In most cultural contexts, consuming ethically is socially desirable and reporting favorable attitudes is relatively cost-free. Thus, consumers have incentives to state favorable attitudes toward ethical products despite barriers to actual purchase. This attitude-behavior gap in ethical consumption presents a global challenge to socially responsible marketing (Carrington et al., 2010, 2014, 2016). Several explanations for this gap have been offered. The current research draws from these explanations and—based on literature in psychometrics and attitude formation—develops a novel measurement tool based on the Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP; Payne et al., 2005). We aim to capture consumers’ implicit ethical product attitudes which have otherwise evaded marketers (Zollo, 2021). Further, using samples of consumers in both the US and Italy, the current research examines the predictive power of this measure in predicting consequential ethical consumption choices. We conclude with a proposal for additional studies to further validate the procedure in more ecologically valid contexts.

In ethical consumerism, the issue of ethical attitudes not translating to ethical behaviors has been highly debated. While previous studies attribute this attitude-behavioral mismatch to the lack of education, hypocrisy, or low commitment, we propose a novel approach of applying Moral Foundation Theory (MFT) to account for the phenomenon. MFT identifies two dimensions of morality: individualizing moral foundations (INDI) which focuses on justice and harm, and binding moral foundations (BIND) which emphasizes authority and loyalty. Using responses from more than 4,000 consumers from four culturally and regionally diverse markets, we investigate the differing roles of moral foundations in response to a scenario on a sweatshop issue of a supplier whose factory is in a developing country. We use the mediator-moderator model of MFT-anticorporate attitude-boycott behavioral intention sequence to examine the differing role of INDI and BIND. Our results show that INDI and BIND are both positively related to anticorporate attitude; However, BIND is negatively related to boycott behavioral intention while INDI is positively related. That is, consumers with a strong BIND may show an attitude-behavioral mismatch although they are highly ethical.