Skip to main content

Does Green Make You Greedy or Does it Make You Go Green? The Influence of Green Color Primes on Consumers’ Promotion Preferences

Abstract

Drawing upon associational priming models, we examine the influence exerted by incidental exposure to the color green on consumers’ promotional preferences. Green color primes are theorized to activate self-related associations, increasing preferences for discount promotions (which benefit the consumer through price savings) versus donation promotions (which benefit others by generating charitable contributions). Results from three studies support this ability of green color primes to influence consumer preferences for discount promotions by systematically altering the salience of self- versus other-related cognitions. Our results also introduce contingencies into this influence of green color primes that are consistent with the potential for green to increase the salience of sustainability-related associations. Specifically, the influence of green color primes on promotional preferences was eliminated for individuals who hold strong environmental (or green) consumption values as well as when an environmental charity was featured as part of the donation promotion. Theoretically, this research significantly contributes to our understanding of the non-conscious influence exerted by green color primes on consumption decisions. Because marketers have full control over the background colors they employ in developing promotional materials, these findings also hold important implications for firms seeking to maximize purchase rates associated with their promotional strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. Based on a pretest (N = 48), this charity was perceived as providing a good fit with the pen company, as the average fit score was higher than the scale midpoint of five (M = 6.76/9, t(47) = 7.42, p < .01).

  2. A follow-up study using a different product (cereal) and charity (an organization fighting hunger) replicated this effect of green (versus blue) color primes on promotion preference (1 = Promotion A, 7 = Promotion B) rather than choice. Stronger preferences for the discount promotion were observed in response to a green versus blue (control) prime.

  3. Additional analysis including the interaction of contrast code 2 and environmental consumption values did not result in a significant two-way interaction (B = −0.11, p = 0.49).

References

  1. Arora N, Henderson T (2007) Embedded premium promotion: why it works and how to make it more effective. Mark Sci 26:514–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bagchi R, Cheema A (2013) The effect of red background color on willingness-to-pay: the moderating role of selling mechanism. J Consum Res 39:947–960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bendapudi N, Singh SN, Bendapudi V (1996) Enhancing helping behavior: an integrative framework for promotion planning. J Mark 60:33–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Burroughs JE, Rindfleisch A (2002) Materialism and well‐being: a conflicting values perspective. J Consum Res 29:348–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cerrato H (2012) The meaning of colors. http://hermancerrato.com/.

  6. Chartrand TL, Huber J, Shiv B, Tanner RJ (2008) Nonconscious goals and consumer choice. J Consum Res 35:189–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. De Bock T, Pandelaere M, Van Kenhove P (2013) When colors backfire: the impact of color cues on moral judgment. J Consum Psychol 23:341–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Eitam B, Higgins E (2010) Motivation in mental accessibility: relevance of a representation (ROAR) as a new framework. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 4:951–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Elliot AJ, Kayser DN, Greitemeyer T, Lichtenfeld S, Gramzow RH, Maier MA, Liu H (2010) Red, rank, and romance in women viewing men. J Exp Psychol Gen 139:399–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Elliot AJ, Maier MA, Binser MJ, Friedman R, Pekrun R (2009) The effect of red on avoidance behavior in achievement contexts. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 35:365–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Elliot AJ, Niesta D (2008) Romantic red: red enhances men’s attraction to women. J Pers Soc Psychol 95:1150–1164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Haws KL, Winterich KP, Naylor RW (2014) Seeing the world through GREEN-tinted glasses: green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. J Consum Psychol 24:336–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Henderson T, Arora N (2010) Promoting brands across categories with a social cause: implementing effective embedded premium programs. J Mark 74:41–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. IEG (2014) Sponsorship spending growth slows in North America as marketers eye newer media and marketing options. IEG Sponsorship Report. http://www.sponsorship.com/iegsr/2014/01/07/Sponsorship-Spending-Growth-Slows-In-North-America.aspx.

  15. Kitayama S, Park H, Sevincer AT, Karasawa M, Uskul AK (2009) A cultural task analysis of implicit independence: comparing north america, western Europe, and east Asia. J Pers Soc Psychol 97:236–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Krauskopf L, Baertlein L (2014) Frugal U.S. consumers make it tough for food companies to raise prices. Reuters.com. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/14/us-usa-prices-food-analysis-idUSBREA4D03X20140514.

  17. Labrecque LI, Patrick VM, Milne GR (2013) The marketers’ prismatic palette: a review of color research and future directions. Psychol Mark 30:187–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lakoff G, Johnson M (2003) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press, Illinois

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Laran J, Janiszewski C, Cunha M Jr (2008) Context‐dependent effects of goal primes. J Consum Res 35:653–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Loersch C, Payne BK (2011) The situated inference model: an integrative account of the effects of primes on perception, behavior, and motivation. Perspect Psychol Sci 6:234–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Luchs MG, Naylor RW, Irwin JR, Raghunathan R (2010) The sustainability liability: potential negative effects of ethicality on product preference. J Mark 74:18–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Madden TJ, Hewett K, Roth MS (2000) Managing images in different cultures: a cross-national study of color meanings and preferences. J Int Mark 8:90–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Maier MA, Elliot AJ, Lichtenfeld S (2008) Mediation of the negative effect of red on intellectual performance. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 34:1530–1540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Marsh RL, Hicks JL, Bryan ES (1999) The activation of unrelated and canceled intentions. Mem Cognit 27:320–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mehta R, Zhu RJ (2009) Blue or red? Exploring the effect of color on cognitive task performances. Science 323:1226–1229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pancer E, McShane L, Noseworthy TJ (2015) Isolated environmental cues and product efficacy penalties: the color green and Eco-labels. J Bus Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2764-4

    Google Scholar 

  27. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2004) SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 36:717–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rosenthal R, Rosnow RL, Rubin DB (2000) Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: a correlational approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  29. Veltkamp M, Art H, Custers R (2008) Perception in the service of goal pursuit: motivation to attain goals enhances the perceived size of goal-instrumental objects. Soc Cognit 26:720–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Vohs KD, Mead NL, Goode MR (2006) The psychological consequences of money. Science 314:1154–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Vohs KD, Mead NL, Goode MR (2008) Merely activating the concept of money changes personal and interpersonal behavior. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 17:208–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Winterich KP, Barone MJ (2011) Warm glow or cold, hard cash? Social identity effects on consumer choice for donation versus discount promotions. J Mark Res 48:855–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We appreciate constructive feedback on this manuscript from Keith Lyle, Meg Meloy, and Luk Warlop and assistance by Gabriel Gonzales

This research was supported in part by a grant from the Smeal College of Business, Penn State University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Barone.

Additional information

Michael J. Barone and Karen Page Winterich contributed equally to this work.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

Please see the supplementary material for stimuli and measures (DOCX 784 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barone, M.J., Winterich, K.P. Does Green Make You Greedy or Does it Make You Go Green? The Influence of Green Color Primes on Consumers’ Promotion Preferences. Cust. Need. and Solut. 3, 3–10 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-015-0058-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-015-0058-8

Keywords

  • Color priming
  • Promotion preferences
  • Discounts
  • Donations
  • Green associations
  • Environmental concern