If a product is known for having specific attributes that
convey an identifiable positive symbolic meaning, by
purchasing this product, the individual transfers these
attributes to himself/herself, thereby enhancing his/her
self-concept (Grubb and Grathwohl, 1967). Reciprocally, any
product that conveys a negative identifiable symbolic meaning
is likely to be rejected to avoid being associated with its
negative attributes. The decision not to purchase items viewed
as inconsistent with self-concept is a way of guaranteeing
self-consistency (Sirgy, 1982). Therefore, if a consumer
perceives a non-ecological product as being inconsistent with
his/her self-image and lifestyle, he/she will tend to avoid it and
to prefer the less environmentally-harmful alternative.
However, it is important to note that group membership and
the reactions of significant others’ influence – and are even
part of – self-concept (Grubb and Grathwohl, 1967; White
and Dahl, 2007). Thus, the ecological beliefs of significant
others are likely to influence self-image related to
pro-environmental consumption. As a result, a product that is
inconsistent with the pro-environmental social norm will also
be perceived as conflicting with self-image and will be avoided.
The following hypothesis is proposed:
H3. Among two products in the same category, the
influence of ECARO on the probability of choosing the
item with the lowest environmental impact is mediated
by the incongruity between the self-image and the
image of the most impactful product.