A sample of 175 students from two universities provided insight regarding the rationale for engaging in anti-consumption behavior. A review of the literature identified myriad reasons why consumers engage in personal boycotts. This study examines 12 of these reasons: environmental concerns, political stance, religious orientation/affiliation, country-of-origin (COO), attitudes towards the LGBTQ community, the size of the marketer, the use of disliked celebrity endorsers, the use of offensive marketing tactics (e.g. advertising), animal cruelty including the use of live animal testing, perceived violations of basic human rights, employing a nonunionized workforce, and employment-related discrimination based on the gender, age, race, religion, or ethnicity of the individual. Respondents rated the appropriateness of each of these 12 issues as a consideration for consumers when making a purchase decision, and they indicated the extent to which they personally use each issue in making their own purchase decisions. The results show that the most accepted rationale for engaging in a public boycott is a reported transgression related to sustainability whereas the least acceptable of the 12 reasons under scrutiny is the large size of the marketer. The respondents also indicated that they were personally most likely to consider anti-consumption because of a firm’s engagement in perceived violations of the basic human rights of the firm’s employees whereas the use of a non-unionized workforce was the issue that was least likely to result in a personal boycott. Five of the six measured demographic variables were found to be associated with the decision-making process with gender and ethnicity being the most common factors. The consideration most likely to be influenced by demographic variables was the company’s position regarding the LGBTQ community.
McCullough et al. (Sat,) studied this question.