Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Disentangling the Effects of Perceived Deception and Anticipated Harm on Consumer Responses to Deceptive Advertising

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous behavioral research on advertising deception has focused on the extent to which consumers would be misled by claims and implications of advertisements. The present research examines the effect of an important, but largely neglected, dimension: the severity of anticipated harm as a result of being deceived. Two experiments disentangle the effect of anticipated harm on consumer brand attitudes and purchase intentions from that of perceived deception. Interestingly, greater harmfulness increases diagnosticity of perceived deception, which partially accounts for consumers’ negative reactions to deceptive advertising. Theoretical, methodological, and ethical implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrews, J. C., Burton, S., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2000). Are some comparative nutrition claims misleading? The role of nutrition knowledge, ad claim type and disclosure conditions. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), 29–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, G. M., Gurol, M. N., & Russ, F. A. (1979). Detecting and correcting deceptive advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(3), 237–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attas, D. (1999). What’s wrong with ‘deceptive’ advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 21(1), 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, A., & Vitell, S. (2010). The ethics of food advertising targeted toward children: Parental viewpoint. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barone, M. J., & Miniard, P. W. (1999). How and when factual ad claims mislead consumers: Examining the deceptive consequences of copy × copy interactions for partial comparative advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, T. E. (1980). A framework for ascertaining deception in children’s advertising. Journal of Advertising, 9(1), 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L. (1984). Manipulative advertising. Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 3(3/4), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkvist, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (2007). The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 175–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, L., & Donnerstein, E. (1982). External validity is more than skin deep: Some answers to criticisms of laboratory experiments. American Psychologist, 37(3), 245–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. R., DeSarbo, W. S., Oliver, R. L., & Robertson, T. S. (1988). Deception by implication: An experimental investigation. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 483–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1981). Designing research for application. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2), 197–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1982). The concept of external validity. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 240–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1983). Beyond external validity. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(1), 112–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, T. L. (2010). Lying and deception: Theory and practice. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, T. L., Wokutch, R. E., & Cox, J. E, Jr. (1985). An ethical analysis of deception in advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 4(2), 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 210–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., & Chang, C. (2013). Greenwash and green trust: The mediation effects of green consumer confusion and green perceived risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), 489–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, A. D., Cox, D., & Mantel, S. P. (2010). Consumer response to drug risk information: The role of positive affect. Journal of Marketing, 74(4), 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, A. W., Loureiro, Y. K., Wood, S., & Vendemia, J. M. C. (2012). Suspicious minds: Exploring neural processes during exposure to deceptive advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 49(3), 361–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darby, M. R., & Karni, E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. Journal of Law and Economics, 16(1), 67–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darke, P. R., Laurence, A., & Ritchie, R. (2008). Damage from corrective advertising: Causes and cures. Journal of Marketing, 72(6), 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darke, P. R., & Ritchie, R. (2007). The defensive consumer: Advertising deception, defensive processing, and distrust. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(1), 114–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 74–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P. (1985). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics, and marriage. New York: Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Trade Commission. (1983). FTC policy statement on deception. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://ftc.gov/bcp/policystmt/ad-decept.htm/.

  • Federal Trade Commission. (2002). Weight-loss advertising: An analysis of current trends. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/reports/weightloss.pdf.

  • Federal Trade Commission. (2012). FTC annual highlights. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://www.ftc.gov/os/highlights/2012/stats.shtm.

  • Feldman, J. M., & Lynch, J. G. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 421–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, M. G., & Ekman, P. (2004). Appearing truthful generalizes across different deception situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(3), 486–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaeth, G. J., & Heath, T. B. (1987). The cognitive processing of misleading advertising in young and old adults: Assessment and training. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(1), 43–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, D. M. (1975). Deception in advertising: A conceptual approach. Journal of Marketing, 39(1), 40–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harless, D. W., & Camerer, C. (1994). The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica, 62(6), 1251–1289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (2006). The general theory of marketing ethics: A revision and three questions. Journal of Macromarketing, 26(2), 143–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, M. (2009). Responsible ads: A workable ideal. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(2), 199–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johar, G. V. (1995). Consumer involvement and deception from implied advertising claims. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 267–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johar, G. V., & Simmons, C. J. (2000). The use of concurrent disclosures to correct invalid inferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(4), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kardes, F. R., Posavac, S. S., & Cronley, M. L. (2004). Consumer inference: A review of processes, bases, and judgment contexts. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(3), 230–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopalle, P. K., & Lehmann, D. (1995). The effects of advertised and observed quality on expectations about new product quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 280–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landro, L. (2010). Herbal supplements face new scrutiny. Wall Street Journal—Eastern Edition, 256(63), D4.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaTour, K. A., & LaTour, M. S. (2009). Positive mood and susceptibility to false advertising. Journal of Advertising, 38(3), 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2007). What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 153–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers-Levy, J., & Malaviya, P. (1999). Consumers’ processing of persuasive advertisements: An integrative framework of persuasion theories. Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miniard, P. W., Sirdeshmukh, D., & Innis, D. E. (1992). Peripheral persuasion and brand choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(2), 226–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nebenzahl, I. D., & Jaffe, E. D. (1998). Ethical dimensions of advertising executions. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(7), 805–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 311–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, P. (1974). Advertising as information. Journal of Political Economy, 82(4), 729–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. R. (1998). Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 159–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. C., & Dover, P. A. (1978). Cognitive effects of deceptive advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(1), 29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M. J., Bailey, J., Baker, H., Basche, C., Jepson, C., & Neath, L. (1998). Communicating environmental information: Are marketing claims on packaging misleading. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(3), 281–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayers, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, J. E., Metcalf, B. L., & Stephens, D. (1981). Identifying misleading advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2), 119–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santilli, P. (1983). The informative and persuasive functions of advertising: A moral appraisal. Journal of Business Ethics, 2(1), 27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, K. J., & Hopkins, C. D. (2007). Truths, half-truths, and deception. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 33–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stearns, J. M., & Borna, S. (1995). The ethics of lottery advertising: Issues and evidence. Journal of Business Ethics, 14(1), 43–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushnet, R., & Goldman, E. (2012). Advertising and marketing law casebook. Retrieved August 1, 2013, from http://www.scribd.com/doc/99904133/Advertising-and-Marketing-Law-Casebook-July-2012-by-Tushnet-and-Goldman.

  • Vitell, S. J. (2003). Consumer ethics research: Review, synthesis and suggestions for the future. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(1/2), 33–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, S. J., & Cook, T. D. (1972). Subject effects in laboratory research: An examination of subject roles, demand characteristics, and valid inference. Psychological Bulletin, 77(4), 273–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie, G., & Boush, D. M. (2011). How susceptible are consumers to deceptive advertising claims? A retrospective look at the experimental research literature. The Marketing Review, 11(3), 293–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, 02125, USA

    Guang-Xin Xie

  2. Charles H. Lundquist College of Business, 1205 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 97403, USA

    Robert Madrigal & David M. Boush

Authors
  1. Guang-Xin Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Madrigal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David M. Boush
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guang-Xin Xie.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Xie, GX., Madrigal, R. & Boush, D.M. Disentangling the Effects of Perceived Deception and Anticipated Harm on Consumer Responses to Deceptive Advertising. J Bus Ethics 129, 281–293 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2155-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2155-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation