IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03379593.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

"Not tested on animals": How consumers react to cruelty-free cosmetics proposed by manufacturers and retailers?

Author

Listed:
  • Cindy G Grappe

    (UQAM - Université du Québec à Montréal = University of Québec in Montréal)

  • Cindy Lombart

    (Audencia Recherche - Audencia Business School)

  • Didier Louis

    (IUT Saint-Nazaire - Institut Universitaire de Technologie Saint-Nazaire - UN - Université de Nantes)

  • Fabien Durif

    (UQAM - Université du Québec à Montréal = University of Québec in Montréal)

Abstract

Purpose-Animal welfare is increasingly favoured by consumers in their choice of food and cosmetic products, proposed by manufacturers and retailers. This study aims to investigate the impact of the "not tested on animals" claim on consumers' attitude and behavioural intention towards a cosmetic product through an enriched version of Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behaviour. Design/methodology/approach-A between-subjects design has been used. 450 participants were recruited through the social network of a cosmetics and personal hygiene brand in Quebec, Canada, and answered a questionnaire. They were randomly assigned to either a manipulation group (n=226) or a control group (n=224). Data were analysed with Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling. Findings-This study shows that external (credibility and attitude towards marketing claims) and internal psychological variables (subjective norms and altruistic concerns with animal welfare) influence attitude towards and purchase intention of "not tested on animals" personal care products. More egotistic concerns, such as personal appearance, also explain the formation of attitude towards cruelty-free cosmetics. Research limitations/implications-This research supplements Ajzen's original model with internal psychological (individuals' concerns with animal welfare and personal appearance) and external (general credibility of cosmetic products claims, credibility of the "not tested on animals" claim and attitude towards this claim) variables. These variables, as suggested by previous research on cosmetics and their claims, improve the understanding of consumer attitude and purchase behaviour patterns. Practical implications-The study's findings point out the role of companies to increase consumers' knowledge on the significance and transparency of their messages, notably the "not tested on animals" claim. They also stress that policymakers in regions where regulation is unclear should at least punish untruthful communication pertaining to animal testing in cosmetic and personal care products. Originality/value-Prior studies on cosmetic products did not investigate the difference of consumer attitude formation towards cruelty-free products compared to conventional cosmetic products. Consequently, this research shows that the construction of attitude towards crueltyfree products highly differs from conventional personal care.

Suggested Citation

  • Cindy G Grappe & Cindy Lombart & Didier Louis & Fabien Durif, 2021. ""Not tested on animals": How consumers react to cruelty-free cosmetics proposed by manufacturers and retailers?," Post-Print hal-03379593, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03379593
    DOI: 10.1108/IJRDM-12-2020-0489
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://audencia.hal.science/hal-03379593
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://audencia.hal.science/hal-03379593/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2020-0489?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lancendorfer, Karen M. & Atkin, JoAnn L. & Reece, Bonnie B., 2008. "Animals in advertising: Love dogs? Love the ad!," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(5), pages 384-391, May.
    2. Ford, Gary T & Smith, Darlene B & Swasy, John L, 1990. "Consumer Skepticism of Advertising Claims: Testing Hypotheses from Economics of Information," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(4), pages 433-441, March.
    3. Azucena Gracia & Maria L. Loureiro & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2011. "Valuing an EU Animal Welfare Label using Experimental Auctions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(6), pages 669-677, November.
    4. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Hsu, Chia-Lin & Chang, Chi-Ya & Yansritakul, Chutinart, 2017. "Exploring purchase intention of green skincare products using the theory of planned behavior: Testing the moderating effects of country of origin and price sensitivity," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 145-152.
    7. Wansink, Brian & Sonka, Steven T. & Hasler, Clare M., 2004. "Front-label health claims: when less is more," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 659-667, December.
    8. Ortega, David L. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2018. "Demand for farm animal welfare and producer implications: Results from a field experiment in Michigan," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 74-81.
    9. Lombart, Cindy & Louis, Didier, 2014. "A study of the impact of Corporate Social Responsibility and price image on retailer personality and consumers' reactions (satisfaction, trust and loyalty to the retailer)," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 630-642.
    10. Liobikienė, Genovaitė & Mandravickaitė, Justina & Bernatonienė, Jurga, 2016. "Theory of planned behavior approach to understand the green purchasing behavior in the EU: A cross-cultural study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 38-46.
    11. Chomsaeank Photcharoen & Rebecca Chung & Raksmey Sann, 2020. "Modelling Theory of Planned Behavior on Health Concern and Health Knowledge towards Purchase Intention on Organic Products," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(8), pages 100-100, August.
    12. Cindy Lombart & Didier Louis, 2014. "A study of the impact of Corporate Social Responsibility and price image on retailer personality and consumers' reactions (satisfaction, trust and loyalty to the retailer)," Post-Print hal-01027577, HAL.
    13. Johanna Lena Dahlhausen & Cam Rungie & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "Value of labeling credence attributes—common structures and individual preferences," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 741-751, November.
    14. Grunert, Suzanne C. & Juhl, Hans Jorn, 1995. "Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 39-62, March.
    15. Cindy Lombart & Didier Louis, 2012. "Consumer satisfaction and loyalty: Two main consequences of retailer personality," Post-Print hal-00956956, HAL.
    16. Lombart, Cindy & Louis, Didier, 2012. "Consumer satisfaction and loyalty: Two main consequences of retailer personality," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 644-652.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. José Magano & Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira & Bruna Ferreira & Ângela Leite, 2022. "A Cross-Sectional Study on Ethical Buyer Behavior towards Cruelty-Free Cosmetics: What Consequences for Female Leadership Practices?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Grappe, Cindy G. & Lombart, Cindy & Louis, Didier & Durif, Fabien, 2022. "Clean labeling: Is it about the presence of benefits or the absence of detriments? Consumer response to personal care claims," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    3. Cindy Grappe & Cindy Lombart & Didier Louis & Fabien Durif, 2022. "Clean labeling: Is it about the presence of benefits or the absence of detriments? Consumer response to personal care claims," Post-Print hal-04293232, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grappe, Cindy G. & Lombart, Cindy & Louis, Didier & Durif, Fabien, 2022. "Clean labeling: Is it about the presence of benefits or the absence of detriments? Consumer response to personal care claims," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    2. Cindy Grappe & Cindy Lombart & Didier Louis & Fabien Durif, 2022. "Clean labeling: Is it about the presence of benefits or the absence of detriments? Consumer response to personal care claims," Post-Print hal-04293232, HAL.
    3. Guang-Wen Zheng & Abu Bakkar Siddik & Mohammad Masukujjaman & Syed Shah Alam & Alvina Akter, 2020. "Perceived Environmental Responsibilities and Green Buying Behavior: The Mediating Effect of Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Najla Gonzaga Ribeiro & Edar Silva Añaña & Belem Barbosa, 2022. "The Influence of Human Values, Environmental Awareness, and Attitudes on the Intention to Purchase Cannabis-Based Skincare Cosmetics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-15, August.
    5. Lombart, Cindy & Louis, Didier, 2016. "Sources of retailer personality: Private brand perceptions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 117-125.
    6. José Magano & Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira & Bruna Ferreira & Ângela Leite, 2022. "A Cross-Sectional Study on Ethical Buyer Behavior towards Cruelty-Free Cosmetics: What Consequences for Female Leadership Practices?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-15, June.
    7. Louis, Didier & Lombart, Cindy, 2018. "Retailers’ communication on ugly fruits and vegetables: What are consumers’ perceptions?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 256-271.
    8. Changjoon Lee & Soyoun Lim & Byoungchun Ha, 2021. "Green Supply Chain Management and Its Impact on Consumer Purchase Decision as a Marketing Strategy: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-16, October.
    9. Han, Heesup & Yu, Jongsik & Kim, Wansoo, 2019. "An electric airplane: Assessing the effect of travelers' perceived risk, attitude, and new product knowledge," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 33-42.
    10. Xiaoyun Zhang & Feng Dong, 2020. "Why Do Consumers Make Green Purchase Decisions? Insights from a Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-25, September.
    11. Marescotti, Maria Elena & Caputo, Vincenzina & Demartini, Eugenio & Gaviglio, Anna, 2020. "Consumer preferences for wild game cured meat label: do attitudes towards animal welfare matter?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 23(4), June.
    12. Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández & Manuel Escobar-Farfán & Mauricio Guerra-Velásquez & Elizabeth Emperatriz García-Salirrosas, 2023. "COVID-19 Effects on Environmentally Responsible Behavior: A Social Impact Perspective from Latin American Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-21, February.
    13. Henri Kuokkanen & William Sun, 2020. "Companies, Meet Ethical Consumers: Strategic CSR Management to Impact Consumer Choice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(2), pages 403-423, October.
    14. Patel, Jayesh D. & Trivedi, Rohit H. & Yagnik, Arpan, 2020. "Self-identity and internal environmental locus of control: Comparing their influences on green purchase intentions in high-context versus low-context cultures," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    15. Thi Thu Huong Nguyen & Zhi Yang & Thi Thuy Nga Nguyen & Cao Thi Thanh, 2019. "Theory of Planned Behavior Approach to Understand the Influence of Green Perceived Risk on Consumers' Green Product Purchase Intentions in an Emerging Country," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 9(3), pages 138-147.
    16. Zohra Ghali-Zinoubi, 2022. "Examining Drivers of Environmentally Conscious Consumer Behavior: Theory of Planned Behavior Extended with Cultural Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Nekmahmud, Md. & Naz, Farheen & Ramkissoon, Haywantee & Fekete-Farkas, Maria, 2022. "Transforming consumers' intention to purchase green products: Role of social media," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    18. Maryam Zidehsaraei & Reza Esmaeilpour & Mohsen Akbari, 2024. "The effects of similarity of values, religious values, and empathy on bank commitment to CSR and customers’ internal and behavioral responses: evidence from Guilan Province in Iran," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(1), pages 154-170, March.
    19. Jana Hojnik & Mitja Ruzzier & Tatiana S. Manolova, 2020. "Sustainable development: Predictors of green consumerism in Slovenia," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1695-1708, July.
    20. Moser, Andrea K., 2016. "Consumers' purchasing decisions regarding environmentally friendly products: An empirical analysis of German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 389-397.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03379593. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.