Narrow Bracketing in Ethical Trade-Offs

We demonstrate narrow bracketing in ethical tradeoffs: individuals who don’t share in lab experiments but donate their (larger) earnings to charity (unethical + ethical) are evaluated less positively than those who share in-lab but later donate less (ethical + ethical) or nothing (ethical + neutral). Broad bracketing reverses these evaluations.



Citation:

Christopher Olivola and Silvia Saccardo (2017) ,"Narrow Bracketing in Ethical Trade-Offs", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 45, eds. Ayelet Gneezy, Vladas Griskevicius, and Patti Williams, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 191-195.

Authors

Christopher Olivola, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Silvia Saccardo, Carnegie Mellon University, USA



Volume

NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 45 | 2017



Share Proceeding

Featured papers

See More

Featured

L3. Categorizing Engagement Behaviors from the Perspective of Customer Resources

Xianfang Zeng, University of Calgary, Canada
James Agarwal, University of Calgary, Canada
Mehdi Mourali, University of Calgary, Canada

Read More

Featured

Pursue Your Passions: Cultural Discourses about Consumer’s Heroic Wilderness Adventures

Nathan Warren, University of Oregon, USA
Linda L Price, University of Oregon, USA

Read More

Featured

O7. Helpful Mental Shortcuts or a Shortcut to Bias? Two Perspectives on Heuristics and One New Direction for Consumer Research

Carly Drake, University of Calgary, Canada
Mehdi Mourali, University of Calgary, Canada

Read More

Engage with Us

Becoming an Association for Consumer Research member is simple. Membership in ACR is relatively inexpensive, but brings significant benefits to its members.