Preliminary Study 3: Comparing the Behavior of U.S. and German Consumers

The Grounded Theory study presented in Section 4.3.4 used expert interviews as primary source of data. All experts work for companies located in the DACH region. Whenever they shared their experiences about selling sustainability to consumers, they did that with consumers from these countries in mind. However, the first two preliminary studies were conducted using a sample of AMT workers residing in the U.S. While research points out that – if viewed from a global perspective – German and U.S. consumers behave in a similar way in the context of sustainability (Hayward et al. 2014, pp. 9–14), the second preliminary study was replicated using a sample of German consumers to find out if there are distinct differences between both samples.

6.4.1 Setup

The setup developed for the second preliminary study was kept constant. Only the text elements were translated to German.

6.4.2 Demographics

Since German workers are rare on AMT, a sample was composed of current and former graduate and doctoral students of TUHH and through snowballing on Facebook. Overall, 101 participants were recruited in July and August 2015. Other than the participants from the previous study, they were not compensated monetarily for taking the survey. The demographics of the sample are summed up in Figure 43. In summary, the participants are a little younger (MAge = 31.9 years, SDAge = 9.4 years) and better educated (60 percent possess at least a graduate degree) than the AMT workers from the first two preliminary studies. While different purchasing powers and fluctuating exchange rates impede the comparison of the participants’ income, it is fair to say that the distribution of income classes throughout the German sample is comparable to the AMT sample. Taken together, the

differences between the samples are limited, however, should be observed carefully when comparing the results.

Figure 43: Demographics of the Sample from Preliminary Study 3

6.4.3 Data Preparation

The data was cleaned, transformed, and inspected for careless responses adhering to the procedure introduced in Section 6.2.3. No values were found to be missing, and no data sets had to be eliminated. Only one value for the willingness to pay was removed since its amount made no sense and probably resulted from a typo. Also, the compounds of the multi-item measures as well as the corresponding Cronbach’s α were calculated. Since the lowest value was α = .779, internal consistency of all measures is assured. Several variables (mostly price variables) had to be transformed to achieve normality. Mean differences, t-tests, and Cohen’s d were calculated for analyzing the influence of the manipulation. The complete findings of the statistical analysis can be found in Appendix XII.

6.4.4 Findings and Discussion

The findings of both studies were then compared to each other. In summary, they are similar since almost all significant effects from preliminary study 2 are also found to be existing and significant in preliminary study 3. Moreover, most of the effects and mean differences are of similar size in both studies. This especially holds true for the effects of the manipulation on the perceived environmental and social sustainability. However, some distinct differences between the samples have to be noted. In the case of the garbage bags, no effect of the manipulation on the purchase decision can be found in the German sample.

For the hair blower, there is a significant effect on the purchase decision as German participants indicate to prefer the original design over its “green” counterpart. This effect

Under 30 years

Preliminary Study 3: Comparing the Behavior of U.S. and German Consumers 137

does not exist for the U.S. sample and is probably the result of the significantly better aesthetic evaluation of the original design. Finally, for the toothbrush the manipulation’s effect on the perceived social sustainability is larger and moreover also significant for the German sample. Figure 44 provides a visual comparison of the findings from the two preliminary studies. The size of the differences between both design treatments is indicated by the size of the bubbles, and the bubbles' color indicates the direction of these differences.

Thus, the bubbles contain the exact information that is displayed through the spread between the treatments in Figure 42. For each product, the findings of both studies are presented side by side. It can easily be seen that the results from both preliminary studies are similar.

Figure 44: Comparison of the Effects of Preliminary Studies 2 and 3

The analysis presented above compares the sizes and the directions of the mean differences as well as the levels of significance for both samples. However, it does not compare the mean values themselves and therefore ignores the position of the effects. To analyze the mean differences for each variable across the samples, both data tables were combined, and t-tests were calculated. The complete results are presented in Appendix XIII.

A graphical illustration of the results is depicted in Figure 45. The size of each bubble illustrates the size of the mean difference for a variable. If this difference is significant, the significance level is also stated. For example, it can be seen that the German participants on average gave lower quality ratings for the original design of the headphones than the U.S. participants. However, the difference is small and also not significant.

P4

Significance Level ≥ 99% (p≤ .01) Significance Level ≥ 95% (p≤ .05)

Significance Level ≥ 90% (p≤ .1) Size of Negative Effect (M_Original–M_Green)

Figure 45: Comparison of the Mean Differences of Preliminary Studies 2 and 3

Significant mean differences are found for a number of variables. It seems that the German sample, in general, was more critical and gave significantly lower ratings especially for the environmental sustainability and aesthetics of most products. However, in almost all cases these mean differences do exist for both the original and the “green” treatment. Most of them are of comparable size and more importantly have the same direction. This results in comparable effect sizes and directions as is illustrated in Figure 45. In a nutshell, the German sample yields comparable effects of the manipulation with some distinct differences regarding the hair blower and toothbrush while overall participants tend to provide lower ratings for the environmental sustainability and aesthetics evaluation of both treatments. This illustrates that the exterior design manipulation also influences the perceptions of the German participants even though the sample’s demographics do differ regarding education and also some cultural differences may exist in the context of sustainability. It is also supported by the participants’ comments at the end of the survey.

Most of them directly drew conclusions from the exterior of the products: “I think it is interesting to see that one can read the product’s environmentally friendliness from its color.

Designers should more often signal sustainability through such a product design.” Some were seemingly aware, that “green” designs like the ones mimicked for this study are often mere marketing ploys but admitted to being influenced by it: “I know very well that you cannot tell from the color and design of the product how sustainable the product is manufactured. However, I am definitely allured by it.“

As a next step, the findings from the concluding questions about the participants’ attitude towards green and social consumption as well as their ambivalence ratings were compared.

Product

Significance Level ≥ 99% (p≤ .01) Significance Level ≥ 95% (p≤ .05) Significance Level ≥ 90% (p≤ .1)

Positive Deviation from Preliminary Study 2 Negative Deviation from Preliminary Study 2

Main Experiment: Investigating the Effects of Material and Design Choices on Product Evaluation 139

For the green consumption scale, a small (M1A = 4.52 vs. M1B = 4.82, d = .22) but slightly significant difference was found (t(229) = -1.67, p = .097). The difference in the social consumption scale also yields a small (M1A = 4.23 vs. M1B = 3.91, d = .19) but insignificant mean difference (t(229) = 1.45, p = .148). Thus, participants from both samples reported being equally concerned about sustainable consumption. As calculating a series of ANCOVAs reveals, the German participants’ attitude towards sustainable consumption does not interfere with the effects of the exterior design manipulation. A highly significant mean difference is found for the ambivalence scale (t(229) = -5.944, p < .001). German participants indicate that they were much more conflicted when evaluating the products than U.S. participants (M1A = 2.98 vs. M1B = 4.12, d = .79). This is likely to be attributed to the routine most AMT workers already gained through participating in similar studies.

Regarding the credibility of the edited product pictured, the German sample is also in line with the U.S. sample. While most products appeared to be actual products to the participants, as stated before, the hair blower and the toothbrush raised some doubts. Also, the participants had difficulties recalling the correct color of the “green” hair blower. Taken together, AMT samples behave similarly to German consumers in the context of sustainable consumption choices. Thus, it seems eligible to also use an AMT sample for this dissertation’s main experiment. Summing up the comparison of both preliminary studies, the following key findings are put forward:

Key Findings of Preliminary Study 3

 The major effects of the exterior design manipulation were replicated for the German sample. In general, German participants were more critical regarding their sustainability ratings. However, signaling superior product sustainability through a

“green” exterior design does also work with the German sample.

 Also to the German sample, the edited versions of the product pictures seemed believable. However, again the hair blower and the toothbrush raised some doubts.

 AMT samples like the one used in preliminary study 1 and 2 are considered to behave similarly to a sample of German consumers in the context of the current dissertation.

Thus, the main experiment’s participants will also be sampled from AMT.

6.5 Main Experiment: Investigating the Effects of Material and Design