater governmental control of pollution.

Trying to control water pollution is more trouble thanit is worth.

I become incensed when I think about the harm beingdone to plant and animal life by pollution.

People should urge their friends to limit their use of products made from scarce resources.

I would be willing to pay one dollar more each monthfor electricity if it meant cleaner air.

It would be wise for the government to devote much more money toward supporting a strong conserva tion program.

I would be willing to accept an increase in my family's total expenses of $120 next year to promote the wise use of natural resources.

Products which during their manufacturing or use pollute the environment should be heavily taxed by the government.

People should be willing to accept smog in exchange for the convenience of automobiles.

When I think of the ways industries are oolluting I getfrustrated and angry.

Our public schools should require all students to take acourse dealing with environmental and conservation problems.

I would be willing to stop buying products from com panies guilty of polluting the environment even though it might be inconvenient.

I'd be willing to make personal sacrificesfor the sake ofslowing down pollution even though the immediate results may not seem significant.

I rarely ever worry about the effects of smog on myselfand family.


Ialways look for specials when I shop. 83 (64) 65 (27)A person can save a lot of money shopping

around for bargains. 77 (48) 64 (31)

APPENDIX C

FACTORS AND EXAMPLE PSYCHOGRAPHIC ITEMS OF HIGH AND LOW SR INDIVIDUALS

Higha

%Low''

%

Community ActivitiesInfluential in my neighborhood 27 (11) 15 ( 5)I am active in community projects. 29 (14) 17 ( 5)

Business-Government IssuesAmerican business has too much political power. 71 (41) 49 (17)The government should control prices and

profits. 33 (22) 20 (10)

Physical Activities and HealthJ like to go for long walks. 69 (45) 41 (17)I like to work outdoors. 88 (64) 69 (35)

U .S. Societ~ ~Liberalism-Conservatism)I think the Women's Liberation Movement

is a good thing. 42 (26) 11 ( 7)You can't believe what you read in the newspaper. 24 ( 9) 41 (13)

AutomobilesIn a car, economy is more important than

power or size. Small, economical cars will be more popular in

78 (56) 53 (29)

the future than they are now. 85 (71) 74 (40)

Satisfaction with Life and JobI am happier now than I have ever been. 67 (49) 54 (27)I take pride in my job. 87 (72) 83 (49)

Cultural InterestsI enjoy going through an art gallery. 65 (43) 32 (15)Magazines are more interesting than television. 50 (20) 29 (10)

Self ConceptI believe in taking direct action when I

don't like something. 81 (41) 53 (25)I think I have a lot of personal ability. 79 (47) 66 (32)

Bar~ain and Shopein~ Behavior

aThe first number listed below each group represents the percentage of respondents who strongly and moderately agree with the statement. The number in parentheses represents the percentage of respondents who strongly agree with the statement.

36 FALL 1984

REFERENCES

Ajzen, leek and Martin Fishbein (1980), UnderstandingAtti tudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Allen, Chris T. (1980), "Self-Perception Based Strategies forStimulating Socially-ConsciousConsumption: The Case of Energy," Center for ManagementResearch WorkingPaper Series, 80-27, Universityof Massachusetts,Amherst.

Allen, Chris T. and WilliamR. Dillion (1979), "On Receptivity to Information Furnished by the Public Policymaker: The

Brooker, George (1976), ''The Self Actualizing Socially Conscious Consumer," Journal of Consumer Research, 3,107-112.

Business Week (1981), "Energy Conservation-Spawning aBillion-DollarBusiness," 6 April, 58-69.

Butte}, Frederick H. and WilliamL. Flinn (1978), ''The Politicsof Environmental Concern: The Impacts of Party Identification and Political Ideology on Environmental Attitudes," Environment and Behavior, 10,17-35.

Case of Energy," in Educator's Proceedings, N. Beckwith et al., eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp.550-556.

(1978a), "Social Class and Mass Environmental Beliefs-A Reconsideration," Environment and Behavior,10,433-449.

Allen, Chris T., Charles D. Schewe, and Bertil Liander (1981), "Cross-CulturalComparisons of a Conservation-Orientation Model," in Consumers and Energy Conservation, John D. Claxton et al., eds., New York: Praeger,pp. 152-159.

Anderson, C. Dennis and John D. Claxton (1981), "EnergyLabels for Appliances," in Consumersand Energy Conservation, John D. Claxton et al., eds., New York: Praeger, pp. 243-250.

Anderson, W. Thomas and William H. Cunningham (1972),''The Socially Conscious Consumer," Journal of Marketing,36, 23-31.

Anderson, W. Thomas, Karl E. Henion, and Eli P. Cox (1974),"Socially vs, Ecologically Responsible Consumers," AMACombined ConferenceProceedings,36, pp. 304-311.

Antil, John H. (1978), ''The Construction and Validation of anInstrument to Measure Socially Responsible ConsumerBehavior: A Study of the SociallyResponsibleConsumer," doctoral dissertation, Department of Marketing, The Penn sylvaniaState University.

(1983), "Uses of Response Certainty in AttitudeMeasurement," in Advances in Consumer Research, 10, Richard P. Bagozziand Alice M. Tybout, eds., Ann Arbor: Associationfor Consumer Research,pp. 409-415.

Antil, John H. and Peter D. Bennett (1979), "Construction andValidation of a Scale to Measure Socially Responsible Consumption Behavior," in The ConserverSociety, Karl E. Henion II and Thomas C. Kinnear, eds., Chicago: American MarketingAssociation,pp. 51-68.

Arbuthnot, Jack (1977), "The Roles of Attitudinal and Personality Variables in the Prediction of EnvironmentalBehavior and Knowledge," Environment and Behavior,9,217-232.

Arndt, Johan and Thorolf Helgesen(1979), "Marketing of Ecologically Compatible Products: Public Policy Issues and aMarket Test," 1979 Educators' Conference Proceedings,Beckwithet al., eds.,Chicago: AmericanMarketingAssociation, pp. 594-597.

Baird, John C. and Judith M. Brier (1981), "Perceptual Awareness of Energy Requirements of Familiar Objects," Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 90-96.

Belch, Michael A. (1979), "Identifying the Socially and Ecologically Concerned Segment through Life-Style Research:

Campbell, Donald E. and Donald W. Fiske (1970), "Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix," in Attitude Measurement, Gene Summers, ed.,Chicago: Rand McNally,pp. 100-122.

Cannon, Lisa (1981), "U.S. Energy Conservation: Federal andCommunity Actions," in Consumersand Energy Conservation, John D. Claxton et al., eds., New York: Praeger, pp. 170-179.

Churchill, G. A. (1979), "A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs," Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (February), 64-73.

Constantini, Edmond and Kenneth Hanf (1972), "Environ mental Concern at Lake Tahoe: A Study of Elite Percep tions, Backgrounds, and Attitudes," Environment and Behavior, 2, 209-242.

Crider, Bill (1984), "Oil: U.S. Has Ace in the Hole," Sunday(Wilmington,Delaware)News Journal, March 3, C1.

Crosby, Lawrence, James Taylor, and Thomas Kinnear (1980),''The Role of Ecological Concern in the Passage of the MichiganContainer Law," in Marketingin the 80s-Changes and Challenges,1980 Educators' Conference Proceedings, Richard Bagozziet al., eds., Chicago: AmericanMarketing Association,pp. 448-451.

Dyer, Robert F. (1981), "Direct Control of Household Electricity," in Consumers and Energy Conservation, John D.

Claxton et al., eds., New York: Praeger,pp. 231-241. Ehrlich, Howard (1979), "Attitudes, Behavior, and the InterveningVariables,"American Sociologist, 4,29-34.

Ferber, R. (1977), "Research by Convenience," Journal ofConsumerResearch, 4 (June), 57-58.

Fishbein, Martin and lcek Ajzen (1975), Belief. Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory andResearch, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Fisk, George (1973), "Criteria for a Theory of ResponsibleConsumption," Journal of Marketing, 37, 24-31.

Fortune (1981), "A Simpler Path to a Cleaner Environment,"4 May, 234-254.

Fusso, Thomas E. (1978), ''The Polls: The Energy Crisis inPerspective,"Public Opinion Quarterly,42,127-136.

Gallup, George H. (1977), The Gallup Poll-Public Opinion1972-1977, vols. 1 and 2, American Institute of PublicOpinion.

Initial Findings," The ConserverSociety, Karl E. Henion II (1978 and 1979), GallupPoll, American Institute ofand Thomas C. Kinnear, eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association,pp. 69-81.

Belk, Russell, John Painter, and Richard Semenik (1981), "Pre

Public Opinion.- (1980), Gallup Opinion Index, American Institute of

Public Opinion.

ferred Solutions to the Energy Crisis as a Function of Causal Attributions," Journal of Consumer Research, 8,

(1981), GallupReport, American Institute of PublicOpinion.

306-312.Bennett, Peter D. and Noreen Klein Moore (1981), "Con

sumers' Preferences for Alternative Energy ConservationPolicies: A Trade-Off Analysis," Journal of Consumer

Research, 8, 313, 321.Berkowitz, Leonard and Kenneth G. Lutterman (1968), ''The

Traditional Socially Responsible Personality," Public

Gaskell, George, P. Ellis, and R. Pike (1981), "Effects of Consumption Feedback," in Consumersand Energy Conservation, John D. Claxton et al., eds., New York: Praeger, pp. 251-261.

Henion, Karl E. (1972), ''The Effect of Ecologically Relevant Information on Detergent Sales," Journal of Marketing Research, 9, 10-14.

Opinion Quarterly, 32,169-185.

-- (1976), EcologicalMarketing, Columbus: Grid.


Henion, Karl E., Rus!l:ill Gregory, and Mona A. Oee (1981), "Trade-off's in Attribute Levels Made by Ecologically Concerned and Unconcerned Consumers When Buying Detergents," Advances in Consumer Research, Kent B. Monroe, ed., Vol. 8, Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 624-629.

Herberger, Roy A., Jr. (1975), ''The Ecological Product Buying Motive-A Challenge for Consumer Education," Journal of ConsumerAffairs, 9, 187-195.

Kassarjian, Harold H. (1971), "Incorporating Ecology into Mar keting Strategy: The Case of Air Pollution," Journal of Marketing, 35,61-65.

Katona, George (1982), "Selling Government Programs," Journal of Macromarketing,2 (Fall), 38-42.

Kerlinger, F. N. and E. Kaya (1970), ''The Construction and

Conservation," in The ConserverSOciety, Karl E. Henion II and Thomas C. Kinnear, eds., Chicago: American Market ing Association, pp. 51-68.

Murray, James, Michael J. Minor, Norman M. Bradburn, Robert F. Cotterman, Martin Frankel, and Alan E. Pisarski (1974), "Evolution of Public Response to the Energy Crisis," Science, 184,257-263.

Pett, Saul (1981), "Reagan Has Faith in American Spirit," Associated Press article in Sunday (Wilmington, Delaware) News Journal, 18 October, AI, A14.

Pitts, Robert E., John F. Willenborg, and Daniel L. Sherrell (1979), "Rising Energy Costs and Adaptive Consumer Behavior-A Segmentation Approach," in 1979 Educators' Conference Proceedings, Beckwith et al., eds., American Marketing Association, pp. 598-601.

Factor Analytic Validation of Scales to Measure Attitudes Toward Education," in Attitude Measurement,G. Summers, ed., Chicago: Rand McNally, pp. 254-264.

(1981), "Consumer Adaptation to Gasoline PriceIncreases," Journalof ConsumerResearch, 8, 322-330.

Kinnear, Thomas C. and James R. Taylor (1973), ''The Effect of Ecological Concern on Brand Perceptions," Journal of MarketingResearch, 10, 191-197.

Kinnear, Thomas C., James R. Taylor, and Sadrudin A. Ahmed (1974), "Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who Are They?" Journalof Marketing, 38, 20-24.

Kushler, Martin G. and John C. Jeppesen (1981), "Teenage Consumers and Energy Conservation," in Consumers and Energy Conservation, John D. Claxton et al., eds., New York: Praeger, pp. 56-68.

Maloney, Michael P., Michael P. Ward, and G. Nicholas Braucht (1975), "A Revised Scale for the Measurement of Ecologi cal Attitudes and Knowledge," American Psychologist,30, 787-790.

McClosky, Herbert (1958), "Conservatism and Personality,"A merican PoliticalScience Review, 52, 27 -45 .

McDougall, G. H. G. (1979), "Consumer Reaction to EnergyConservation Messages: An Experimental Design," Research Paper Series No. 0280, School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University.

McDougall, Gordon H. G. and J. R. Brent Ritchie (1980), "Consumer Energy Conservation: A Framework for Policy Research," in Advances in Consumer Research,7, J. Olson, ed., Ann Arbor: Association for ConsumerResearch, pp. 272-276.

McNeill, Dennis L. and R. Bruce Hutton (1981), "Marketing Incentives and Energy Conservation," in Consumers and Energy Conservation, John D. Claxton et al., 008., New York: Praeger, pp. 271-279.

Milstein, Jeffrey (1977), "Attitudes, Knowledge and Behavior of American Consumers Regarding Energy Conservation with Some Implications for Governmental Action," in Advances in Consumer Research, 4, Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 315-321.

(1978), "Energy Conservation and Travel Behavior," in Advances in ConsumerResearch, 5, Ann Arbor: Associa tion for Consumer Research, pp. 422-425.

(1979), "The Conserver Society? Consumers' Attitudes and Behaviors Regarding Energy Conservation," in The ConserverSociety, Karl E. Henion II and Thomas C. Kinnear, eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp.43-50.

Murphy, Patrick E. (1978), "Environmentally Concerned Con sumers: Demographic Dimensions," in Research Frontiers in Marketing: Dialogues and Directions, 1978 Educators' Proceedings, Subhash C. Jain, ed., Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 316-320.

Murphy, Patrick E., Norman Kangun, and William B. Locander (1978), "Environmentally Concerned Consumers-Racial Variations," Journalof Marketing, 42, 61-66.

Murphy, Patrick E., Gene R. Laczniak, and Richard K. Robinson(1979), "An Attitudinal and Behavioral Index of Energy

38 FALL 1984

Public Utilities Fortnightly (1981), "Energy Conservation,"9 April, 66-82.

Riezenstein, Richard C., Gerald E. Hills, and John W. Philpot(1974), ''Willingness to Pay for Control of Air Pollution:A Demographic Analysis," in 1974 CombinedProceedings, Ronald C. Curhan, ed., Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 323-328.

Ritchie, J. R. Brent, Gordon H. G. McDougall, and John D.Claxton (1981), "Complexities of Household Energy Consumption and Conservation," Journal of Consumer Re search, 8, 233-242.

Seligman, C., M. Kriss, J. M. Darley, R. H. Fazio, L. J. Becker, and J. B. Pryor (1979), "Predicting Summer Energy Con sumption from Homeowners' Attitudes," Journal of Applied SocialPsychology, 9, 70-90.

Semenik, Richard S., Russell Belk, and John Painter (1981), "A Study of Factors Influencing Energy Conservation Behavior," in Advances in Consumer Research, Andrew Mitchell, cd., 9, Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 306-312.

Signore, Jeanie Del and Harold H. Kassarjian (1981), ''The Rela tionship Between Opinions, Social Values and Behavior during the 1979 Gasoline Crisis: An Exploratory Attempt,"in The Oianging Marketing Environment: New Theoriesand Applications, 1981 Educators' Conference Proceedings, Bernhardt et al., eds., Chicago: American MarketingAssociation, pp. 295-298.

Stobaugh, Robert B. and Daniel Yergin (1979), Energy Future: Report of the Energy Project at the Harvard Business School, New York: Random House.

Tognacci, Louis N., Marvin F. Weigel, and David T. Vernon (1972), "Environmental Quality-How Universal is Public Concern?" Environment and Behavior,4 (March), 73-86.

Tucker, Lewis R. (1978), ''The Environmentally ConcernedCitizen-Some Correlates," Environment and Behavior,10,389-418.

Van Liere, K. D. and R. E. Dunlap (1980), ''The Social Bases of Environmental Concern: A Review of Hypotheses, Explanations and Empirical Evidence," Public Opinion Quarterly,4,181-197.

Van Liere, Kent D., and Riley E. Dunlap (1981), "Environ mental Concern: Does it Make a Difference How It's Measured?" Environment and Behavior, 13,651-676.

Verhallen, Theo M. M. and W. Fred Van Raaij (1981), "Household Behavior and the Use of Natural Gas for Home Heating," Journalof ConsumerResearch, 8, 253-257.

Walker, Bruce J. and Kenneth A. Coney (1981), "Consumer Adoption of an Energy Conservation Product," in The ChangingMarketing Environment: New Theoriesand Ap plications, 1981 Educators' Conference Proceedings, Bernhardt et al., eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 245-248.

Walker, James M. (1980), "Voluntary Response to Energy Conservation Appeals," Journal of Consumer Research, 7,88-92.

Wall Street Journal (1983), "Is the Oil Crisis Over? ExpertsDoubt it," 4 April, 1.

(1983a), 14 June, 37.(l983b), "Smoke from Wood Becomes Big

Polluter in Northern U.S.," 4 October, 35.(1983c), "Reagan Says Renewable-EnergyProjects

and ConservationAre Vital in Long Term," 5 October, 2.Webster, Frederick E. (1975), "Determining the Characteristics

of the SociallyConsciousConsumer," Journalof Consumer Research, 2, 188-196.

Weijo, Richard and William Rudelius (1981), "How Local Governments Can Promote Energy Savings: An Analysis of Saint Paul Homeowners," in The ChangingMarketing Environment: New Theoriesand Applications, 1981 Edu cators' Conference Proceedings, Bernhardt et al., OOs., Chicago: American MarketingAssociation,pp. 252-255.

Wells,Williams (1971), "AIO Item Library," Unpublished listing of 300 AIO items obtained from author.

Wicker, Allan (1969), "Attitudes versus Actions: The Relationship of Verbal and Overt Behavioral Responses toAttitude Objects," Journal of SocialIssues, 25,41-78.

Willenborg, John F. and Robert E. Pitts (1977), "GasolinePrices: The Effect on Consumer Behavior and Attitudes,"Journalof Marketing, 41, 24-31.


Journal of Macromarketing 1984 Antil 18 39

Documents

Transcript of Journal of Macromarketing 1984 Antil 18 39