Please wait a minute...
Advances in Psychological Science    2017, Vol. 25 Issue (3) : 511-522     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2017.00511
Regular Articles |
The attitude–behavior gap of ethical consumers: From the perspective of construal level
WANG Caiyu1; LEI Li2; WU Bo3
(1 Department of Psychology, Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang 464000, China) (2 Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China) (3 Business School, Tianjin University of Finance & Economics, Tianjin 300222, China)
Download: PDF(542 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    

Ethical consumption refers to that consumers should consider the impact of their consumption choices upon the environment, animals and society in the acquisition, use or disposal of products. Despite embracing the values of ethical consumerism, most consumers rarely support their beliefs at the check-out counter, which is considered to be the attitude–behavior gap. This study shed light on the attitude–behavior gap of ethical consumers from the perspective of construal level. From the temporal dimension, ethical consumer is in high construal level when evaluating ethical products, since he or she is far from ethical products in psychological distance, but in purchasing stage, ethical consumer is near from ethical products, so he or she is in low construal level. There are many differences in motivation and cognition under different construal levels, which lead to the attitude–behavior gap. Future research needs to focus on how to transfer this kind of support into truly positive purchasing behavior.

Keywords ethical consumption      attitude-behavior gap      construal level     
Corresponding Authors: LEI Li, E-mail:; WANG Caiyu, E-mail:    
Issue Date: 15 March 2017
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
WANG Caiyu
Cite this article:   
WANG Caiyu,LEI Li,WU Bo. The attitude–behavior gap of ethical consumers: From the perspective of construal level[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(3): 511-522.
URL:     OR
[1] LI Ming-Hui, RAO Li-Lin.  Moral judgment from construal level theory perspective[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(8): 1423-1430.
[2] WANG Caiyu; LEI Li; WU Bo. The influence of temporal reference on inaction inertia of green innovative consumption[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(1): 1-11.
[3] ZHANG Yue; XIN Ziqiang. Priming research in social psychology: Approaches and challenges[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(5): 844-854.
[4] DENG Ying; XU Fu-Ming; LI Ou; SHI Yan-Wei; LIU Cheng-Hao. The framing effect on social preferences[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(4): 622-632.
[5] HUANG Jun; LI Ye; ZHANG Hongwei. The Application and Development of Construal Level Theory[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(1): 110-119.
[6] ZHANG Hongwei;LI Ye. Moral Behavior under Two Kinds of Moral Self-regulation Mechanisms[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(7): 1178-1187.
[7] LIU Cuicui;CHEN Bin;LIU Leixin;YUAN Xianxue;WANG Zuojun. Does Standers-by Always See More Than Gamesters?A Review on the Self-other Decision Making Differences[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2013, 21(5): 879-885.
[8] YAN Jin;LOU Chunhua. Decision-making under Ethical Temptation: How Construal Level Theory May Help[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2013, 21(11): 2047-2056.
[9] LI Yan-Chen; ZHOU Ting-Rui; ZHOU Xiu. Theoretical Models of Multisensory Cues Integration……WEN Xiao-Hui, LIU Qiang, SUN Hong-Jin, et al.(666)
Construal Level Theory: From Temporal Distance to Psychological Distanc
[J]. , 2009, 17(04): 667-677.
[10] Zou Zengli;Zhang Zhijie;Wang Yujuan. Why People Underestimate the Time of Completing a Task: A Review[J]. , 2008, 16(02): 207-212.
Full text



Copyright © Advances in Psychological Science
Support by Beijing Magtech