Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Price sensitivity versus ethical consumption: a study of Millennial utilitarian consumer behavior

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Marketing Analytics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Millennial consumers have been associated with a preference for environmental, socially responsible, and high-tech products; they have also been known to be quick spenders tending to hedonistic consumption; however, there is not much consensus on the generation’s behavior. The question is, are Millennial consumers more prone to price sensitivity or ethical consumption of utilitarian products? The main objective of the empirical study was to explore Millennial utilitarian consumer behavior in reference to their degree of price sensitivity and ethical consumption, and preference to purchase from a firm engaged in corporate social responsibility (CSR). In order to do so, two models were developed, each focused on a different utilitarian product, to analyze Millennial consumer behavior regarding price sensitivity and ethical consumption. Results show that Millennial consumers are less price sensitive in regards to product attribute, and favor ethical consumption over price when CSR engagement is revealed.

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

  • Abrantes Ferreira, D., M. Gonçalves Avila, and M. Dias de Faria. 2010. Corporate social responsibility and consumers' perception of price. Social Responsibility Journal 6 (2): 208–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adomaviciute, K. 2013. Relationship between utilitarian and hedonic consumer behavior and socially responsible consumption. Economics and Management 18 (4): 754–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (2): 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Mamun, A., M.K. Rahman, and S.D. Robel. 2014. A critical review of consumers’ sensitivity to price: Managerial and theoretical issues. Journal of International Business and Economics 2 (2): 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R.L., S.H. Dahlquist, and M.S. Garver. 2018. Millennials’ purchasing response to CSR behavior. Marketing Management Journal 28 (1): 14–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auger, P., and T.M. Devinney. 2007. Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment of preferences with unconstrained ethical intentions. Journal of Business Ethics 76: 361–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakewell, C., and V.-W. Mitchell. 2003. Generation Y female consumer decision-making styles. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 31 (2): 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balla, E., and H. Deari. 2015. How do product’s attributes affect consumer behavior: An empirical evidence of the brand choice. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management 3 (8): 38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, C., P. Cloke, N. Clarke, and A. Malpass. 2005. Consuming ethics: Articulating the subjects and spaces of ethical consumption. Antipode 37 (1): 23–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boccia, F., R.M. Manzo, and D. Covino. 2019. Consumer behavior and corporate social responsibility: An evaluation by a choice experiment. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 26 (1): 97–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bray, J., N. Johns, and D. Kilburn. 2011. An exploratory study into the factors impeding ethical consumption. Journal of Business Ethics 98 (4): 597–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browning, N. 2016. Is it worth it? Consumers' willingness to pay for socially responsible practices. In International communication association, 1–61. Fukuoka: ICA.

  • Bucic, T., J. Harris, and D. Arli. 2012. Ethical consumers among the Millennials: A cross-national study. Journal of Business Ethics 110 (1): 113–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, J.G. 2012. Introduction. In Ethical consumption: Social value and economic practice, ed. J.G. Carrier and P.G. Luetchford, 1–36. New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrington, M.J., B.A. Neville, and G.J. Whitwell. 2010. Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics 97: 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho, S.W., S. Sen, M. de Oliveira Mota, and R. Carneiro de Lima. 2010. Consumer reactions to CSR: A Brazilian perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 91 (2): 291–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro-González, S., B. Bande, P. Fernández-Ferrín, and T. Kimura. 2019a. Corporate social responsibility and consumer advocacy behaviors: The importance of emotions and moral virtues. Journal of Cleaner Production 231: 846–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro-González, S., B. Bande, P. Fernández-Ferrín, and T. Kimura. 2019b. Data to model the influence of CSR on consumer behaviors: A process approach. Data in Brief 27: 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chernev, A. 2004. Goal orientation and consumer preference for the status quo. Journal of Consumer Research 31 (3): 557–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clausen, G.J. 2004. Price sensitivity for electronic entertainment: Determinants and consequences. Boca Raton: Disertation.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colucci, M., and D. Scarpi. 2013. Generation Y: Evidences from the fast-fashion market and implications for targeting. Journal of Business Theory and Practice 1 (1): 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cone Communications. 2015. Cone communications Millennial CSR study. https://www.conecomm.com/2015-cone-communications-millennial-csr-study-pdf. Accessed 18 Mar 2020.

  • Cooper-Martin, E., and M.B. Holbrook. 1993. Ethical consumption experiences and ethical space. Advances in Consumer Research 20 (1): 113–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowe, R., and S. Williams. 2000. Who are the ethical consumers? The Co-operative Bank. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.458.5207&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed 28 Mar 2020.

  • Dawkins, C., and F.W. Ngunjiri. 2008. Corporate social responsibility reporting in South Africa: A descriptive and comparative analysis. International Journal of Business Communication 45 (3): 286–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, G.S. 1970. Buyer attitudes and brand choice behavior. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Mooij, M., and G. Hofstede. 2011. Cross-cultural consumer behavior: A review of research findings. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 23 (3–4): 181–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Pelsmacker, P., L. Driesen, and G. Rayp. 2005. Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. The Journal of Consumer Affairs 39 (2): 363–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte. 2019. The deloitte global Millennial survey 2019. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/About-Deloitte/deloitte-2019-millennial-survey.pdf. Accessed 6 Dec 2019.

  • DeVaney, S.A. 2015. Understanding the millennial generation. Journal of Financial Service Professionals 69 (6): 11–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhanoa, R., and N. Goyal. 2018. Millennial generations’ susceptibility to interpersonal influence: A case of personal care products purchases. International Journal of Management Studies V (2(6)): 73–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhurup, M. 2014. Impulsive fashion apparel consumption: The role of hedonism, fashion involvement and emotional gratification in fashion apparel impulsive buying behaviour in a developing country. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 5 (8): 168–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijksterhuis, A., P.K. Smith, R.B. van Baaren, and D.H. Wigboldus. 2005. The unconscious consumer: Effects of environment on consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology 15 (3): 193–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • East, R., M. Vanhuele, and M. Wright. 2008. Consumer behavior: Applications in marketing. California: Sage Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastman, J.K., R. Iyer, and S.P. Thomas. 2012. The impact of status consumption on shopping styes: An exploratory look at the Millennial generation. The Marketing Management Journal 23 (1): 57–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, J.F., R.D. Blackwell, and P.W. Miniard. 1993. Consumer behavior. New York: Dryden Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etikan, I., S.A. Musa, and R.S. Alkassim. 2016. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics 5 (1): 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M.M., G. Foxall, and A. Jamal. 2009. Consumer behaviour. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassin, Y., and A. Van Rossem. 2009. Corporate governance in the debate on CSR and ethics: Sensemaking of social issues in management by authorities and CEOs. Corporate Governance: An International Review 17 (5): 573–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, P.R. 2009. Impact of branding on gen Y’s choice of clothing. Journal of the South East Asia Research Centre for Communications and Humanities 1 (1): 79–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromm, J., and C. Garton. 2013. Marketing to Millennials: Reach the largest and most influential generation of consumers ever. New York: AMACOM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerzema, J., and M. D'Antonio. 2011. Spend shift: How the post-crisis values revolution is changing the way we buy, sell, and live. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldgehn, L.A. 2004. Generation who, what, Y? What you need to know about Generation Y. International Journal of Educational Advancement 5 (1): 24–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotlieb, J.B., J.L. Schlacter, and R.S. Louis. 1992. Consumer decision making: A model of the effects of involvement, source credibility, and location on the size of the price difference required to induce consumers to change suppliers. Psychology & Marketing 9 (3): 191–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hainmueller, J., M.J. Hiscox, and S. Sequeira. 2015. Consumer demand for fair trade: Evidence from a multistore field experiment. Review of Economics and Statistics 97 (2): 242–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanf, J.H., and P. Winter. 2017. Chapter 9-David versus Goliath: Market entry strategies of small and medium sized wine estates. In The wine value chain in China. Consumers, marketing, and the wider world, ed. R. Capitello, S. Charters, D. Menival, and J. Yuan, 133–144. London: Chandos Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • He, Y., and K.K. Lai. 2014. The effect of corporate social responsibility on brand loyalty: The mediating role of brand image. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 25 (3–4): 249–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewlett, S.A., L. Sherbin, and K. Sumberg. 2009. How generation y and baby boomers will reshape your agenda. Harvard Business Review, July-August, 71–77. https://hbr.org/2009/07/how-gen-y-boomers-will-reshape-your-agenda. Accessed 6 Dec 2019.

  • Hirschman, E.C., and M.B. Holbrook. 1982. Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing 46 (3): 92–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, C.-W. 2017. Does practicing CSR makes consumers like your shop more? Consumer-retailer love mediates CSR and behavioral intentions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14 (12): 1558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, N., and W. Strauss. 2000. Millennials rising: The next great generation. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacobucci, D. 2001. Kellogg on marketing. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J., and R.W. Chestnut. 1978. Brand loyalty: Measurement and management. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J., and M. Morrin. 2015. Consumer psychology. In International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, ed. J.D. Wright, 738–743. Florida: Elsevier Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R.B., and A.J. Onwuegbuzie. 2004. Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher 33 (7): 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyner, B.E., and D. Payne. 2002. Evolution and implementation: A study of values, business ethics and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 41 (4): 297–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kacen, J.J., and J.A. Lee. 2002. The influence of culture on consumer impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology 12 (2): 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaifi, B.A., W.A. Nafei, N.M. Khanfar, and M.M. Kaifi. 2012. A multi-generational workforce: Managing and understanding millennials. International Journal of Business and Management 7 (24): 88–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G.E., T.S. Judd, A. Churchward, K. Gray, and K.-L. Krause. 2008. First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 24 (1): 108–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. 2017. Consumer responses to the food industry’s proactive and passive environmental CSR, factoring in price as CSR tradeoff. Journal of Business Ethics 140: 307–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., and J. Kim. 2016. The influence of hedonic versus utilitarian consumption situations on the compromise effect. Marketing Letters 27 (1): 387–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobler, D., F. Hauber, and B. Ernst. 2015. Millennial and wealth management. Trends and Challenges of the new clientele. Deloitte. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/lu/Documents/financial-services/lu-millennials-wealth-management-trends-challenges-new-clientele-0106205.pdf. Accessed 6 Dec 2019.

  • Kotler, P.T., and G. Armstrong. 2013. Fundamentos de Marketing. Mexico City: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraljević, R., and Z. Filipović. 2017. Gender differences and consumer behavior of Millennials. Acta Economica Et Turistica 3 (1): 5–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroth, A., and S.J. Young. 2014. New professionals, new desires: What millennials want in their work. Recreational Sports Journal 38 (1): 23–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhns, A., and M. Saksena. 2017. Food purchase decisions of Millennial households compared to other generations. United States Department of Agriculture. Economic Information Bulletin Number 186. https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/86401/eib-186.pdf?v=43097. Accessed 15 Mar 2020.

  • Kumar, S.R. 2007. Marketing and branding: The Indian scenario. Patparganj: Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurz, C.J., G. Li, and D.J. Vine. 2019. Chapter 8—Are millennials different? In Handbook of US consumer economics, ed. A. Haughwout and B. Mandel, 193–232. New York: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lämsä, A.-M., M. Vehkaperä, T. Puttonen, and H.-L. Pesonen. 2008. Effect of business education on women and men students' attitudes on corporate responsibility in society. Journal of Business Ethics 82 (1): 45–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., and G. Circella. 2019. Chapter Five—ICT, millennials' lifestyles and travel choices. Advances in Transport Policy and Planning 3: 107–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., G. Circella, P.L. Mokhtariana, and S. Guhathakurta. 2019. Heterogeneous residential preferences among millennials and members of generation X in California: A latent-class approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 76: 289–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerro, M., M. Raimondo, M. Stanco, C. Nazzaro, and G. Marotta. 2019. Cause related marketing among millennial consumers: The role of trust and loyalty in the food industry. Sustainability 11 (2): 535–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M.T., I.A. Wong, G. Shi, R. Chu, and J.L. Brock. 2014. The impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance and perceived brand quality on customer-based brand preference. Journal of Services Marketing 28 (3): 181–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marin, L., S. Ruiz, and A. Rubio. 2009. The role of identity salience in the effects of corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 84 (1): 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, M. 2016. Ocuparan 35% de los millennials el mercado laboral en el 2020. El Economista. https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/empresas/Ocuparan-35-de-losmillennials-el-mercado-laboral-en-el-2020-20160525-0091.html. Accessed 6 Dec 2019.

  • Martínez-Ruiz, M.P., and C.M. Gómez-Cantó. 2016. Key external influences affecting consumers' decisions regarding food. Frontiers in Psychology 7 (1618): 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAlister, A. 2009. Teaching the Millennial generation. The American Music Teacher 59 (1): 13–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki, A.D., D. Grewal, and R.C. Goodstein. 2005. The effect of multiple extrinsic cues on quality perceptions: A matter of consistency. Journal of Consumer Research 32 (1): 146–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, L.A., and D.J. Webb. 2005. The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. Journal of Consumer Affairs 39 (1): 121–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, F.M., J.G. Lafuente, F.Á. Carreón, and S.M. Moreno. 2017. The characterization of the Millennials and their buying behavior. International Journal of Marketing Studies 9 (5): 135–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munnukka, J. 2005. Dynamics of price sensitivity among mobile service customers. Journal of Product & Brand Management 14 (1): 65–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, K.K., and K. Sadaghiani. 2010. Millennials in the workplace: A communication perspective on Millennials’ organizational relationships and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology 25 (2): 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nan, X., and K. Heo. 2007. Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives: Examining the role of brand-cause fit in cause-related marketing. Journal of Advertising 36 (2): 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayana, C.L., and R.J. Markin. 1975. Consumer behavior and product performance: An alternative conceptualization. Journal of Marketing 39 (4): 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newbold, K.B., and D.M. Scott. 2017. Driving over the life course: The automobility of Canada’s Millennial, Generation X, Baby Boomer and greatest generations. Travel Behaviour and Society 6: 57–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, E.S., L. Schweitzer, and S.T. Lyons. 2010. New generation, great expectations: A field study of the Millennial generation. Journal of Business & Psychology 25 (2): 281–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A., and C. Opal. 2005. Fair Trade: Market-driven ethical consumption. London: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen. 2013. Nielsen: 50% of global consumers surveyed willing to pay more for goods, services from socially responsible companies, up from 2011. Press Room. https://www.nielsen.com/eu/en/press-releases/2013/nielsen-50-percent-of-global-consumers-surveyed-willing-to-pay-more-fo/. Accessed 7 Dec 2019.

  • Norum, P.S. 2003. Examination of generational differences in household apparel expenditures. Family & Consumer Sciences 32 (1): 52–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, L., L. Thach, and J.E. Olsen. 2006. Wowing the Millennials: Creating brand equity in the wine industry. Journal of Product & Brand Management 15 (5): 316–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oblinger, D. 2003. Boomers & Gen-Xers, Millennials Understanding the new student. EDUCAUSE Review 500 (4): 37–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordun, G. 2015. Millennial (Gen Y) consumer behavior their shopping preferences and perceptual maps associated with brand loyalty. Canadian Social Science 11 (4): 40–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • OTA. 2016. Millennials and organic: A winning combination. Organic Trade Association. https://ota.com/news/press-releases/19256. Accessed 15 Mar 2020.

  • Pérez, A., and I. Rodríguez-del-Bosque. 2015. Corporate social responsibility and customer loyalty: Exploring the role of identification, satisfaction and type of company. Journal of Services Marketing 29 (1): 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peter, J.P., and S.L. Tarpey. 1975. A comparative analysis of three consumer decision strategies. Journal of Consumer Research 2 (1): 29–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomarici, E., and R. Vecchio. 2014. Millennial generation attitudes to sustainable wine: An exploratory study on Italian consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production 66 (1): 537–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PWC. 2011. Millennials at work reshaping the workplace. https://www.pwc.com/co/es/publicaciones/assets/millennials-at-work.pdf. Accessed 6 Dec 2019.

  • Reisenwitz, T.H., and R. Iyer. 2009. Differences in generation X and generation Y: Implications for the organization and marketers. The Marketing Management Journal 19 (2): 91–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richins, M.L. 1997. Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research 24 (2): 127–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandeen, C. 2008. Boomers, Xers, and Millennials: Who are they and what do they really want from continuing higher education? Continuing Higher Education Review 72 (1): 11–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saratovsky, K.D., and D. Feldmann. 2013. Cause for change: The why and how of nonprofit Millennial engagement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sashittal, H.C., M. Hodis, and R. Sriramachandramurthy. 2015. Entifying your brand among Twitter-using Millennials. Business Horizons 58 (3): 325–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sathre, R., and L. Gustavsson. 2009. Process-based analysis of added value in forest product industries. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (1): 65–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafir, E., I. Simonson, and A. Tversky. 1993. Reason-based choice. Cognition 49 (1–2): 11–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheahan, P. 2005. Generation Y: Thriving and surviving with generation Y at work. Prahan: Hardie Grant Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, I., and R. Batra. 1999. The effect of consumer price consciousness on private label purchase. International Journal of Research in Marketing 16 (3): 237–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivagnanam, K.J., and R. Srinivasa. 2010. Business economics. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Education Private Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K.T. 2012. Longitudinal study of digital marketing strategies targeting millennials. Journal of Consumer Marketing 29 (2): 86–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sproles, G.B., and E.L. Kendall. 1986. A methodology for profiling consumers' decision-making styles. Journal of Consumer Affairs 20 (2): 267–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stampa, E., C. Schipmann-Schwarze, and U. Hamm. 2020. Consumer perceptions, preferences, and behavior regarding pasture-raised livestock products: A review. Food Quality and Preference 82: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolz, H., M. Stolze, U. Hamm, M. Janssen, and E. Ruto. 2011. Consumer attitudes towards organic versus conventional food with specific quality attributes. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 58 (3–4): 67–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, P., and J. Heitmeyer. 2008. Looking at Gen Y shopping preferences and intentions: Exploring the role of experience and apparel involvement. International Journal of Consumer Studies 32 (3): 285–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, W. 2019. Toward a theory of ethical consumer intention formation: Re-extending the theory of planned behavior. AMS Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-019-00156-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J.W. 1974. The role of risk in consumer behavior: A comprehensive and operational theory of risk taking in consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing 38 (2): 54–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teagle, J., S. Mueller, and L. Lockshin. 2010. How do millennials’ wine attitudes and behaviour differ from other generations? In 5th international academy of wine business research conference, 1–8. Auckland.

  • Teddlie, C., and F. Yu. 2007. Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1 (1): 77–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trudel, R., and J. Cotte. 2009. Does it pay to be good? MIT Sloan Management 50 (2): 61–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNSD. 2017. Population by age, sex and urban/rural residence. United Nations Statistic Division: https://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=POP&f=tableCode%3A22. Accessed 7 Dec 2019.

  • Verbeke, W., F. Vanhonacker, I. Sioen, J. Van Camp, and S. De Henauw. 2007. Perceived importance of sustainability and ethics related to fish: A consumer behavior perspective. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 36 (7): 580–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, K.L. 2007. Team sports marketing. Burlington: Elsevier Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, O.S., and R. Sarin. 2018. Consumer choice and market outcomes under ambiguity in product quality. Marketing Science 37 (3): 333–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, M.E., and A.W. McCoy. 2016. Millennials and chocolate product ethics: Saying one thing and doing another. Food Quality and Preference 49: 42–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaichkowsky, J.L. 1985. Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research 12 (3): 341–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y. 2015. The impact of brand image on consumer behavior: A literature review. Open: Journal of Business and Management 3 (1): 58–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zukin, S., and J.S. Maguire. 2004. Consumers and consumption. Annual Review of Sociology 30: 173–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Panamericana, Augusto Rodin 498, Insurgentes Mixcoac, Benito Juárez, 03920, Mexico City, Mexico

    Andrée Marie López-Fernández

Authors
  1. Andrée Marie López-Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrée Marie López-Fernández.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

López-Fernández, A.M. Price sensitivity versus ethical consumption: a study of Millennial utilitarian consumer behavior. J Market Anal 8, 57–68 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-020-00074-8

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-020-00074-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation