Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

‘Consuming Good’ on Social Media: What Can Conspicuous Virtue Signalling on Facebook Tell Us About Prosocial and Unethical Intentions?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mentioning products or brands on Facebook enables individuals to display an ideal self to others through a form of virtual conspicuous consumption. Drawing on conspicuous donation behaviour literature, we investigate ‘conspicuous virtue signalling’ (CVS), as conspicuous consumption on Facebook. CVS occurs when an individual mentions a charity on their Facebook profile. We investigate need for uniqueness (NFU) and attention to social comparison information (ATSCI) as antecedents of two types of CVS–self-oriented (to gain intrinsic benefits) and other-oriented (to impress others). We also explore the relationship between CVS and self-esteem, and offline prosocial (donation to the charity) and unethical (counterfeit purchase) behaviour intentions. Data from two studies, a college survey (N = 234) and an adult survey via MTurk (N = 296), were analysed using structural equation modelling. Results indicate that NFU predicts both forms of CVS, while ATSCI influences both forms of CVS for adults and other-oriented CVS for students. Self-esteem is enhanced by self-oriented CVS. Self-oriented CVS predicts donation intention whereas other-oriented CVS significantly reduces donation intention for both samples. Furthermore, a significant relationship between CVS and purchase intention of counterfeit luxury goods is revealed. Findings provide insights into conspicuous virtue signalling and the relationship between CVS on Facebook and offline behavioural intentions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ATSCI:

Attention to social comparison information

AVE:

Average variance extracted

CDB:

Conspicuous donation behaviour

CFA:

Confirmatory factor analysis

CR:

Composite reliability

CVS:

Conspicuous virtue signalling

NFU:

Need for uniqueness

OECD:

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

References

  • Andreoni, J. (1989). Giving with impure altruism: Applications to charity and Ricardian equivalence. Journal of Political Economy, 97(6), 1447–1458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Back, M. D., Stopfer, J. M., Vazire, S., Gaddis, S., Schmukle, S. C., Egloff, B., et al. (2010). Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychological Science, 21(3), 372–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basil, D. Z., Ridgway, N. M., & Basil, M. D. (2006). Guilt appeals: The mediating effect of responsibility. Psychology & Marketing, 23(12), 1035–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(March), 473–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bearden, W. O., & Rose, R. R. (1990). Attention to Social Comparison Information: An individual difference factor affecting consumer conformity. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(4), 461–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behrend, T. S., Sharek, D. J., Meade, A. W., & Wiebe, E. N. (2011). The viability of crowdsourcing for survey research. Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 800–813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R. W. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2006). Incentives and prosocial behavior. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1652–1676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bian, Q., & Forsythe, S. (2012). Purchase intention for luxury brands: A cross cultural comparison. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1443–1451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bian, X., & Moutinho, L. (2009). An investigation of determinants of counterfeit purchase considerations. Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 368–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Kramer, R. M. (1985). The psychology of intergroup attitudes and behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 36(1), 219–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chell, K., & Mortimer, G. (2014). Investigating online recognition for blood donor retention: An experiential donor value approach. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 19(May), 143–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J., Teng, L., & Liao, Y. (2018). Counterfeit luxuries: Does moral reasoning strategy influence consumers’ pursuit of counterfeits? Journal of Business Ethics, 151(1), 249–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commuri, S. (2009). The impact of counterfeiting on genuine-item consumers’ brand relationships. Journal of Marketing, 73(May), 86–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, XXVIII, 307–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘friends’: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, J. E., Burgess, L., & Lu, M. (2015). Hip to be cool: A Gen Y view of counterfeit luxury products. Journal of Brand Management, 22(8), 588–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales, M. A., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(1–2), 79–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six pre-conceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59(2), 93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grace, D., & Griffin, D. (2006). Exploring conspicuousness in the context of donation behavior. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(2), 147–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grace, D., & Griffin, D. (2009). Conspicuous donation behaviour: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 8(1), 14–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greitemeyer, T., Mügge, D. O., & Bollermann, I. (2014). Having responsive Facebook friends affects the satisfaction of psychological needs more than having many Facebook friends. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 36(3), 252–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th edn.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannah, F. (2016). Counterfeit goods: Tempting danger. Retrieved July 9, 2018, from http://www.independent.co.uk/money/counterfeit-goods-tempting-danger-a7473751.html.

  • Hollenbeck, C. R., & Kaikati, A. M. (2012). Consumers’ use of brands to reflect their actual and ideal selves on Facebook. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 395–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J.-N., & Bastien, V. (2009). The specificity of luxury management: Turning marketing upside down. Brand Management, 16(5/6), 311–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastanakis, M. N., & Balabanis, G. (2012). Between the mass and the class: Antecedents of the “Bandwagon” luxury consumption behavior. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1399–1407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, E. A., Ratneshwar, S., Roeslr, E., & Chowdhury, T. G. (2016). Attention to social comparison information and brand avoidance behaviors. Marketing Letters, 27(2), 259–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. E., Cho, Y. J., & Johnson, K. K. P. (2009). Influence of moral affect, judgment, and intensity on decision making concerning counterfeit, grey-market, and imitation products. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 27(3), 211–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, K. K.-Y., & Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1999). Brand imitation: Do the Chinese have different views? Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 16(2), 179–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lennox, R. D., & Wolfe, R. N. (1984). Revision of the self-monitoring scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6), 1349–1364.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(May), 130–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marticotte, F., & Arcand, M. (2017). Schadenfreude, attitude and the purchase intentions of a counterfeit luxury brand. Journal of Business Research, 77(August), 175–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meade, A., & Craig, B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myszkowski, N., Storme, M., Zenasni, F., & Lubart, T. (2014). Appraising the duality of self-monitoring: psychometric qualities of the revised self-monitoring scale and the concern for appropriateness scale in French. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 46(3), 387–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nia, A., & Zaichkowsky, J. L. (2000). Do counterfeits devalue the ownership of luxury brands? Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(7), 485–497.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD/EUIPO (2016). Trade in counterfeit and pirated goods: mapping the economic impact. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved July 9, 2018, from http://www.oecd.org/gov/risk/trade-in-counterfeit-and-pirated-goods-9789264252653-en.htm.

  • Outten, H. R., Schmitt, M. T., Garcia, D. M., & Branscombe, N. R. (2009). Coping options: missing links between minority group identification and psychological well-being. Applied Psychology, 58(1), 146–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Packard, V. (1959). The status seekers. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, J. K., & John, D. R. (2010). Got to get you into my life: Do brand personalities rub off on consumers? Journal of Consumer Research, 37(4), 655–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruvio, A. (2008). Unique like everybody else? The dual role of consumers’ need for uniqueness. Psychology & Marketing, 25(5), 444–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schau, H. J., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). We are what we post? Self-presentation in personal web space. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 385–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, C., & Fromkin, H. L. (1977). Abnormality as a positive characteristic: The development and validation of a scale measuring need for uniqueness. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86(October), 518–527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(4), 526–537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strizhakova, Y., Coulter, R. A., & Price, L. L. (2008). The meanings of branded products: A cross-national scale development and meaning assessment. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(2), 82–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrant, M., North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2001). Social Categorization, self-esteem, and the estimated musical preferences of male adolescents. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141(5), 565–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A. (2013). Givers deserve their ‘helper’s high’. Third Sector, 780, 20–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian, K. T., Bearden, W. O., & Hunter, G. L. (2001). Consumers’ need for uniqueness: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 50–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veblen, T. (1912). The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. London: George Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. J., & McGrath, F. P. (2000). Identity, coping style, and health behavior among first generation Irish immigrants in England. Psychology and Health, 15(4), 467–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, P. (2004). Conspicuous compassion: Why sometimes it really is cruel to be kind. London: Civitas, Institute for the Study of Civil Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, R. T. (2009). Nonprofit advertising: Impact of celebrity connection, involvement and gender on source credibility and intention to volunteer time or donate money. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 21(1), 80–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, K., Kim, H. M., & Sen, S. (2009). Why do consumers buy counterfeit luxury brands? Journal of Marketing Research, 46(2), 247–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooten, D. B., & Reed, A., II (2004). Playing it safe: Susceptibility to normative influence and protective self-presentation. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 551–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, Y. K., La Ferle, C., & Edwards, S. M. (2016). A normative approach to motivating savings behavior: The moderating effects of attention to social comparison information. International Journal of Advertising, 35(5), 799–822.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Government of Spain (ECO2017-82103-P), and the Government of Aragón and the European Social Fund (Project Generés S54_17R).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. J. E. Cairnes School of Business & Economics, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland

    Elaine Wallace

  2. Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain

    Isabel Buil

  3. Marketing & Strategy Group, Aston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK

    Leslie de Chernatony

Authors
  1. Elaine Wallace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isabel Buil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Leslie de Chernatony
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elaine Wallace.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1 Profile of survey respondents (Study 1 and Study 2)
Full size table
Table 2 Scale items and measurement model results
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wallace, E., Buil, I. & de Chernatony, L. ‘Consuming Good’ on Social Media: What Can Conspicuous Virtue Signalling on Facebook Tell Us About Prosocial and Unethical Intentions?. J Bus Ethics 162, 577–592 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3999-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3999-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation