4 The Influence Of Social Norms In Consumer Behavior

4 the influence of social norms in consumer behavior: a meta-analysis vladimir melnyk erica van herpen hans c. m. van tr

4
The Influence of Social Norms in Consumer Behavior:
A Meta-Analysis
Vladimir Melnyk
Erica van Herpen
Hans C. M. van Trijp*
* Vladimir Melnyk is a doctoral candidate at the Marketing and
Consumer Behavior Group, Wageningen University, 6706 KN Wageningen,
The Netherlands (e-mail: [email protected], Phone: +31 317
484348, Fax: +31 317 484361).
Erica van Herpen is assistant professor, Marketing and Consumer
Behavior Group, Wageningen University, 6706 KN Wageningen, The
Netherlands (e-mail: [email protected], Phone: +31 317 483385,
Fax: +31 317 484361).
Hans C. M. van Trijp is a professor of Marketing and Consumer
Behavior, Wageningen University, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands
(e-mail: [email protected], Phone: +31 317 483385, Fax: +31 317
484361).
Social norms are major drivers of human behavior and crucial in
consumer decision making. Consumers often take expectations and
behavior of others into consideration when they decide what is
appropriate and social norms thus profoundly influence their
preferences and behavior (Cialdini, Reno, and Kallgren 1990). How
much to drink at a party, whether to subscribe to a fitness club and
how much to eat are all decisions that are at least partly guided by
social norms. Although social norms can substantially influence
consumer decision making, understanding of how the specification of
the norm determines its effect is limited. Despite a large body of
research on social norms, empirical findings about their effect in
consumer decision making are not consistent (Schultz et al. 2007).
For example, Sheeran, Abraham, and Orbell (1999), in their
meta-analysis of the willingness to use condoms (121 studies out of
which 21 include social norms) find that subjective norms are weak
predictors of intentions (r = .26), whereas Rivis and Sheeran (2003)
in their meta-analysis of the theory of planned behavior (21 studies)
find a more substantial correlation between norms and intentions (r =
.44).
This meta-analysis examines the association between social norms on
the one hand and consumer’s attitudes, behavioral intentions, and
behavior on the other hand, while accounting for study characteristics
(study domain, gender and age of participants, type of culture) and
methodological factors. We expect that several aspects of norm
specification will influence the strength of these associations.
First, norms can be specified in a descriptive or prescriptive (i.e.,
injunctive) way, a distinction which has previously been shown to
determine their influence on consumer decision making (Cialdini et
al. 1990). Injunctive norms focus consumers on what is approved and
may activate the typical attitudes associated with the group, whereas
descriptive norms specify the behavior of others, and consumers may
follow such norms without giving it much thought. Thus we expect
descriptive norms have a larger effect on behavior but a smaller
effect on attitudes than an injunctive norms. Second, the influence of
social norms may depend on the concreteness with which the required
behavior, the consequences of following or deviating from the norm,
and the target person are specified (Shaffer 1983). Concrete
information is generally more engaging and memorable than abstract
information, and could therefore be more persuasive. Third, norms may
be more relevant, and hence more influential, when these come from
persons with whom the consumer can easily identify. Fourth, because
public behavior is noticed and corrected by others, norms relating to
public behavior should have more influence than norms relating to
private behavior.
The sample consisted of 200 studies, producing 659 effect sizes. As a
measure for effect sizes, we chose the Pearson correlation
coefficient, converted to the normally distributed Fisher's z scores.
Because attitudes are both strongly correlated with norms and have a
strong influence on intentions (behavior), the total correlation
between norms and intentions (behavior) may contain some of the effect
of attitudes and thus overestimate the effect of social norms. To
account for this, we also examined partial correlations between norms
and intentions (behavior), controlling for attitudes.
Results showed that effect sizes obtained from partial correlations
were significantly lower than effect sizes obtained from total
correlations for both behavioral intentions and behavior. This implies
that indeed a substantial part of the effect of social norms on
intentions and behavior can be accounted for by the covariation
between attitudes and social norms. Descriptive norms were shown to
have a larger effect on behavior than injunctive norms, whereas
injunctive norms have a larger effect on attitudes than descriptive
norms. Hence, for changing attitudes, injunctive norms may be more
effective, whereas for changing behavior, descriptive norms are more
appropriate. Effects on behavior are also stronger when norms come
from close and concrete sources (vs. authority figures or abstract
others) and when the behavior is public (vs. private). No effects were
found for specifications of the expected behavior, the consequences,
or the target person. In addition, we examined interaction effects
between independent variables and no significant effects were found.
The study also demonstrated that the effect of social norms differed
across domains. Compared with decisions related to healthy lifestyle,
social responsibility, or sex, everyday consumption decisions such as
choices between food, drinks, and leisure time activities showed a
high consistency between social norms and attitudes. Interestingly,
social norms had a relatively large effect on social responsible
behaviors. These are behaviors where societal benefits are involved,
and where social norms should drive human behavior to prevent
free-riding problems. Our study showed that social norms indeed are
relatively influential for consumer behavior in this domain.
Our study has several implications. The meta-analysis reveals a high
association between social norms and attitudes, and one possible
extension to theoretical models that include normative components is
to examine this relationship. It has recently been posited that social
norms influence attitudes (Terry et al. 2000), and our study shows
that the strength of this influence depends on the specification of
norm aspects.
Additionally, consumers respond differently to injunctive versus
descriptive norms, and, more importantly, an injunctive specification
of a norm leads to stronger effects on attitudes but weaker effects on
behavior than a descriptive formulation. This implies that an
investigation of the effect of social norms which examines only
attitudes or only behavior does not provide a complete picture of the
effect of social norms. To truly understand the effect of social
norms, attitudes, behavioral intentions, and behavior need all be
examined. In addition, further research could examine other aspects of
social norms, such as group size, or uncertainty, which could
influence their effectiveness. This meta-analysis is obviously bound
to prior research that has been conducted, but more aspects remain to
be investigated. We hope that our study presents a stepping stone
towards a deeper understanding of when and how social norms drive
consumer attitudes, intentions, and behavior.
References
===========
Albarracín, Dolores, Blair T. Johnson, Martin Fishbein, and Paige A.
Muellerleile (2001), "Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior
as Models of Condom Use: A Meta-Analysis," Psychological Bulletin, 127
(1), 142-61.
Armitage, Christopher J. and Mark Connor (2001), "Efficacy of the
Theory of Planned Behaviour: A Meta-Analytic Review," British Journal
of Social Psychology, 40, 471-99.
Bijmolt, Tammo H. A. and Rik G. M. Pieters (2001), "Meta-Analysis in
Marketing When Studies Contain Multiple Measurements," Marketing
Letters, 12 (2), 157-69.
Cialdini, Robert B., Raymond. R. Reno, and Carl A. Kallgren (1990), "A
Focus Theory of Normative Conduct: Recycling the Concept of Norms to
Reduce Littering in Public Places," Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 58 (6), 1015-26.
Reno, Raymond R., Robert B. Cialdini, and Carl A. Kallgren (1993),
"The Transsituational Influence of Social Norms," Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (1), 104-12.
Rivis, Armanda and Paschal Sheeran (2003), "Descriptive Norms as an
Additional Predictor in the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A
Meta-Analysis," Current Psychology, 22 (3), 218-33.
Schultz, P. Wesley, Jessica M. Nolan, Robert B. Cialdini, Noah J.
Goldstein, and Vlades Griskevicius (2007), "The Constructive,
Destructive and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms," Psychological
Science, 18 (5), 429-34.
Shaffer, Leigh S. (1983), "Toward Pepitone’s Vision of a Normative
Social Psychology: What Is a Social Norm?," Journal of Mind and
Behavior, 4 (2), 275-93.
Sheeran, Paschal, Charles Abraham, and Sheina Orbell (1999),
"Psychosocial Correlates of Heterosexual Condom Use: A Meta-Analysis,"
Psychological Bulletin, 125 (1), 90-132.
Terry, Deborah J., Michael A. Hogg, and Katherine M. White (2000b),
"Attitude-Behavior Relations: Social Identity and Group Membership "
in Attitudes, Behavior, and Social Context: The Role of Norms and
Group Membership, ed. Deborah J. Terry and Michael A. Hogg, London:
Lawrence Erlbaum 67-94.