Power versus morality: uncovering the underlying mechanisms of consumer response to perceived visual sustainability in package design

Abstract

Purpose Visual sustainability has gained significant relevance for both firms and consumers. While the importance of perceived sustainability in package design is well researched, there is a research gap regarding divergent responses of consumers to perceived visual sustainability. This research aims to close this gap by providing deeper insights into the underlying mechanisms of perceived visual sustainability in package design. As a boundary condition, this work also investigates gender differences in response to a design’s visual sustainability. Design/methodology/approach To explore the mediating influences of cognitive (i.e. a product’s gentleness and power) versus emotional (i.e. moral satisfaction) attributes as well as the role of consumer gender in the perceived visual sustainability–purchase intention relationship, the authors extend previous research through three experiments. Findings Study 1 provides initial evidence supporting the main effect of perceived visual sustainability on purchase intention. Findings of Study 2 show that moral satisfaction serves as a significant driver of purchase intention for females, while power-related attributes are more influential for males. Study 3 provides additional evidence for the main effect, the interaction effect with consumer gender and underlying mechanisms. Practical implications These findings have important implications for marketers and designers aiming to design packages that appeal to different consumer groups based on their (gender-specific) values regarding visual sustainability. Originality/value This work extends the literature on green behavior by highlighting the importance of perceived visual sustainability as a factor that influences purchase intention and the role of cognitive versus affective mechanisms in shaping consumer responses to design sustainability.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.