100% tevredenheidsgarantie Direct beschikbaar na je betaling Lees online óf als PDF Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten
logo-home
Summary Articles Sustainability Marketing 2025 €7,49
In winkelwagen

Samenvatting

Summary Articles Sustainability Marketing 2025

 0 keer verkocht

A summary of the following articles, which are mandatory to study for the exam: - Bryan, C. J., Tipton, E., & Yeager, D. S. (2021). Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without a heterogeneity revolution. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 980-989 - Braga L.D., Tardin M.G., Grinstein A. &...

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 4 van de 48  pagina's

  • 28 januari 2025
  • 48
  • 2024/2025
  • Samenvatting
Alle documenten voor dit vak (1)
avatar-seller
sophieisabella
Articles Sustainability Marketing - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam 2024-2025

Bryan, C. J., Tipton, E., & Yeager, D. S. (2021). Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without a
heterogeneity revolution. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 980-989.........................................................................................2
Braga L.D., Tardin M.G., Grinstein A. & Perin M (2024). The Effectiveness of Corporate Activism: A Meta-Analysis..4
Chater, N., & Loewenstein, G. (2023). The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led
behavioral public policy astray. Behavioral and Brain Sciences.......................................................................................... 5
Chatterji, A., & Toffel, M. (2018). The new CEO activist. Harvard Business Review....................................................... 8
Du, G., Millet, K., Aydinli, A., & Argo, J. (2025). Disrespectful promotions: The negative impact of price promotions
on products symbolically linked to stigmatized identities. Journal of Marketing Research.............................................. 10
Elmor, L., Ramos, G.A., Vieites, Y., Andretti, B., & Andrade, E.B. (2025). Environmental sustainability considerations
(or lack thereof) in consumer decision making. International Journal of Research in Marketing..................................... 13
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous
conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology..............................................................................................16
Hagmann, D., Ho, E.H., & Loewenstein, G. (2019). Nudging out support for a carbon tax. Nature Climate Change..... 18
Jublee, D. I., Dharun, K., & Gladys S. (2023). Investigating the impact of brand vs cause interaction on cause related
advertisements. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75, 103524........................................................................20
Kim, J.C., Huh, Y.E., McFerran, B. (2025). To Dispose or Eat? The Impact of Perceived Healthiness on Consumption
Decisions for About-to-Expire Foods. Journal of Marketing, in press...............................................................................21
Kim, T., Barasz, K., Norton, M., & John, L. (2023). Calculators for Women: When Identity-Based Appeals Alienate
Consumers. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 8, 72-82........................................................................ 24
Millet, K., Bolderdijk, J.W., Kirilova, G., & Weijters, B. (2025). Not going green when seen: How watching eyes affect
pro-environmental choices..................................................................................................................................................26
Millet, K., & Weijters, B. (2023). The behavioral intervention “positive cueing”: Altering self-perception, increasing
green awareness, or undermining the signaling value of costly green behavior? Journal of Environmental Psychology. 28
Millet, K., & Weijters, B. (2025). The value of multiproxy experiments to study pro-environmental behavior. Journal of
Environmental Psychology................................................................................................................................................. 29
Millet, K., & Weijters, B. (2025b). Carrots or sticks? How perceived fairness of incentives vs. penalties for sustainable
choices depends on social acceptance of the specific choice............................................................................................. 31
Mohan, Bhavya, et al. (2018). Consumers avoid buying from firms with higher CEO‐to‐worker pay ratios. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 28, 344-352.‫‏‬.................................................................................................................................. 32
Nadricka, K., Millet, K., & Aydinli, A. (2024). Are consumers more or less averse to wasting organic food? Journal of
Environmental Psychology................................................................................................................................................. 34
Özturan, P., & Grinstein, A. (2022). Impact of Global Brand Chief Marketing Officers’ Corporate Social Responsibility
and Sociopolitical Activism Communication on Twitter. Journal of International Marketing.......................................... 37
Porter and Kramer (2011), Creating Shared Value: How to Reinvent Capitalism—and Unleash a Wave of Innovation
and Growth, Harvard Business Review.............................................................................................................................. 39
Tari, A., & Trudel, R. (2024). Affording disposal control: The effect of circular take-back programs on psychological
ownership and valuation. Journal of Marketing, 88, 110-126............................................................................................ 40
Sun, J. J., Bellezza, S. & Paharia, N. (2021). Buy less, buy luxury: Understanding and overcoming product durability
neglect for sustainable consumption. Journal of Marketing, 85, 28-43.‫‏‬.............................................................................41
Weed (2016), Forget Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing Good Should be a Core Part of Your Business.................44
White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature
review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83, 22–49..................................................................................... 45
Winterich, K. P., Reczek, R.W., & Makov, T. (2024). How lack of knowledge on emissions and psychological biases
deter consumers from taking effective action to mitigate climate change. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
52, 1475-1494..................................................................................................................................................................... 47




1

,Bryan, C. J., Tipton, E., & Yeager, D. S. (2021). Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without
a heterogeneity revolution. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 980-989
This article presents a compelling argument for a paradigm shift in behavioral science research, particularly
in the field of behavioral interventions aimed at informing policy. The authors propose that the current
approach to behavioral science research is fundamentally flawed and needs to evolve to address the
challenges of heterogeneity in treatment effects.

Theories and Hypotheses
Heterogeneity in treatment effects: most behavioral interventions have heterogeneous effects across different
contexts and populations. This means that the impact of an intervention can vary significantly depending on
factors such as the setting, demographics, or other contextual variables. The current focus on main effects
and the practice of drawing broad conclusions from convenience samples is misleading and potentially
harmful

Replication crisis and heterogeneity: The replication crisis in psychology is largely due to unacknowledged
heterogeneity rather than solely methodological flaws or questionable research practices. They suggest that
the variation in effect estimates across studies is to be expected when heterogeneous effects are studied
without a systematic approach to sampling and moderation.

Theory development through heterogeneity: Systematically studying heterogeneity can lead to more complete
and nuanced theories of causal mechanisms. By understanding how and why interventions work differently
in various contexts, researchers can develop more robust and predictable intervention effects across different
populations and settings.

Paradigm shift in Behavioral Science: The article proposes a "heterogeneity revolution" or paradigm shift in
behavioral science research. This new approach assumes that intervention effects are likely to be
context-dependent and emphasizes the importance of studying these variations systematically to improve the
field's ability to inform effective policies.

Methods and Approach
The authors use several examples and case studies to illustrate their points:

1.​ The Opower energy conservation intervention

The Opower program sought to reduce household energy consumption by providing customers with
information on how their energy use compared to their neighbors. Initial results were highly promising,
showing an average reduction of 2% in energy consumption across treated households.​
The early evaluations were conducted in communities that were progressive in environmental attitudes and
relatively affluent. These households had ample opportunities for energy savings, such as reducing heating
for swimming pools. As the program expanded to a broader range of communities, including lower-income
and less environmentally conscious populations, the average effect of the intervention dropped substantially.
This revealed significant heterogeneity in its impact based on community characteristics.

-​ The program's effectiveness depended on the demographic and cultural attributes of the target
population. Affluent, environmentally aware communities benefited more than others.
-​ Opower’s continued use of randomized trials in each new community and careful analysis of data
helped clarify where the intervention worked best.
-​ Early unqualified claims of effectiveness, based on the initial studies, were overly broad and led to
misinterpretations about the program's general applicability.


2

, 2.​ The National Study of Learning Mindsets (NSLM)

This study investigated the effects of a short, online growth-mindset intervention, which teaches students that
intelligence can grow with effort. The aim was to improve academic outcomes in high school students.​
The study was conducted with a national probability sample of U.S. public high schools, ensuring that the
results were representative across diverse contexts.

-​ The intervention was most effective in schools with norms supportive of a growth mindset. For
instance, schools where students generally believed in self-improvement saw significant benefits.
-​ It was less effective in schools with unsupportive peer norms or where the intervention was
redundant (e.g., high-achieving schools with extensive support systems already in place).
-​ Vulnerable students (e.g., low-achieving students in supportive schools) experienced the most
substantial improvements, including higher grades and increased enrollment in advanced math
courses.

The study was pre-registered with a detailed plan to test for moderators, such as school norms and resource
availability. It used machine learning and advanced statistical methods to identify subgroups where the
intervention had the largest impact.
-​ The intervention’s success depended on the compatibility between the school environment and the
growth-mindset message.
-​ Measuring moderators (e.g., school norms) provided valuable insights into how and why the
intervention worked in specific contexts.
-​ Combining the intervention with others that target social norms could lead to more widespread
benefits, such as encouraging influential peers to model growth mindsets.

Results and Conclusions
-​ The current paradigm in behavioral science is inadequate for producing reliable, generalizable
findings that can inform effective policies. A new paradigm that assumes and systematically studies
heterogeneity in treatment effects is necessary.
-​ This new approach will lead to:
-​ More complete and nuanced theories of causal mechanisms
-​ More reliable and predictable intervention effects across contexts and populations
-​ Better-informed policy recommendations
-​ Achieving this paradigm shift will require:
-​ Changes in research practices at all stages of intervention development and evaluation
-​ Substantial investment in shared research infrastructure to support generalizable samples and
comprehensive moderator analysis

The article also discusses:
-​ The potential risks of the current approach, including:
-​ Loss of credibility for behavioral science in policy making
-​ Potential harm to minority groups through poorly understood interventions
-​ The importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and diverse expertise in addressing these
challenges.
-​ The parallels between this proposed revolution in behavioral science and paradigm shifts in other
scientific fields, such as physics.

In conclusion, embracing heterogeneity and developing more sophisticated approaches to studying it will
lead to a more robust, generalizable, and ultimately more impactful behavioral science that can fulfill its
promise to change the world.

3

, Braga L.D., Tardin M.G., Grinstein A. & Perin M (2024). The Effectiveness of Corporate Activism: A
Meta-Analysis
This article presents a comprehensive meta-analysis of corporate activism (CA) effectiveness. The study
aims to consolidate existing research and advance our understanding of CA's impact on stakeholder
reactions.

Theories
Signaling Theory: the central theoretical lens used in this meta-analysis. It provides a framework for
understanding how corporations communicate their values and stances on sociopolitical issues to
stakeholders through corporate activism. The theory considers four key components:
1.​ The signaler (corporation, brand, or CEO)
2.​ The signal (CA message or action)
3.​ The receiver (stakeholders)
4.​ The signaling environment (broader socio political context)

Social Identity Theory:
While not as prominently featured as signaling theory, social identity theory is mentioned in the context of
understanding stakeholder reactions to corporate activism. This theory helps explain why stakeholders whose
beliefs align with the CA stance tend to respond more positively.

Stakeholder Theory: examining how different stakeholder groups react to corporate activism. This theory
underpins the study's focus on various stakeholder reactions and the importance of considering different
stakeholder groups in CA strategies.

Authenticity: The concept of perceived authenticity is discussed as a crucial factor in CA effectiveness. The
importance of authenticity in stakeholder perceptions aligns with broader authenticity theories in marketing
and organizational behavior.

Resource-Based View: The study touches on the resource-based view of the firm when discussing the impact
of resource commitment on CA effectiveness. This theory helps explain why CA signals that demonstrate
tangible resource commitment are more impactful.

Methodology
The authors conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, following these steps:
-​ Extensive search of electronic databases using specific keywords
-​ Coding of studies based on predefined variables
-​ Conversion of statistics to correlation coefficients
-​ Random-effects meta-analysis approach
-​ Univariate analysis of individual moderators
-​ Multivariate meta-regression to examine multiple moderators simultaneously

Results
The study reveals a small but positive overall effect of CA on stakeholder reactions (r = 0.084). However, the
effectiveness of CA is significantly influenced by various moderating factors:
CA-related Moderators
-​ Communicating entity: Brand activism is more effective than CEO or company activism.
-​ Sociopolitical issue controversy: Less controversial issues lead to more positive stakeholder
reactions.
-​ Consistency: Consistent CA efforts are more effective.

4

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Direct to-the-point

Direct to-the-point

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper sophieisabella. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €7,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 69252 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Begin nu gratis
€7,49
  • (0)
In winkelwagen
Toegevoegd