Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon Heuristic processing of green advertising: Review and policy implications Juana Castro Santa *, Stefan Drews Institute of Environmental Science and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Campus de la UAB, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Keywords: Green advertising aims to communicate pro-environmental dimensions of products to achieve an increase in Heuristics sales. Within a general advertising framework, we organize studies of green advertising to examine the psy­ Consumer behavior chological processes it triggers and how it influences consumers. We analyze (1) the information typically Emission reduction conveyed in green advertising through verbal and non-verbal cues, (2) the moderating variables of consumers' Green advertising Spillovers attention, and (3) the cognitive and emotional responses to green advertising. We describe the latter through the prism of heuristics, i.e. simple rules of thumb that consumers use to analyze cues. We find that five main heu­ ristics drive consumer responses to green advertising. We discuss how these heuristics can create psychological barriers for required changes in consumption to reduce emissions, and what policies can overcome adverse, and promote beneficial effects of green advertising. 1. Introduction persuasion mechanisms used in green advertising may lead to systematic misperceptions. For example, research shows that people underestimate Green advertising has emerged as a popular business strategy in carbon emissions of products labelled as green (Gorissen and Weijters, recent years for marketing products that are claimed to have a relatively 2016), or think they taste or perform better than identical non-labelled low environmental impact (Banerjee et al., 1995; Peattie, 2001a). The options (Sörqvist et al., 2015a-b). These examples illustrate not only the main approach of green advertising is communicating the pro- effectiveness of green advertising but also that it can build on or, environmental dimensions of a product by employing different ap­ compensate for, consumer heuristics. peals and cues. Environmental claims in advertising allow firms to Decades of research show that the influence of advertising on con­ improve their market share by differentiating their products as lower- sumer perceptions and preferences takes place through mostly carbon while helping individuals to reduce the environmental impact emotional channels and that rational assessment of the available infor­ of their consumption (Pinkse and Bohnsack, 2021; Sun et al., 2021). Yet, mation is limited (Kroeber-Riel, 1979; Heath, 2009; Zhang et al., 2014). as any other kind of advertising, green advertising plays a role in the This in turn triggers consumer heuristics, i.e. shortcuts that allow the causation of climate change as it contributes to carbon emissions processing of product information in a fast and efficient way rather than through various channels. It directly does so via its operational and in a comprehensive and time-consuming manner (Payne et al., 1991). communication activities, such as events, prints and digital messages Advertisers have a good understanding of such heuristics and hence (Pärssinen et al., 2018; Simons and Pras, 2010). But more importantly, have developed various persuasion techniques that account for non- green advertising creates emissions indirectly by encouraging purchases rational information processing (Chaudhuri and Buck, 1995; Merlo of commercial goods. et al., 2008). Green advertising makes use of the same mechanisms to The use of environmental claims in green advertising is effective in influence consumers (Liu and Liu, 2020; Zubair et al., 2020). Yet, its encouraging purchases to the extent that today's consumers are often consequences both in terms of consumer heuristics and its implications more strongly persuaded by advertising that emphasizes the product's for emissions reduction remain understudied. green credentials, rather than other relevant attributes (Chan and Fan, In this paper we review the literature on how consumers process the 2015; Ku et al., 2012). Often, consumers are even willing to pay more for information contained in green advertising. In particular, we study the products just because they are claimed to be green (Laroche et al., 2001). content and cues of green advertising messages, the factors moderating While this should constitute an opportunity to reduce consumption- consumers' (limited) attention to the advertising, and the effects green related emissions by enhancing lower-carbon purchases, the ads attain on consumers' cognitive and affective responses. The latter * Corresponding author. E-mail address: juana224@gmail.com (J.C. Santa). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107760 Received 4 January 2022; Received in revised form 16 September 2022; Accepted 21 January 2023 Available online 4 February 2023 0921-8009/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 include perceptions and attitudes towards the advertised products. We Advertising Message Cognition and Affect explore these cognitive and affective processes by employing five key heuristics. These describe how consumers develop attitudes or percep­ tions towards products based on the way they process the information contained in green advertising. The ultimate motivation of this research is to improve our understanding of the consumer heuristics arising from Verbal and non- Heuristics verbal cues green advertising and their implications in terms of consumption-related emissions. More generally, this article seeks to add to a growing litera­ ture on the psychology of the low-carbon transition (e.g. Nielsen et al., Filters of Attention 2021). The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the frame­ Motivation, involvement and work that we propose to organize the literature. Section 3 describes the individual characteristics content of green advertising. Section 4 identifies the filters of consumers' attention. Section 5 explores consumers' cognitive and affective pro­ cessing of green advertising messages and presents a conceptual inno­ Fig. 1. A framework describing advertising effects in terms of consumer heu­ ristics. vation by describing it in terms of relevant consumer heuristics. Section Source: Adapted from Vakratsas and Ambler (1999). 6 considers the implications of consumer heuristics in terms of emission reductions. Section 7 discusses policy implications from green adver­ tising effects. Section 8 concludes. We review literature on the verbal and non-verbal cues contained in green advertising messages as the input consumers receive. Likewise, we summarize the literature on the different filters, such as motivation or 2. A framework for analyzing green advertising involvement that determine the level of attention allocated to this input. Finally, for the category of the framework regarding cognitive and af­ Different models have been proposed in order to explain advertising fective processes, we connect green advertising cues with the cognitive effects on consumers. Among the most popular are economic models of and affective responses they trigger, i.e., the attitudes and perceptions rational choice that consider advertising purely as information (see consumers develop towards the product. Based on this relationship, we Nelson, 1974), models that study affect (Aaker et al., 1986) or the fre­ infer the heuristics that consumers employ, creating a novel framework quency of exposure as the basic mechanism of persuasion (Naples, for interpreting green advertising effects. 1979), others that suggest advertising as a signal of product quality To identify relevant literature, we searched for articles in the English (Tellis and Fornell, 1988), or cognitive models for advertising processing academic database Scopus. Our search terms are related to the frame­ with different hierarchies between emotional and rational processing of work used. For message content we included the keywords “green information (Barry, 1987; Hornik et al., 2017. advertising” together with “information”, “content”, “messages” and Vakratsas and Ambler (1999) review and describe the various “appeals”. For filters of attention, we included “green advertising” models to study advertising effects on consumers, deduce a taxonomy to together with “attention”, “motivation” and “involvement”, while for classify them and finally arrive at a general framework. We consider this consumers' cognitive and affective processing we used “green adver­ framework appropriate to achieve our aim of understanding consumers' tising effects” together with “processing”, “cognitive”, “emotional” and information processing of green advertising as it explains in three simple “heuristics”. In each case we read the abstracts and identified those stages, how advertising influence consumers' attitudes and perceptions studies that were empirical and fell into the categories established by the towards a product and finally behavior. In particular, the three stages framework. The review also covered studies related with the visual cues describe: (1) the message of the advertisement as the input that con­ of labels and packaging as they represent common features used in the sumers receive, (2) the filters that determine the level of consumers' promotion of green products and are eventually part of the visual attention, and (3) consumers' cognitive and affective processing of the advertising of green products. Note that some references are included in advertising. Importantly the framework considers that the cognitive and multiple framework subsets as they are relevant for more than one affective processing of information take place both in isolation and category. For example, a study could be relevant for both the message of simultaneously. That is, to form a perception of an advertised product, the advertising and for consumers' affective responses. In total, we cover consumers are assumed to make both rational, cognitive representations 117 empirical studies published between 1990 until 2021. For a detailed of the information presented, and to develop affective reactions and overview of the included studies in each category, see Appendix 1. emotions towards it. In the present study, we employ an adapted version of this frame­ 3. Message content in green advertising work to study green advertising effects. In particular, we extend the framework by employing heuristics to describe consumers' cognitive and Green advertising is typically used to communicate either the pro- affective processing of the advertisement. Fig. 1 illustrates our frame­ environmental attributes of a product, or the corporate commitment work. The advertising message refers to the content of the green to environmental causes of a firm (Dangelico and Vocalelli, 2017). advertisement and how it is constructed. It includes a combination of the Messages conveyed by green advertising tend to combine both product product information, claims, appeals, images, labels and other non- information (product characteristics and information on the environ­ verbal cues. The filters denote individual-level variables such as moti­ mental impact) and cues such as colors, music and images. The combi­ vation, knowledge and interest in a product that moderate the attention nation of these elements can capture consumers' attention and generate given to an advertisement by a consumer. Finally, cognition and affect positive perceptions of the green product, contributing to the effective­ refer to the mental processing of the advertising. In this stage, we adapt ness of the advertisement (Agarwal and Kumar, 2021; Purohit, 2012; Till the framework and infer the heuristics that consumers use by examining and Baack, 2005). In this section, we discuss the characteristic features the way that the advertising message leads to different cognitive re­ of green advertising’‘s visual communication. We distinguish between sponses, i.e., to attitudes and perceptions. Finally, we exclude the last two streams in the literature, namely (i) verbal or textual cues that refer part of the original framework that refers to behavior. This is because we to information and claims, and (ii) non-verbal cues such as images, identified a very limited number of studies that measure actual purchase colors, etc. This distinction is important given the discrete role these behavior. cues play in advertisements and the processing by consumers (Malin In what follows, we organize and review the relevant empirical et al., 2017). literature on green advertising according to the framework categories. 2 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 3.1. Verbal or textual cues in green advertising shame which are effective emotions in encouraging pro-environmental behaviors (Amatulli et al., 2019; Chen, 2016; Olsen et al., 2014; Shin The terminology used in green advertising is varied and includes et al., 2017). In particular, guilt appeals in green advertising have been different words that consumers associate with environmental issues, found to be more effective in persuading consumers than non-guilt ap­ such as “biodegradable”, “eco-friendly”, “green”, “natural”, “organic”, peals (Chang, 2011, 2012). “recycled”, and “sustainable” (Prakash, 2002; Smith and Brower, 2012; Sdrolia and Zarotiadis, 2019). While some of these terms are technical, 3.2. Non-verbal cues in green advertising (e.g., biodegradable and organic) other terms are ambiguous (e.g., eco- friendly and green), subject to many different interpretations, and often Non-verbal advertising cues refer to elements such as images, music, used in a generic context (Hansen, 2002; Parguel et al., 2015; Smith, colors, the attractiveness of the communicator, etc., that are neither 2010). Most consumers are unable to identify the difference between textual nor directly related to the advertised product. As expected by its more and less technical terms and, as a result, misinterpret the actual name, the most basic cue in green advertising is the color green. Mar­ environmental impact of the associated products (Smith, 2014). keters have obtained insights on how color shapes consumer expecta­ Importantly, labels that are used for certifying the environmental impact tions and creates consumer associations between brands or products of products typically use the same generic terminology (D'Souza, 2004; with certain colors (Labrecque et al., 2013). The color green, for D'Souza et al., 2006). Moreover, unless they represent third parties or instance, has been adopted as a marketing tool to evoke associations of government-mandated labels, these labels may come down to being self- nature with green products (Bottomley and Doyle, 2006; Labrecque declarations of companies to promote their products as green. et al., 2013). Experimental research with a total of 355 students in the Although some scholars have found that the information about the US has shown that consumers associate the color green with a lower environmental impact of products contained in green advertising to be environmental impact of brands, triggering positive advertising atti­ increasing over time (Leonidou et al., 2011), most studies show that the tudes and purchase intentions (Lim et al., 2020). Further cues used in information is largely vague and uninformative (Carlson et al., 1993; Dai green advertising are images of nature. Visual advertising imagery is et al., 2014; Grillo et al., 2008; Karna et al., 2001). For example, Segev typically used in green advertising to elicit emotional responses et al. (2016) studied 433 green advertisements in 18 magazines in the US (Chowdhury et al., 2008; Hartmann et al., 2016). Research has shown and found the majority of green claims were deemed acceptable in terms that advertisements with scenes of nature evoke very similar emotions to of the information they convey. Yet, in their study, they did not account those felt while being in nature (Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2012), for false green claims which pertain to the domain of deceptive adver­ enhancing positive brand perceptions (Hartmann et al., 2005; Matthes tising. Contrarily, but with a smaller sample, Cummins et al. (2014) find et al., 2014). Further research suggests that the most effective green that from 87 advertisements selected from popular magazines and advertising combines textual cues on the environmental benefits with newspapers in the US, about half of them were misleading. Likewise, imagery of nature (Schmuck et al., 2018). Testa et al. (2011) performed an analysis of green advertising in Other visual cues such as green packaging of products using biode­ different newspapers in Italy from 2007 to 2008. They find that only gradable or recyclable boxes—or simply green claims on the pack­ 17% presented clear and transparent information about products envi­ aging—have also been shown to trigger positive attitudes towards ronmental impact. Also, recent qualitative and quantitative studies on brands (Rokka and Uusitalo, 2008; Seo and Scammon, 2017). Likewise, car advertising in Spain find that very few car advertisements explicitly additional features such as famous actors, sports figures, or merely report sufficient information to allow consumers to correctly assess and beautiful people (e.g., influencers) using a particular green product can compare the overall environmental performance of the respective cars be effective at creating perceptions in consumers that the product is (Pedros-Perez et al., 2019; Scopa et al., 2016). desirable (Blasche and Ketelaar, 2015; Kumar and Tripathi, 2019; Eren- Central to green advertising is the framing of a message. This refers Erdogmus et al., 2016). Studies have also found that some consonants in to the way a product is portrayed and communicated to the public. words can convey more environmental concern than others (Joshi and Frames are important as they construct meaning by selecting the aspects Kronrod, 2020), that circular looking logos tend to be perceived as that are salient in a text, in such a way as to promote a particular greener than angular shapes (Xu et al., 2020) and that green products interpretation or moral evaluation. In two content analyses of published using round-ending prices (e.g., €4) result in perceptions of higher magazines in the US, one from 1979 until 2008 (Ahern et al., 2013) and quality than odd-ending prices (e.g., €3.99) (Tripathi and Pandey, the other from 1990 until 2010 (VanDyke and Tedesco, 2016), authors 2018). find that the dominant environmental issues portrayed in advertise­ ments are species/habitat protection followed by energy efficiency in 4. Filters of attention to green advertising the more recent years. In the second study, they also find responsibility with the environment as an emerging frame in green corporate adver­ Advertising typically takes place while consumers are engaged in tisements. Note that these frames refer to environmental benefits ach­ certain activities such as shopping, watching television, checking social ieved with purchases, i.e. so-called gain frames. media, or reading an article on the internet. Research has shown that There is significant evidence on the effectiveness of gain frames to when messages (such as advertising) are embedded in contexts where communicate green products (Nabi et al., 2020; Segev et al., 2015; consumers are performing other tasks, they receive only passive mental Spence and Pidgeon, 2010; Xu et al., 2021; Yu and Shen, 2013; Zubair processing rather than an active one, as consumers have limited atten­ et al., 2020). Other common frames stress the temporal effects of pur­ tion and processing capacity (Grimes, 2008). Message processing in this chases on the environment, either in the present or the future (Fujita context is thus characterized by low levels of attention and a lack of et al., 2006). Stressing future environmental gains has been found to consumer motivation to actively seek and process detailed issue-relevant trigger more positive consumer attitudes towards the product than those information (Petty and Cacioppo, 1979; Petty and Cacioppo, 1981. framed as present gains (Chen and Chiu, 2016). For example, in a In this context, factors moderating consumer attention to an adver­ message such as “think about what will be gained [lost] this [next] year tisement can alter, or radically change, the response to advertising if we do [don't] make a green choice”, a future positive gain frame (Rosbergen et al., 1997). In other words, whether a green advertisement produces more positive attitudes towards the brand and increases pur­ is able to influence consumer attitudes is contingent upon moderating chase intention. On the other hand, messages that emphasize outcomes variables. These variables can even change the direction of consumer from environmental purchases in the present have been found to be response (e.g., an “ecological” frame in advertising might trigger posi­ more effective if they stress losses (Chang et al., 2015; Homar and tive/negative consumer attitudes depending on their motivations). The Cvelbar, 2021). Loss frames can also be used to create fear, guilt and framework by Vakratsas and Ambler (1999) precisely suggests that 3 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 motivation and the ability to process information are the central mod­ 5. Consumer heuristics in processing green advertising erators of individual responses to advertising. Moreover, individual differences in processing styles (Ruiz and Sicilia, 2004), receptiveness to Processing the advertising messages takes place at both the cognitive different advertising appeals (Zhang et al., 2014), and preferences and affective level (Chaudhuri and Buck, 1995). Cognitive processing is defining consumer attitudes towards the advertisement can further typically associated with rationally analyzing the product's information moderate the effects of advertising (Rayner et al., 2008). While these contained in advertisements. In the case of green advertising, it is further moderating variables could be identified for a single advertisement (e.g., associated with the assessment of a product's environmental claims. an advertisement for light bulbs), generalizations about variables Affective processing on the other hand, refers to emotional, non-rational moderating consumer attention for green advertising are difficult. Green processing of particular appeals, images, music, or other cues used in an advertising encompasses a varied range of goods, and hence consumer advertisement. As attention is limited, only consumers highly involved categories, since there is no universal prototype of a green consumer with environmental issues rationally process the environmental claims (Peattie, 2001b). in green advertising (Petty and Cacioppo, 1979). Otherwise, attention is Nevertheless, some general insights can be derived from the litera­ mostly fixated on cues such as green colors or images capable of trig­ ture. Motivation as the basic moderator of attention to a green adver­ gering emotions (Du Plessis, 2005). This type of processing, where the tisement will be contingent on consumers' awareness of environmental available information is not analyzed “rationally”, is referred to as threats (Choi and Johnson, 2019; Copeland and Bhaduri, 2019: Testa heuristics (Liberman and Eagly, 1989). In particular, heuristic process­ et al., 2020; Yadav and Pathak, 2016) and, more generally, upon their ing occurs when consumers do not analyze the information in detail involvement with environmental issues (Buchholz and Smith, 1991; because they are unfocused, rushed, or driven by emotional responses. Kong and Zhang, 2013; Pickett-Baker and Ozaki, 2008; Tucker et al., In other words, heuristics are decision rules that simplify people's 2012). Moreover, regarding the ability to process information, the everyday decisions. Therefore, when analyzing affective and limited- attention allocated to an advertisement will be moderated by individual rational processing of green advertising, it is useful to see which heu­ variables such as product knowledge (Kim et al., 2016; Kusuma and ristics are triggered by certain cues. Handayani, 2018) and, importantly in the case of green advertising, by Although the literature of green advertising has not been previously the brand's reputation concerning its environmental impact (Shin and organized through the prism of heuristics, studies on general advertising Ki, 2019). Regarding the latter, the credibility of the advertisement and have often employed heuristics to describe the way consumers analyze the channel where the advertising is presented act as important filters of the message content. In particular, reviewing the relevant literature we consumer attention in the case of green advertising (Hartmann et al., identified four such heuristics or effects. Namely the affect heuristic 2017). (Moore and Hutchinson, 1983), the familiarity heuristic (Campbell and Interestingly, while motivation, involvement and knowledge are Keller, 2003), halo effects (Beckwith et al., 1978), and the activation of a typically positive filters for advertising attention, in the case of green desirable social identity (Forehand et al., 2002). In addition, particular advertising, the relationship can also be reverse (Matthes and Wonne­ to green advertising we identified in the literature a fifth heuristic, berger, 2014). In other words, the more people know about environ­ namely the footprint illusion. The latter, unlike the first four, refers mental issues, the less they are persuaded by green claims. Considerable exclusively to environmental products, making it a special case for green evidence shows that consumers who are less involved in environmental advertising, as will be further explained below. In this section we issues are more persuaded by green appeals in advertisements, while analyze consumers' cognitive and affective processing of the message in those who are highly involved tend to be more skeptical (Cheng et al., green advertising, i.e. the third element of the framework in terms of 2020; Luo et al., 2020; Shrum et al., 1995). This can be explained by the heuristics. We infer the heuristics by examining the way that the common use of uninformative and ambiguous environmental claims advertising message leads to different cognitive responses, i.e., to atti­ that have led to a growing number of customers becoming skeptical tudes and perceptions. about the environmental performance and benefits of green products Table 1 lists the five heuristics, provides a short description of each (Do Paço and Reis, 2012; Goh and Balaji, 2016). Moreover, many con­ and an example illustrating their effect. This classification contributes a sumers also distrust labels as there is an increasing confusion with the new interpretation of the existing data on green advertising. While very overabundance of corporate, third party and government eco-labels few of the reviewed studies classify the effects of green cues in terms of (Bhaskaran et al., 2006). For both skeptical and non-skeptical con­ heuristics, the description of an effect can match the definition of a sumers, green signaling in advertising may capture attention. Yet in the heuristic. For example, studies exploring the positive effects of attractive case of the skeptics, attention is not due to positive feelings but to a celebrities in advertisements on consumer attitudes (e.g., Eren-Erdog­ perception of greenwashing as they distrust green claims (Nyilasy et al., mus et al., 2016) do not invoke heuristic terminology. Nevertheless, 2014). these can be classified as belonging to the category of a halo effect. The Other filters of attention are related to socio-demographic charac­ goal of this section is to identify consumer cognitive and affective re­ teristics, such as country, age or gender (Luchs and Mooradian, 2012; sponses to green advertising and interpret them in terms of the existing Matthes, 2019), or to additional individual characteristics, such as consumer heuristics. A detailed explanation of each heuristic and how values, beliefs, or intentions, that can predict attitudes towards green they are boosted by green advertising cues can be found below together product advertising (Groening et al., 2018; Young et al., 2010). A good with the supporting evidence for these effects. example to illustrate their moderating role are differences in consumer responses to gain versus loss-framed messages. While both frames in 5.1. Affect heuristics green advertising can trigger consumer attention, individual differences determine whether consumers are more responsive to gain- or loss- Arguably the most important heuristic in advertising, the affect oriented messages (Kareklas et al., 2012). This is referred in the litera­ heuristic refers to judgements based on induced emotions, such as ture as regulatory focus theory. Depending on the goals people pursue, pleasure, fear, surprise, etc., that bypasses a more extensive search and some information may be more or less appealing. While some pursue process of relevant information, negating the need for higher levels of goals with a promotion focus (attainment of gains, hopes, ideals), others cognitive processing (Moore and Hutchinson, 1983). Consumers' atti­ are more sensible to a prevention focus related to loss or pain (see for tudes towards a product are strongly determined by the capacity of the example Bhatnagar and McKay-Nesbitt, 2016; Ku et al., 2012). advertisement of triggering emotions (Kao and Du, 2020). Regarding textual cues in green advertising, the evidence reviewed in Section 3 showed positive and negative emotions are enhanced by gain- and loss-framed messages and are both effective in influencing 4 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 Table 1 Canada and the US shows across three experiments that labels are not as Five major heuristics elicited by green advertising messages. effective at influencing product environmental perception if they are not Heuristic Description Example green colored (Pancer et al., 2017). Affect heuristics - Judgements based on - Green color in advertising arising emotions without produces positive emotions to 5.2. Familiarity effect searching for information the point that environmental labels are not as persuasive in This heuristic refers to developed preferences for products merely absence of green color because they are familiar, without considering the whole choice-set or (Pancer et al., 2017). Familiarity effect - Developed preferences for - Green advertisements depict evaluating further information. Exposure to advertising, understood as things merely because they images of familiar landscapes the simple advertising disclosure, is shown to strengthen consumers' are familiar without that trigger more positive preferences for the product advertised (Zajonc, 1968). Psychologists searching for further perceptions of the product have explained the exposure phenomenon as producing a sense of “fa­ information. than those with non-familiar miliarity” that reduces the level of risk associated with a stimulus, thus landscapes (Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibanez, 2010). generating a preference for it (Hansen and Wänke, 2009). This process is Green-halo effect - Increased perception of - Individuals perceive that food reinforced by repeated exposures to the advertising; the more frequent quality, taste or products taste better if they the exposure to an advertisement, the larger the preference for the performance of “green” are labelled as “eco-friendly”, advertised product and the higher the brand recall (Schmidt and Eisend, labelled products compared to identical, non- eco-friendly alternatives 2015; Shapiro and Shanker Krishnan, 2001). Further, neurological evi­ (Sörqvist et al., 2015a). dence on familiarity effects has shown that exposure to known brand Identity effect - Biased information - Through the purchase of logos triggers positive emotional associations in consumers (Plassmann processing characterized products labelled as green, et al., 2012). by scrutinizing information individuals can see In the case of green advertising, experimental research shows a single so as to confirm the validity themselves as the cause of of important self-relevant positive environmental exposure to a sustainable message increases consumers' positive beliefs outcomes (Antonetti and perception of the advertisement and the involvement with the product Maklan, 2014). (Cummins et al., 2014). Moreover, familiarity regarding attributes from Footprint illusion - Adding a green option to a - Individuals believe that green products produces a positive influence on consumer intention or quantity choice-set reduces the introducing environmentally insensitivity overall perceived emission certified buildings to a towards buying green products, while a lack of experience with green of the whole choice-set community would decrease attributes may generate an intention–behavior gap (Biswas and Roy, the total carbon footprint of 2015; Wang et al., 2018). Repeated exposure to green colors, images, the community (Holmgren and labels contributes to the positive emotional associations that con­ et al., 2018a). sumers derive from green products. The color effect in green advertising and its association with reduced environmental impact is the perfect consumers attitudes towards products (Nabi et al., 2020; Segev et al., example of a reinforced process resulting in positive emotional associ­ 2015; Yu and Shen, 2013). This influence of emotion in consumer atti­ ations (Lim et al., 2020). Moreover, depicting pleasant and recognizable tude is explained by a significant positive relationship between the images like green landscapes with familiar vegetation triggers positive emotional content of advertising and brand favorability, while rational emotional responses and attitudes, as shown in an experimental field claims in advertising show no significant relationship (Heath et al., study with 750 Spanish participants (Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibanez, 2006). This non-rational processing of green textual cues is further 2010). Advertisements with such images are also better recalled illustrated by consumers being more easily persuaded by general and compared than identical advertisements with attractive, but non-nature abstract green claims than by specific environmental information images (Hartmann et al., 2013). Feelings of familiarity reinforce green related to the product (Chen and Chiu, 2016). For example, in a choice purchases, which in turn increase the likelihood of making additional experiment conducted in New Zealand with 401 participants, general green purchases (Copeland and Bhaduri, 2019). green claims triggered more positive reactions to a product than specific environmental information of the product (Hoek et al., 2013). Reczek 5.3. Green halo effect et al. (2018) replicate this result in five experimental studies with different products and, similarly, Montoro-Rios et al. (2008) find that The halo effect is a type of cognitive bias. In advertising it occurs environmental information alone has no effect on the attitudes of when a product enjoys marketing success due to its association with a Spanish shoppers towards a brand (n = 828). successful company, celebrity, or other recognizable element that trig­ Regarding non-textual cues like green color and nature images, they gers positive associations (Beckwith et al., 1978). The positive influence are fixated for a longer time than text in advertisements (Rayner et al., on consumer perception is generated via the positive image of the ce­ 2001) and processed more rapidly by consumers (Heath, 2009). Like­ lebrity or company and not by the product characteristics. Celebrities wise, most evidence show they prompt higher levels of emotional re­ are therefore used in a similar vein in green advertising to create positive sponses than textual ones. The success of such cues in producing associations and endorse green products (see e.g., Eren-Erdogmus et al., emotional benefits to consumers is based on a universal human desire to 2016). “feel at one with nature”, which in turn provides an instinctive attraction The halo effect specific to green advertisement, is referred to as towards products associated with lower environmental impact (Kals “green halo”. The green halo effect is based on people's idealized per­ et al., 1999; Zubair et al., 2020). Experimental evidence shows that la­ ceptions of green products that prompt better consumer evaluations of bels (Hahnel et al., 2015) and nature images enhance positive product such products. Consumers associate happiness and pleasure with the perceptions to a much larger extent than environmental claims alone consumption of organic food (Apaolaza et al., 2018) and think that eco- (Hartmann et al., 2005; Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2012). For labelled bread (Annett et al., 2008), potato chips (Lee et al., 2013), fruits example, Matthes et al. (2014) performed an online experiment with (Sörqvist et al., 2015a), wine (Wiedmann et al., 2014), and most other 484 US participants, either explaining the environmental advantages of food products taste better just because they are “eco-friendly”, a product textually or using natural scenery only. They found that im­ compared to identical, non-eco-friendly alternatives. Green halo effects ages of nature positively influenced brand attitude while textual infor­ produce placebo effects not only in taste but also in performance. In an mation alone did not. Likewise, regarding green color, a recent study for experiment with a within-subject design among 48 Swedish students, Sörqvist et al. (2015b) found that the green claims of a desktop lamp 5 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 produced placebo-like effects on performance and comfort ratings from academia and society. There are many conceptualizations of the ‘carbon users. footprint’. One widely cited definition is that of “a measure of the Furthermore, this effect upholds even for product packaging. In an exclusive total amount of carbon dioxide emissions that is directly and experiment with 185 French consumers, Magnier and Schoormans indirectly caused by an activity or is accumulated over the life stages of a (2015) demonstrate that an ecological-looking package, positively in­ product.” (Wiedmann and Minx, 2008). Miscalculation of the own fluences purchase intention independent of the congruency of the sus­ footprint is a common bias as people typically underestimate emissions tainability claims. As a package is the first thing consumers see in a associated with food, electronic devices, and most consumption prod­ product, it is often considered an important criterion and thus many ucts (Camilleri et al., 2019). Yet, experimental evidence shows that cues companies are using it as a communications channel. Research shows such as “green” or “ecological” claims and the use of green colors, labels that consumers have a clear preference for products with green pack­ or green packaging make consumers even more likely to underestimate aging (Rokka and Uusitalo, 2008; Seo and Scammon, 2017). Note that in product emissions (Hahnel et al., 2015; Lim et al., 2020; Seo and all the above examples, the emotional responses are towards the green Scammon, 2017; Smith, 2014). In the literature, this heuristic is referred cues—independent of the product itself and to whether it actually has a to as “the footprint illusion”, quantity insensitivity, or averaging bias. lower environmental impact. To illustrate this heuristic, consider a study by Gorissen and Weijters (2016) showing in two between-subject survey experiments that Belgian 5.4. Identity effects consumers consistently perceive that adding a green-labelled product on top of a meal lowered, rather than raised, the carbon footprint of the At the core of identity is the categorization of the self as an occupant entire meal. The green-colored label depicting green claims caused a of a role (Stets and Burke, 2000). Roles or identities that generate pos­ cognitive bias in participants that made them insensitive to quantity. itive feelings will be employed more often (Stryker, 1987). The desire for This perceptual bias was also found in participants' perceptions of the a positive identity and self-completion then typically leads to a moti­ environmental impact of hybrid versus conventional automobiles. Here vated information processing that is characterized by biased, or selective again, having an extra hybrid automobile did not increase the perceived manner in which information is scrutinized, so as to confirm the validity environmental impact of having an extra car (Kim and Schuldt, 2018). of important self-relevant beliefs (e.g., Liberman and Chaiken, 1992). Similarly, laypersons and experts believe that adding environmentally This way of processing the information is referred to as identity effects in certified buildings to a community would decrease the total carbon the advertising literature. While consumers buy products for the private footprint of the community (Holmgren et al., 2018a/b). These studies utility they provide, some of this utility can be derived not from provide evidence that the green claims and imaginaries typically used in consuming the product but rather by the symbolic connotation a product green advertising trigger a processing bias that leads consumers to un­ has (Dunning, 2007), which can be created by advertising (Edell and derestimate product emissions. Finally, this bias is specific to green Burke, 1987). advertising as it deals with underestimating product emissions. In the case of green advertising, cues signaling the green dimensions of a product will make people attach higher social and ethical values to 6. Implications of heuristics in terms of consumption-related green products over conventional ones as they are not merely buying a emissions product but satisfying a set of own values (Haytko and Matulich, 2008; Mazar and Zhong, 2010: Purohit, 2012). Correlational research for the In this section we discuss how the heuristics evoked by exposure to UK has shown that consumers have an anticipated positive affect from green advertising may constitute both opportunities but (mostly) bar­ helping the environment (van der Linden, 2018). Feelings of well-being, riers to the reduction of emissions from consumption. We do this by pride, fulfilment, or accomplishment are associated with altruistic be­ linking the heuristics triggered by green advertising with potential be­ haviors (Hoeffler and Keller, 2002). For example, in an experimental haviors that may result from them. We identify three potential spillovers study with 415 US residents, Antonetti and Maklan (2014) find that after from green advertising that are relevant for consumption emissions, a single purchase of a green-labelled product, participants experience a namely defaults and habits, false green beliefs from greenwashing and feeling of pride that increases their sense of self-efficacy in helping compensatory green-beliefs, and rebound. We consider these three types reduce emissions. Other more recent experimental research shows of spillovers as particularly relevant for the context of green advertising, persuasive effects of pride appeals in green advertisements can be but note that other types of spillovers could occur (Truelove et al., strengthened to the extent that they create an admiring self-image to 2014). participants (Hong et al., 2021). This can be explained by an emotional advantage produced by choices that are perceived as morally superior 6.1. Default options and habits that maintain a favorable self-image in consumers. Moreover, this may in turn provide individuals with a self-benefit from contributing to a In Section 5 we discussed how affect and familiarity are two basic public good (Nyborg et al., 2006). heuristics employed by consumers when faced with general advertising. The self-benefit that influences green purchases may also come from In green advertisements, cues such as pleasant images of nature and a boost of social identity as a perception of social approval that provides green claims are typically used to trigger decisions based on rousing self-esteem. This will happen if consumers believe important others buy emotions, which in turn elicit affect heuristics. Further, repeated expo­ or approve of green products (Hoeffler and Keller, 2002; Kareklas et al., sure to green cues in advertising strengthens consumers' preferences for 2014). Lastly, green advertising may induce positive identity effects not green products and enhances the sense of familiarity with them. This by an emotional reaction, but instead by rational processing of the should represent an opportunity for emission reductions in consump­ environmental consequences or by moral reasoning defining the optimal tion. Notably, consumers today are familiar with green advertising cues, choice (Rios et al., 2006). Notably, either morally, socially, or rationally and thus with green products, to the point that they are more strongly motivated, promoting a product as being green induces consumers to persuaded by advertising that emphasizes green rather than general take personal action (i.e., to buy green) that in turn may lead them to product attributes (Ku et al., 2012; Rios et al., 2006). Moreover, con­ have a more positive image of themselves and of their environmental sumers show more positive attitudes towards advertisements displaying impact. environmental claims than to those that do not (Chan and Fan, 2015). Green advertising can thus be used to prompt consumption habits 5.5. Footprint illusion with lower carbon emissions and, over time, it could enhance default consumption to the state where low-carbon products act as substitutes The notion of the carbon or environmental footprint is widely used in for high-carbon ones. Some consumers have in fact already developed a 6 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 choice heuristic that triggers a preference for green alternatives over must therefore be carefully assessed as it may license socially and/or conventional options (Thøgersen et al., 2012). Moreover, consumers environmentally undesirable behavior in different domains. Specif­ who begin to buy organic food products are more likely to subsequently ically, purchasing green products has been found to trigger dishonesty buy other organic products, thus creating a positive spillover in con­ and less altruism (Mazar and Zhong, 2010), and green advertising to sumption (Juhl et al., 2017). However, some reservations must be lower the intentions of consumers to engage in subsequent pro- highlighted here. First, growth in carbon emissions will inevitably result environmental behavior (Meijers et al., 2019). Even exposure to green from higher overall consumption in the case that (1) high-carbon goods products alone has been found to reduce pro-social behavior and trigger are advertised as low-carbon or (2) green advertising is used to promote stronger moral judgements (Eskine, 2013). Nonetheless, the evidence new products, even if they are low-carbon. In addition, green advertising for licensing effects derived from green purchases is so far inconclusive may have null or even adverse effects in promoting green products given as other studies have failed to replicate prior results (see, for example, the rising consumer skepticism that results in lower consumer intentions Urban et al., 2021). Further research in this direction is therefore to buy green products (Goh and Balaji, 2016). needed. Moreover, the existence of negative spillovers from green advertising 6.2. False beliefs from greenwashing could imply an indirect “rebound effect” from green advertising in consumption, as they are conceptually identical (Nash et al., 2017). This Greenwashing refers to deceptive claims of a product's low envi­ would occur if buying low-carbon products involuntarily leads to an ronmental impact either by (1) employing false claims, (2) omitting increase in emissions. For instance, consumers may believe that their relevant information or (3) employing ambiguous or vague terms purchases have a lower environmental impact and they, therefore, end (Kangun et al., 1991). Research shows that abstract and uninformative up consuming even more products than they originally would have. As environmental claims are often used in advertising to deceptively pro­ discussed above, claims and labels used in green advertising have been mote high-carbon products as being low-carbon, as it has become an shown to cause a misjudgment of a product's emissions (Gorissen and important marketing strategy for increasing sales (Dangelico and Weijters, 2016). These misjudgments could trigger an averaging bias Vocalelli, 2017). Ambiguous terms used in green advertising and in la­ where paradoxically, the more low-carbon options in a choice-set, the bels such as “eco-friendly” and “green” are subject to many in­ lower the perception of its overall environmental impact. Green claims terpretations and create a mismatch between the available information in advertising can thus lead to an underestimation of product emissions and the environmentally relevant information required by the consumer that could increase overall consumption while consumers incorrectly for rational decision-making. believe they are reducing emissions. Importantly, vague terminology can easily mislead both consumers innately concerned about the environment and those motivated to 7. Policy implications preserve their self-image through morally superior choices (Parguel et al., 2015). Yet, other cues such as color, images, labels and packaging The reviewed research shows cues used in green advertising can can also trigger green halo effects that makes consumes perceive prod­ effectively persuade consumers either by emotional arousal or by ucts as low-carbon (Gershoff and Frels, 2015; Magnier and Schoormans, rational processing, triggering consumer heuristics that makes them 2015; Naderer et al., 2017). This makes it very difficult for consumers to perceive green products more positively. While this appears to represent distinguish greenwashing from sincere information (Nyilasy et al., 2014; an opportunity for reducing consumption-related emissions, the heu­ Schmuck et al., 2018). For example, Hahnel et al. (2015) show green ristics it triggers are in many cases the product of a false or imprecise use labels can weight heavier on consumers' purchase decisions than con­ of green cues, adding uncertainty about the ultimate consequences of tradicting environmental information regarding the product. In such a green advertising. Instead of signaling a path to emissions reductions, context where information on the real environmental impact of products the previously discussed evidence suggests that heuristics specific to is not clear or not available, and where high-carbon products can easily green advertising, such as identity effects and the footprint illusion, may use the same terminology and cues used to advertise green products, actually induce consumers to improve their moral self-image while green advertising may represent a barrier rather than an opportunity to underestimating their emissions. Moreover, the indiscriminate use of lower consumption emissions. environmental claims in green advertising has in many cases resulted in skeptical consumers that may end up avoiding purchasing products that 6.3. Compensatory green beliefs and rebound are actually greener options as they no longer trust environmental claims. As a result, for both skeptical and non-skeptical, consumption- Compensatory green beliefs refer to the idea that pro-environmental related emissions may remain the same or even increase when exposed actions like purchasing green products compensate for environmentally to green advertising. harmful behaviors, such as buying holiday flights (Kaklamanou et al., Additional social and environmental costs are associated with 2015; Hope et al., 2018). In the case of green advertising, claims sug­ advertising and rarely discussed. Scarpaci et al. (2016) highlight the fact gesting that a product has a lower environmental impact may promote a that advertising represents a societal cost in terms of environmental positive perception in consumers from their purchase-actions and it may degradation, both indirectly, by means of boosting overconsumption reinforce common misinterpretations about the effectiveness of own and promoting materialistic values, and directly, as emissions are actions in terms of emission reductions (Gardner and Stern, 2008). These associated to printed and digital advertising (pollution and energy together may generate negative spillovers to other environmental be­ consumption). Green advertising providing ambiguous claims or omit­ haviors referred to in the literature as compensatory green beliefs, along ting relevant product information creates an additional cost of misin­ with notions of “moral cleansing” (Sörqvist and Langeborg, 2019) or formation, audit and regulation (Jahn et al., 2005). Indeed, the current “moral licensing” (Nilsson et al., 2017). As a result of environmental practice of green advertising has led many public administrations claims and cues, individuals may perceive their green purchases in an worldwide to develop initiatives aimed at reformulating, limiting, or overly favorable way, thus thinking their moral action of reducing preventing specific advertising formulations or content (Futerra, 2008; consumption emissions can compensate for the other more costly be­ Worldwide initiatives to ban fossil fuel advertisements, 2022). Examples haviors needed to genuinely reduce emissions. In other words, the range from fines like the one Ryanair received from the UK regulator due overestimation of emission reductions from purchasing green products to their misleading advertising claims of having “the lowest carbon might release the consumer from further environmental responsibilities emissions of any major airline” (News RTÉ, 2020), to stronger regula­ (Kabanshi, 2020). tions such as the ban on fossil fuel advertising in the city of Amsterdam The benefits from the green halo associated with green advertising after Shell's greenwashing claims (Groen, 2020). 7 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 Misleading advertising is prohibited under in the European Union 8. Conclusions under the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD), in the United Stated by the American Marketing Association (AMA) as well as under The present paper presents a thorough evaluation of the persuasion the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and in numerous mechanisms employed in green advertising and provides evidence on international industry advertising codes, such as the Advertising and how this type of advertising can have adverse effects for limiting carbon Marketing Communications Code of the International Chamber of emissions. Employing a general advertising framework, we classified the Commerce. While all these regulations to advertising stipulate that it relevant research within green advertising literature to explore the most should do no harm, enhance trust in the marketing system and hold common features employed in green advertising and the effects they ethical values (American Marketing Association, 2015), numerous ex­ trigger in consumers. Moreover, we adapt the framework and present amples such as the systematic advertising of fossil fuels using positive green advertising effects in terms of five relevant consumer heuristics by environmental associations show advertising authorities have so far organizing the evidence on different verbal and non-verbal cues trig­ failed to address this problem in a systematic manner (Brulle et al., gering the different heuristics. Among the most common cues triggering 2020; Plec and Pettenger, 2012). This raises doubts about the effec­ consumer heuristics are ambiguous green claims and non-textual cues tiveness of current regulations and the governments' capacity to stop such as green colors, images of nature and labels that are determinant in corporate greenwashing (Kaupa, 2021; Klintman, 2016). consumer persuasion. An alternative to regulations are policies that can empower con­ The heuristics that consumers use when processing green advertising sumers to change their consumption patterns by reducing their cognitive reflect a consumers' interest in more sustainable consumption. This is limitations with education and information about sustainability issues reflected by the fact that emotional arousal and moral associations drive (Thøgersen, 2005). Nonetheless, in the case of consumption, making an consumers' processing of green cues. While this should constitute an informed decision on the environmental impact of products is difficult, opportunity to reduce consumption-related emissions, the indiscrimi­ also because consumers have a wide range of different motivations for nate use of green advertising has led to systematic misperceptions of the green consumption (Moisander, 2007). While in some product cate­ environmental impact of products, to moral licensing, and to green­ gories lower environmental impact relates to being organic (for food), washing. Therefore, the consequences of green advertising in terms of using less energy (light bulbs), or coming from renewable sources emission-reduction may be null or even negative. Consumers cannot (wood), the literature does not yet offer general guidelines of what overcome the difficulty in responding to the currently available infor­ makes a product “environmentally safe”. To address this problem, labels mation and have considerable problems identifying what is green­ certifying environmental performance of products are used to inform washing from what it is not. Yet, as discussed above, such claims and consumers and signal products ‘true’ environmental impact. However, cues are difficult to regulate. while most labels belong to third parties and governments, private in­ A potential strategy is to take advantage of the consumers' heuristics. dustries are increasingly creating their own environmental labels (Pel­ For instance, introducing a global and certified carbon label or a cue that lus, 2014). Cases of competing labels have been documented where accurately and effectively communicates products' overall emissions industries have created their own labels with lower environmental may help heuristics-driven consumers towards lower-carbon choices. standards in response to those by NGOs (Makower, 2012). This makes it Moreover, governments could act as choice architects by preventing the very difficult for consumers to recognize environmentally sound prod­ advertising of carbon-intensive products to limit potentially harmful ucts from labels alone (Taufique et al., 2019). In the absence of credible consumer heuristics such as those triggered by green advertising. Con­ standards and an optimal level of audit, labels as certification systems sumers should be enabled to easily discern and competently reduce their will be susceptible to opportunistic behavior by industries and jeopar­ consumption-related emissions through the product choices they make. dize public confidence in labels (Jahn et al., 2005). The present study can guide future research on green advertising. We One way to prevent misperceptions from advertising would be to briefly suggest three potential directions. First, more research is needed include a warning of the emission intensity or damage caused by the linking product advertising with its associated emissions. As clarified in products and services, similar to what has been done with tobacco and this article, with the exception of very few studies (e.g., Pärssinen et al., alcohol, and enhancing consumer attention with graphic images for the 2018), evidence linking advertising to direct and indirect effects on warning (Higgins et al., 2014). Another solution could be the creation of carbon emissions is very scarce. Additionally, research is lacking on a graphic cue with low-attention demands such as an official and uni­ regulations of green advertising in terms of both design and potential versal label that could guarantee the lower environmental impact of consequences. In this direction, it would be interesting to document and products and prevent private companies from initiating their own analyze recent governmental and civic initiatives to ban advertising of (Thøgersen and Nielsen, 2016). For consumers highly involved with carbon-intensive products (Boyle et al., 2020; ECI, 2021). At last, the environmental issues this label would provide environmental informa­ present article reviewed mainly experimental literature on the effects of tion of the product preventing skepticism. For those less involved it green advertising on consumer perceptions and attitudes towards the would have the effect of emotional arousal currently triggered by green product. Yet the framework could be extended to study green adver­ colors or images of nature. This would create a positive heuristic in the tising effects on actual purchase behavior. While it is difficult to obtain processing of advertising that could help, rather than mislead consumers these data with laboratory experiments, further research is needed in in lowering their emissions. this direction to arrive at a complete understanding of green-advertising An alternative policy proposal is a label in the form of a traffic light effects and how to take them into account in policy-making. informing about products' environmental performance (Marette et al., 2019) or stressing consumer identity (Schwartz et al., 2020). In our Funding view, a successful label will be such that can dissociate current cues (vague claims, green color, nature images) with environmental protec­ This study has received funding through an ERC Advanced Grant tion to avoid greenwashing. Thus, it should use very different cues from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's (another color and other images) to make it easy for consumers to Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (grant agreement identify environmentally sound products and preventing greenwashing. no. 741087). More research is needed on ways to easily signal products with lower environmental impact to trigger positive heuristics that reduce emis­ sions in consumption. Yet, some regulations on advertising of, for Declaration of Competing Interest example, fossil fuels, are imperative. None. 8 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 Data availability No data was used for the research described in the article. Appendix 1 Table A1 Literature reviewed and organized in the framework categories. Message Terminology (9) Prakash, 2002; Smith and Brower, 2012; Sdrolia and Zarotiadis, 2019; Hansen, 2002; Parguel et al., 2015; Smith, 2010- content Smith, 2014; D'Souza, 2004; D'Souza et al., 2006. Environmental information (10) Leonidou et al., 2011; Carlson et al., 1993; Dai et al., 2014; Grillo et al., 2008; Karna et al., 2001; Segev et al., 2016; Cummins et al., 2014; Testa et al., 2011; Pedros-Perez et al., 2019; Scopa et al., 2016. Frames (18) Ahern et al., 2013; VanDyke and Tedesco, 2016; Nabi et al., 2020; Segev et al., 2015; Spence and Pidgeon, 2010; Xu et al., 2021; Yu and Shen, 2013; Zubair et al., 2020; Fujita et al., 2006; Chen and Chiu, 2016; Chang et al., 2015; Homar and Knežević, 2021; Amatulli et al., 2019; Chen, 2016; Olsen et al., 2014; Shin et al., 2017; Chang, 2011-Chang, 2012. Non-verbal cues (18) Labrecque et al., 2013; Bottomley and Doyle, 2006; Lim et al., 2020; Chowdhury et al., 2008; Hartmann et al., 2016; Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2012; Hartmann et al., 2005; Matthes et al., 2014; Schmuck et al., 2018; Rokka and Uusitalo, 2008; Seo and Scammon, 2017; Blasche and Ketelaar, 2015; Kumar and Tripathi, 2019; Eren-Erdogmus et al., 2016; Joshi and Kronrod, 2020; Xu et al., 2020; Tripathi and Pandey, 2018. Filters of Moderators of attention to advertising Rosbergen et al., 1997; Ruiz and Sicilia, 2004; Zhang et al., 2014; Rayner et al., 2008; Peattie, 2001a. attention (general) (5) Moderators of attention to green Choi and Johnson, 2019; Copeland and Bhaduri, 2019; Testa et al., 2020; Buchholz and Smith, 1991; Kong and Zhang, advertising (12) 2013; Pickett-Baker and Ozaki, 2008; Tucker et al., 2012; Kim et al., 2016; Kusuma and Handayani, 2018; Shin and Ki, 2019; Hartmann et al., 2017. Scepticism (8) Matthes and Wonneberger, 2014; Cheng et al., 2020; Luo et al., 2020; Shrum et al., 1995; Do Paço and Reis, 2012; Goh and Balaji, 2016; Bhaskaran et al., 2006; Nyilasy et al., 2014. Individual characteristics and Luchs and Mooradian, 2012; Matthes, 2019; Groening et al., 2018; Young et al., 2010, Kareklas et al., 2012; Bhatnagar and demographics (7) McKay-Nesbitt, 2016; Ku et al., 2012. Heuristics Affects heuristic (18) Nabi et al., 2020; Segev et al., 2015; Yu and Shen, 2013; Heath et al., 2006; Chen and Chiu, 2016; Hoek et al., 2013; Reczek et al., 2018; Montoro-Rios et al., 2008; Rayner et al., 2001; Heath, 2009; Kals et al., 1999; Zubair et al., 2020; Hahnel et al., 2015; Hartmann et al., 2005; Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2012; Matthes et al., 2014; Pancer et al., 2017. Familiarity effect (7) Cummins et al., 2014; Biswas and Roy, 2015; Wang et al., 2018; Lim et al., 2020; Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibanez, 2010; Hartmann et al., 2013; Copeland and Bhaduri, 2019. Green halo (10) Eren-Erdogmus et al., 2016; Apaolaza et al., 2018; Annett et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2013; Sörqvist et al., 2015a; Wiedmann et al., 2014; Sörqvist et al., 2015b; Magnier and Schoormans, 2015; Rokka and Uusitalo, 2008; Seo and Scammon, 2017. Identity effects (9) Haytko and Matulich, 2008; Mazar and Zhong, 2010; Purohit, 2012; van der Linden, 2018; Hoeffler and Keller, 2002; Kareklas et al., 2014; Antonetti and Maklan, 2014; Hong et al., 2021; Nyborg et al., 2006; Rios et al., 2006. Footprint illusion (8) Hahnel et al., 2015; Lim et al., 2020; Seo and Scammon, 2017; Smith, 2014; Gorissen and Weijters, 2016; Kim and Schuldt, 2018; Holmgren et al., 2018a, 2018b. References Bhatnagar, N., McKay-Nesbitt, J., 2016. Pro-environment advertising messages: the role of regulatory focus. Int. J. Advert. 35 (1), 4–22. Biswas, A., Roy, M., 2015. Leveraging factors for sustained green consumption behavior Aaker, D.A., Stayman, D.M., Hagerty, M.R., 1986. Warmth in advertising: measurement, based on consumption value perceptions: testing the structural model. J. Clean. impact, and sequence effects. J. Consum. Res. 12 (4), 365–381. Prod. 95, 332–340. Agarwal, N.D., Kumar, V.R., 2021. Three decades of green advertising–a review of Blasche, J., Ketelaar, P.E., 2015. The synergy in green persuasion: Green celebrity literature and bibliometric analysis. Benchmark. Int. J. 28 (6), 1934–1958. endorsers in green advertising: a study of brand-endorser congruence effects in green Ahern, L., Bortree, D.S., Smith, A.N., 2013. Key trends in environmental advertising advertising. J. Euromarket. 24 (2–3), 86–105. across 30 years in National Geographic magazine. Public Underst. Sci. 22 (4), Bottomley, P.A., Doyle, J.R., 2006. The interactive effects of colors and products on 479–494. perceptions of brand logo appropriateness. Mark. Theory 6 (1), 63–83. AMA (American Marketing Association), 2015. Codes of conduct. https://www.ama.org/ Boyle, D., Simms, A., Tricarico, E., Murray, L., Gillett, R., 2020. Smoking out the climate: codes-of-conduct/. Retrieved 08 November, 2021. lessons from the advertising ban on tobacco for tackling the climate emergency. Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Peluso, A.M., Soscia, I., Guido, G., 2019. The effect of Badvertising, New Weather Institute. negative message framing on green consumption: An investigation of the role of Brulle, R.J., Aronczyk, M., Carmichael, J., 2020. Corporate promotion and climate shame. J. Bus. Ethics 157 (4), 1111–1132. change: an analysis of key variables affecting advertising spending by major oil Annett, L.E., Muralidharan, V., Boxall, P.C., Cash, S.B., Wismer, W.V., 2008. Influence of corporations, 1986–2015. Clim. Chang. 159 (1), 87–101. health and environmental information on hedonic evaluation of organic and Buchholz, L.M., Smith, R.E., 1991. The role of consumer involvement in determining conventional bread. J. Food Sci. 73 (4), H50–H57. cognitive response to broadcast advertising. J. Advert. 20 (1), 4–17. Annett, L.E., Muralidharan, V., Boxall, P.C., Cash, S.B., Wismer, W.V., 2008. Influence of Camilleri, A.R., Larrick, R.P., Hossain, S., Patino-Echeverri, D., 2019. Consumers health and environmental information on hedonic evaluation of organic and underestimate the emissions associated with food but are aided by labels. Nat. Clim. conventional bread. J. Food Sci. 73 (4), H50–H57. Chang. 9 (1), 53–58. Antonetti, P., Maklan, S., 2014. Feelings that make a difference: how guilt and pride Campbell, M.C., Keller, K.L., 2003. Brand familiarity and advertising repetition effects. convince consumers of the effectiveness of sustainable consumption choices. J. Bus. J. Consum. Res. 30 (2), 292–304. Ethics 124 (1), 117–134. Carlson, L., Grove, S.J., Kangun, N., 1993. A content analysis of environmental Apaolaza, V., Hartmann, P., D’Souza, C., López, C.M., 2018. Eat organic–Feel good? The advertising claims: A matrix method approach. J. Advert. 22 (3), 27–39. relationship between organic food consumption, health concern and subjective Chan, K., Fan, F., 2015. How consumers perceive environmental advertising in the wellbeing. Food Qual. Prefer. 63, 51–62. banking context. Asian J. Business Res. 5 (1), 69. Banerjee, S., Gulas, C.S., Iyer, E., 1995. Shades of green: a multidimensional analysis of Chang, C.T., 2011. Guilt appeals in cause-related marketing: the subversive roles of environmental advertising. J. Advert. 24 (2), 21–31. product type and donation magnitude. Int. J. Advert. 30, 587–616. Barry, T.E., 1987. The development of the hierarchy of effects: An historical perspective. Chang, C.T., 2012. Are guilt appeals a panacea in green advertising? The right formula of Current Issues Res. Advert. 10 (1–2), 251–295. issue proximity and environmental consciousness. Int. J. Advert. 31 (4), 741–771. Beckwith, N.E., Kassarjian, H.H., Lehmann, D.R., 1978. Halo effects in marketing Chang, H., Zhang, L., Xie, G.X., 2015. Message framing in green advertising: the effect of research: review and prognosis. Adv. Consum. Res. 5, 465–467. construal level and consumer environmental concern. Int. J. Advert. 34 (1), Bhaskaran, S., Polonsky, M., Cary, J., Fernandez, S., 2006. Environmentally sustainable 158–176. food production and marketing: opportunity or hype? Br. Food J. 108 (8), 677–690. 9 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 Chaudhuri, A., Buck, R., 1995. Affect, reason, and persuasion: advertising strategies that Hartmann, P., Ibáñez, V.A., Sainz, F.J.F., 2005. Green branding effects on attitude: predict affective and analytic-cognitive responses. Hum. Commun. Res. 21 (3), functional versus emotional positioning strategies. Mark. Intell. Plan. 23, 9–29. 422–441. Hartmann, P., Apaolaza, V., Alija, P., 2013. Nature imagery in advertising: attention Chen, M.F., 2016. Impact of fear appeals on pro-environmental behavior and crucial restoration and memory effects. Int. J. Advert. 32 (2), 183–210. determinants. Int. J. Advert. 35 (1), 74–92. Hartmann, P., Apaolaza, V., Eisend, M., 2016. Nature imagery in non-green advertising: Chen, M.Y., Chiu, C.I., 2016. Go green: how to influence the perceived effectiveness of a the effects of emotion, autobiographical memory, and consumer's green traits. green product? Int. J. Advert. 35 (4), 622. J. Advert. 45 (4), 427–440. Cheng, Z.H., Chang, C.T., Lee, Y.K., 2020. Linking hedonic and utilitarian shopping Hartmann, P., Apaolaza, V., D’Souza, C., Barrutia, J.M., Echebarria, C., 2017. Corporate values to consumer skepticism and green consumption: the roles of environmental environmental responsibility communication: implications from CSR and green involvement and locus of control. Rev. Manag. Sci. 14 (1), 61–85. advertising research. In: Handbook of Integrated CSR Communication. Springer, Choi, D., Johnson, K.K., 2019. Influences of environmental and hedonic motivations on Cham, pp. 377–392. intention to purchase green products: an extension of the theory of planned Haytko, D.L., Matulich, E., 2008. Green advertising and environmentally responsible behavior. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 18, 145–155. consumer behaviors: linkages examined. J. Manag. Market. Res. 1, 2. Chowdhury, R.M., Olsen, G.D., Pracejus, J.W., 2008. Affective responses to images in Heath, R., 2009. Emotional engagement: how television builds big brands at low print advertising: affect integration in a simultaneous presentation context. attention. J. Advert. Res. 49 (1), 62–73. J. Advert. 37 (3), 7–18. Heath, R., Brandt, D., Nairn, A., 2006. Brand relationships: strengthened by emotion, Copeland, L., Bhaduri, G., 2019. Consumer relationship with pro-environmental apparel weakened by attention. J. Advert. Res. 46 (4), 410–419. brands: effect of knowledge, skepticism and brand familiarity. J. Prod. Brand. Higgins, E., Leinenger, M., Rayner, K., 2014. Eye movements when viewing Manag. 29 (1), 1–14. advertisements. Front. Psychol. 5, 210. Cummins, S., Reilly, T.M., Carlson, L., Grove, S.J., Dorsch, M.J., 2014. Investigating the Hoeffler, S., Keller, K.L., 2002. Building brand equity through corporate societal portrayal and influence of sustainability claims in an environmental advertising marketing. J. Public Policy Mark. 21 (1), 78–89. context. J. Macromark. 34 (3), 332–348. Hoek, J., Roling, N., Holdsworth, D., 2013. Ethical claims and labelling: an analysis of Dai, X., Goh, T.T., Cheng, S., 2014. A Content analysis of Green advertising in China. consumers’ beliefs and choice behaviours. J. Mark. Manag. 29 (7–8), 772–792. J. Market. Res. Case Stud. 2014, 1–19. Holmgren, M., Andersson, H., Sörqvist, P., 2018a. Averaging bias in environmental Dangelico, R.M., Vocalelli, D., 2017. “Green Marketing”: An analysis of definitions, impact estimates: evidence from the negative footprint illusion. J. Environ. Psychol. strategy steps, and tools through a systematic review of the literature. J. Clean. Prod. 55, 48–52. 165, 1263–1279. Holmgren, M., Kabanshi, A., Marsh, J.E., Sörqvist, P., 2018b. When A+ B< A: cognitive Do Paço, A.M.F., Reis, R., 2012. Factors affecting skepticism toward green advertising. bias in experts’ judgment of environmental impact. Front. Psychol. 9, 823. J. Advert. 41 (4), 147–155. Homar, A.R., Cvelbar, L.K., 2021. The effects of framing on environmental decisions: A D'Souza, C., 2004. Ecolabel programmes: a stakeholder (consumer) perspective. Corp. systematic literature review. Ecolog. Econ. 183, 106950. Commun. Int. J. 9 (3), 179–188. Homar, A., Knežević, C., 2021. The effects of framing on environmental decisions: a D'Souza, C., Taghian, M., Lamb, P., 2006. An empirical study on the influence of systematic literature review. Ecol. Econ. 183, 106950. environmental labels on consumers. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 11 (2), 162–173. Hong, J.M., Lim, R.E., Atkinson, L., 2021. “Doing Good” versus “Being Good”: the Du Plessis, E., 2005. The Advertised Mind: Ground-Breaking Insights into How Our interplay between pride appeals and regulatory-focused messages in green Brains Respond to Advertising. Kogan Page Publishers, London. advertising. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 51 (11), 1089–1108. Dunning, D., 2007. Self-image motives and consumer behavior: How sacrosanct self- Hope, A.L., Jones, C.R., Webb, T.L., Watson, M.T., Kaklamanou, D., 2018. The role of beliefs sway preferences in the marketplace. J. Consum. Psychol. 17 (4), 237–249. compensatory beliefs in rationalizing environmentally detrimental behaviors. ECI, 2021. Ban Fossil Fuel Advertising and Sponsorships. ECI(2021)000004. European Environ. Behav. 50 (4), 401–425. Citizens' Initiative. European Commission. https://europa.eu/citizens-initiative/i Hornik, J., Ofir, C., Rachamim, M., 2017. Advertising appeals, moderators, and impact nitiatives/details/2021/000004_en. on persuasion: a quantitative assessment creates a hierarchy of appeals. J. Advert. Edell, J.A., Burke, M.C., 1987. The power of feelings in understanding advertising effects. Res. 57 (3), 305–318. J. Consum. Res. 14 (3), 421–433. Jahn, G., Schramm, M., Spiller, A., 2005. The reliability of certification: quality labels as Eren-Erdogmus, İ., Lak, H.S., Çiçek, M., 2016. Attractive or credible celebrities: who a consumer policy tool. J. Consum. Policy 28 (1), 53–73. endorses green products better? Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 235, 587–594. Joshi, P., Kronrod, A., 2020. Sounds of Green: how brand name sounds metaphorically Eskine, K.J., 2013. Wholesome foods and wholesome morals? Organic foods reduce convey environmental friendliness. J. Advert. 49 (1), 61–77. prosocial behavior and harshen moral judgments. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 4 (2), Juhl, H.J., Fenger, M.H., Thøgersen, J., 2017. Will the consistent organic food consumer 251–254. step forward? An empirical analysis. J. Consum. Res. 44 (3), 519–535. Forehand, M.R., Deshpandé, R., Reed II, A., 2002. Identity salience and the influence of Kabanshi, A., 2020. Are we overestimating the benefits of emission reduction measures? differential activation of the social self-schema on advertising response. J. Appl. Sustainability 12 (3), 808. Psychol. 87 (6), 1086. Kaklamanou, D., Jones, C.R., Webb, T.L., Walker, S.R., 2015. Using public transport can Fujita, K., Henderson, M.D., Eng, J., Trope, Y., Liberman., N., 2006. Spatial distance and make up for flying abroad on holiday: compensatory green beliefs and mental construal of social events. Psychol. Sci. 17 (4), 278–282. environmentally significant behavior. Environ. Behav. 47 (2), 184–204. Futerra, 2008. The greenwash guide. available at: www.futerra.co.uk/ (accessed 20 June Kals, E., Schumacher, D., Montada, L., 1999. Emotional affinity toward nature as a 2021). motivational basis to protect nature. Environ. Behav. 31 (2), 178–202. Gardner, G.T., Stern, P.C., 2008. The short list: the most effective actions US households Kangun, N., Carlson, L., Grove, S.J., 1991. Environmental advertising claims: a can take to curb climate change. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 50 (5), 12–25. preliminary investigation. J. Public Policy Mark. 10 (2), 47–58. Gershoff, A.D., Frels, J.K., 2015. What makes it green? The role of centrality of green Kao, T.F., Du, Y.Z., 2020. A study on the influence of green advertising design and attributes in evaluations of the greenness of products. J. Market. 79 (1), 97–110. environmental emotion on advertising effect. J. Clean. Prod. 242, 118294. Goh, S.K., Balaji, M.S., 2016. Linking green skepticism to green purchase behavior. Kareklas, I., Carlson, J.R., Muehling, D.D., 2012. The role of regulatory focus and self- J. Clean. Prod. 131, 629–638. view in “green” advertising message framing. J. Advert. 41 (4), 25–39. Gorissen, K., Weijters, B., 2016. The negative footprint illusion: perceptual bias in Kareklas, I., Carlson, J.R., Muehling, D.D., 2014. “I eat organic for my benefit and yours”: sustainable food consumption. J. Environ. Psychol. 45, 50–65. egoistic and altruistic considerations for purchasing organic food and their Grillo, N., Tokarczyk, J., Hansen, E., 2008. Green advertising developments in the US implications for advertising strategists. J. Advert. 43 (1), 18–32. forest sector: a follow-up. For. Prod. J. 58 (5), 40. Karna, J., Juslin, H., Ahonen, V., Hansen, E., 2001. Green advertising: greenwash or a Grimes, A., 2008. Towards an integrated model of low attention advertising effects. Eur. true reflection of marketing strategies? Greener Manag. Int. 33, 59–70. J. Mark. 42, 69–86. Kaupa, C., 2021. Smoke gets in your eyes: misleading fossil fuel advertisement in the Groen, J., 2020. “Historical! Amsterdam First City World Wide That Wants to Ban Fossil climate crisis. J. Eur. Consum. Market Law 1. Fuel Advertising.” Verbied Fossiele Reclame, 21 Dec.. https://www.verbiedfossielere Kim, B., Schuldt, J.P., 2018. Judging the environmental impact of green consumption: clame.nl/amsterdam-wants-to-ban-fossil-fuel-ads/. evidence of quantity insensitivity. J. Environ. Psychol. 60, 122–127. Groening, C., Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q., 2018. Green marketing consumer-level theory review: a Kim, Y., Yun, S., Lee, J., Ko, E., 2016. How consumer knowledge shapes green compendium of applied theories and further research directions. J. Clean. Prod. 172, consumption: an empirical study on voluntary carbon offsetting. Int. J. Advert. 35 1848–1866. (1), 23–41. Hahnel, U.J., Arnold, O., Waschto, M., Korcaj, L., Hillmann, K., Roser, D., Spada, H., Klintman, M., 2016. A Review of Public Policies relating to the Use of Environmental 2015. The power of putting a label on it: green labels weigh heavier than Labelling and Information Schemes (ELIS). OECD Environment Working Papers, contradicting product information for consumers’ purchase decisions and post- Paris. purchase behavior. Front. Psychol. 6, 1392. Kong, Y., Zhang, A., 2013. Consumer response to green advertising: the influence of Hansen, A., 2002. Discourses of nature in advertising. Commun. Sankt Augustin Then product involvement. Asian J. Commun. 23 (4), 428–447. Berlin 27 (4), 499–512. Kroeber-Riel, W., 1979. Activation research: Psychobiological approaches in consumer Hansen, J., Wänke, M., 2009. Liking what's familiar: the importance of unconscious research. J. Consum. Res. 5 (4), 240–250. familiarity in the mere-exposure effect. Soc. Cogn. 27 (2), 161–182. Ku, H.H., Kuo, C.C., Wu, C.L., Wu, C.Y., 2012. Communicating green marketing appeals Hartmann, P., Apaolaza-Ibanez, V., 2010. Beyond savanna: an evolutionary and effectively: the role of consumers’ motivational orientation to promotion versus environmental psychology approach to behavioral effects of nature scenery in green prevention. J. Advert. 41 (4), 41–50. advertising. J. Environ. Psychol. 30 (1), 119–128. Kumar, R., Tripathi, V., 2019. Green advertising: examining the role of celebrity's Hartmann, P., Apaolaza-Ibáñez, V., 2012. Consumer attitude and purchase intention credibility using SEM approach. Glob. Bus. Rev. 0972150919862660. toward green energy brands: the roles of psychological benefits and environmental concern. J. Bus. Res. 65 (9), 1254–1263. 10 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 Kusuma, P.N.P.D., Handayani, R.B., 2018. The effect of environmental knowledge, green Olsen, M.C., Slotegraaf, R.J., Chandukala, S.R., 2014. Green claims and message frames: advertising and environmental attitude toward green purchase intention. Russian J. how green new products change brand attitude. J. Mark. 78 (5), 119–137. Agric. Socio-Econ. Sci. 78 (6). Pancer, E., McShane, L., Noseworthy, T.J., 2017. Isolated environmental cues and Labrecque, L.I., Patrick, V.M., Milne, G.R., 2013. The marketers’ prismatic palette: a product efficacy penalties: the color green and eco-labels. J. Bus. Ethics 143 (1), review of color research and future directions. Psychol. Mark. 30 (2), 187–202. 159–177. Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., Barbaro-Forleo, G., 2001. Targeting consumers who are Parguel, B., Benoit-Moreau, F., Russell, C.A., 2015. Can evoking nature in advertising willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. J. Consum. Mark. 18 (6), mislead consumers? The power of ‘executional greenwashing’. Int. J. Advert. 34 (1), 503–520. 107–134. Lee, W.C.J., Shimizu, M., Kniffin, K.M., Wansink, B., 2013. You taste what you see: do Pärssinen, M., Kotila, M., Cuevas, R., Phansalkar, A., Manner, J., 2018. Environmental organic labels bias taste perceptions? Food Qual. Prefer. 29 (1), 33–39. impact assessment of online advertising. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 73, 177–200. Leonidou, L.C., Leonidou, C.N., Palihawadana, D., Hultman, M., 2011. Evaluating the Payne, J., Bettman, J.R., Johnson, E.J., 1991. Consumer decision making. In: Handbook green advertising practices of international firms: a trend analysis. Int. Mark. Rev. 28 of Consumer Behaviour, pp. 50–84. (1), 6–33. Peattie, K., 2001a. Towards sustainability: the third age of green marketing. Mark. Rev. 2 Liberman, A., Chaiken, S., 1992. Defensive processing of personally relevant health (2), 129–146. messages. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 18 (6), 669–679. Peattie, K., 2001b. Golden goose or wild goose? The hunt for the green consumer. Bus. Liberman, A., Eagly, A.H., 1989. Heuristic and systematic information processing within Strateg. Environ. 10 (4), 187–199. and beyond the persuasion context. In: Uleman, J.S., Bargh, J.A. (Eds.), Unintended Pedros-Perez, G., Martínez-Jiménez, P., Aparicio-Martinez, P., 2019. The potential of car Thought. The Guildford Press, New York, pp. 212–252. advertising in pursuing transport policy goals: Code of good practices in the Spanish Lim, D., Baek, T.H., Yoon, S., Kim, Y., 2020. Colour effects in green advertising. Int. J. context. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 72, 312–332. Consum. Stud. 44 (6), 552–562. Pellus, Chiara, 2014. Regulations, Watchdogs, Eco-Labels, Oh My! The Highly Liu, S., Liu, X., 2020. Culture and green advertising preference: a comparative and Fragmented and Uncoordinated State of Anti-Greenwashing Efforts. Law School critical discursive analysis. Front. Psychol. 11, 1944. Student Scholarship 619, 2–45. Luchs, M.G., Mooradian, T.A., 2012. Sex, personality, and sustainable consumer Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T., 1979. Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion behaviour: elucidating the gender effect. J. Consum. Policy 35, 127–144. by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37 (10), Luo, B., Sun, Y., Shen, J., Xia, L., 2020. How does green advertising skepticism on social 1915. media affect consumer intention to purchase green products? J. Consum. Behav. 19 Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T., 1981. Issue involvement as a moderator of the effects on (4), 371–381. attitude of advertising content and context. Adv. Consum. Res. 8, 20–24. Magnier, L., Schoormans, J., 2015. Consumer reactions to sustainable packaging: the Pickett-Baker, J., Ozaki, R., 2008. Pro-environmental products: marketing influence on interplay of visual appearance, verbal claim and environmental concern. J. Environ. consumer purchase decision. J. Consum. Mark. 25 (5), 281–293. Psychol. 44, 53–62. Pinkse, J., Bohnsack, R., 2021. Sustainable product innovation and changing consumer Makower, J., 2012. Will the Plastics Industry Kill LEED? GreenBiz. July 9, 2012. behavior: Sustainability affordances as triggers of adoption and usage. Bus. Strateg. Available at: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/will-plastics-industry-kill-leed. Environ. 30 (7), 3120–3130. Malin, C.H., Gudaitis, T., Holt, T., Kilger, M., 2017. Deception in the Digital Age: Plassmann, H., Ramsøy, T.Z., Milosavljevic, M., 2012. Branding the brain: a critical Exploiting and Defending Human Targets Through Computer-Mediated review and outlook. J. Consum. Psychol. 22 (1), 18–36. Communications. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Plec, E., Pettenger, M., 2012. Greenwashing consumption: the didactic framing of Marette, S., Nabec, L., Durieux, F., 2019. Improving nutritional quality of consumers' ExxonMobil's energy solutions. Environ. Commun. J. Nat. Cult. 6 (4), 459–476. food purchases with traffic-lights labels: an experimental analysis. J. Consum. Policy Prakash, A., 2002. Green marketing, public policy and managerial strategies. Bus. 42 (3), 377–395. Strateg. Environ. 11 (5), 285–297. Matthes, J., 2019. Uncharted territory in research on environmental advertising: toward Purohit, H.C., 2012. Product positioning and consumer attitude towards eco-friendly an organizing framework. J. Advert. 48 (1), 91–101. labeling and advertisement. J. Manag. Res. 12 (3), 153–162. Matthes, J., Wonneberger, A., 2014. The skeptical green consumer revisited: testing the Rayner, K., Rotello, C.M., Stewart, A.J., Keir, J., Duffy, S.A., 2001. Integrating text and relationship between green consumerism and skepticism toward advertising. pictorial information: eye movements when looking at print advertisements. J. Exp. J. Advert. 43 (2), 115–127. Psychol. Appl. 7 (3), 219. Matthes, J., Wonneberger, A., Schmuck, D., 2014. Consumers' green involvement and the Rayner, K., Miller, B., Rotello, C.M., 2008. Eye movements when looking at print persuasive effects of emotional versus functional ads. J. Bus. Res. 67 (9), 1885–1893. advertisements: the goal of the viewer matters. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. Off. J. Soc. Mazar, N., Zhong, C.B., 2010. Do green products make us better people? Psychol. Sci. 21 Appl. Res. Memory Cognit. 22 (5), 697–707. (4), 494–498. Reczek, R.W., Trudel, R., White, K., 2018. Focusing on the forest or the trees: how Meijers, M.H., Noordewier, M.K., Verlegh, P.W., Willems, W., Smit, E.G., 2019. abstract versus concrete construal level predicts responses to eco-friendly products. Paradoxical side effects of green advertising: how purchasing green products may J. Environ. Psychol. 57, 87–98. instigate licensing effects for consumers with a weak environmental identity. Int. J. Rios, F.J.M., Martinez, T.L., Moreno, F.F., Soriano, P.C., 2006. Improving attitudes Advert. 38 (8), 1202–1223. toward brands with environmental associations: an experimental approach. Merlo, O., Lukas, B.A., Whitwell, G.J., 2008. Heuristics revisited: implications for J. Consum. Mark. 23 (1), 26–33. marketing research and practice. Mark. Theory 8 (2), 189–204. Rokka, J., Uusitalo, L., 2008. Preference for green packaging in consumer product Moisander, J., 2007. Motivational complexity of green consumerism. Int. J. Consum. choices – do consumers care? Int. J. Consum. Stud. 32 (5), 516–525. Stud. 31 (4), 404–409. Rosbergen, E., Pieters, R., Wedel, M., 1997. Visual attention to advertising: a segment- Montoro-Rios, F.J., Luque-Martinez, T., Rodriguez-Molina, M.A., 2008. How green level analysis. J. Consum. Res. 24 (3), 305–314. should you be: can environmental associations enhance brand performance? Ruiz, S., Sicilia, M., 2004. The impact of cognitive and/or affective processing styles on J. Advert. Res. 48 (4), 547–563. consumer response to advertising appeals. J. Bus. Res. 57 (6), 657–664. Moore, D.L., Hutchinson, J., 1983. The effects of ad affect on advertising effectiveness. Scarpaci, J.L., Sovacool, B.K., Ballantyne, R., 2016. A critical review of the costs of NA - Adv. Consumer Res. 10, 529–531. advertising: a transformative consumer research perspective. J. Consum. Policy 39 Nabi, R.L., Walter, N., Oshidary, N., Endacott, C.G., Love-Nichols, J., Lew, Z.J., Aune, A., (2), 119–140. 2020. Can emotions capture the elusive gain-loss framing effect? A meta-analysis. Schmidt, S., Eisend, M., 2015. Advertising repetition: a meta-analysis on effective Commun. Res. 47 (8), 1107–1130. frequency in advertising. J. Advert. 44 (4), 415–428. Naderer, B., Schmuck, D., Matthes, J., 2017. Greenwashing: disinformation through Schmuck, D., Matthes, J., Naderer, B., 2018. Misleading consumers with green green advertising. In: Siegert, G., Rimscha, M.B., Grubenmann, S. (Eds.), Commercial advertising? An affect–reason–involvement account of greenwashing effects in Communication in the Digital Age, pp. 105–120. environmental advertising. J. Advert. 47 (2), 127–145. Naples, M.J., 1979. Effective frequency: The relationship between frequency and Schwartz, D., Loewenstein, G., Agüero-Gaete, L., 2020. Encouraging pro-environmental advertising effectiveness. Association of National Advertisers. behaviour through green identity labelling. Nat. Sustain. 3 (9), 746–752. Nash, N., Whitmarsh, L., Capstick, S., Hargreaves, T., Poortinga, W., Thomas, G., Scopa, P., Scapellato, M.L., Perissinotto, E., Trevisan, A., Carrieri, M., Bartolucci, G.B., Xenias, D., 2017. Climate-relevant behavioral spillover and the potential 2016. The greenhouse gas automotive advertisement study. Transp. Policy 45, contribution of social practice theory. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 8 (6), 77–85. e481. Sdrolia, E., Zarotiadis, G., 2019. A comprehensive review for green product term: from Nelson, P., 1974. Advertising as information. J. Polit. Econ. 82 (4), 729–754. definition to evaluation. J. Econ. Surv. 33 (1), 150–178. News RTÉ, 2020. Ryanair Ads Banned for Misleading Environmental Claims. RTE.ie, RTÉ, Segev, S., Fernandes, J., Wang, W., 2015. The effects of gain versus loss message framing 5 Feb. https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2020/0205/1113225-ryanair-ads-bann and point of reference on consumer responses to green advertising. J. Curr. Issues ed-in-uk/. Res. Advert. 36 (1), 35–51. Nielsen, K.S., Clayton, S., Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., Capstick, S., Whitmarsh, L., 2021. How Segev, S., Fernandes, J., Hong, C., 2016. Is your product really green? A content analysis psychology can help limit climate change. Am. Psychol. 76 (1), 130. to reassess green advertising. J. Advert. 45 (1), 85–93. Nilsson, A., Bergquist, M., Schultz, W.P., 2017. Spillover effects in environmental Seo, J.Y., Scammon, D.L., 2017. Do green packages lead to misperceptions? The behaviors, across time and context: a review and research agenda. Environ. Educ. influence of package colors on consumers’ perceptions of brands with environmental Res. 23 (4), 573–589. claims. Mark. Lett. 28 (3), 357–369. Nyborg, K., Howarth, R.B., Brekke, K.A., 2006. Green consumers and public policy: on Shapiro, Stewart, Shanker Krishnan, H., 2001. Memory-based measures for assessing socially contingent moral motivation. Resour. Energy Econ. 28 (4), 351–366. advertising effects: A comparison of explicit and implicit memory effects. J. Advert. Nyilasy, G., Gangadharbatla, H., Paladino, A., 2014. Perceived greenwashing: the 30 (3), 1–13. interactive effects of green advertising and corporate environmental performance on consumer reactions. J. Bus. Ethics 125 (4), 693–707. 11 J.C. Santa and S. Drews Ecological Economics 206 (2023) 107760 Shin, S., Ki, E.J., 2019. The effects of congruency of environmental issue and product Thøgersen, J., Jørgensen, A.K., Sandager, S., 2012. Consumer decision making regarding category and green reputation on consumer responses toward green advertising. a “green” everyday product. Psychol. Mark. 29 (4), 187–197. Manag. Decis. 57 (3), 606–620. Till, B.D., Baack, D.W., 2005. Recall and persuasion: does creative advertising matter? Shin, S., Ki, E.J., Griffin, W.G., 2017. The effectiveness of fear appeals in J. Advert. 34 (3), 47–57. ‘green’advertising: an analysis of creative, consumer, and source variables. J. Mark. Tripathi, A., Pandey, N., 2018. Are nine-ending prices equally influential in eastern Commun. 23 (5), 473–492. culture for pricing green products? J. Int. Consum. Mark. 30 (3), 192–205. Shrum, L.J., McCarty, J.A., Lowrey, T.M., 1995. Buyer characteristics of the green Truelove, H.B., Carrico, A.R., Weber, E.U., Raimi, K.T., Vandenbergh, M.P., 2014. consumer and their implications for advertising strategy. J. Advert. 24 (2), 71–82. Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review Simons, R.J.G., Pras, A., 2010. The hidden energy cost of web advertising. In: and theoretical framework. Glob. Environ. Chang. 29, 127–138. Proceedings of the 12th Twente Student Conference on Information Technology, Tucker, E.M., Rifon, N.J., Lee, E.M., Reece, B.B., 2012. Consumer receptivity to green pp. 1–8. ads: a test of green claim types and the role of individual consumer characteristics Smith, K.T., 2010. An examination of marketing techniques that influence Millennials’ for green ad response. J. Advert. 41 (4), 9–23. perceptions of whether a product is environmentally friendly. J. Strateg. Mark. 18 Urban, J., Braun Kohlová, M., Bahník, Š., 2021. No evidence of within-domain moral (6), 437–450. licensing in the environmental domain. Environ. Behav. 53 (10), 1070–1094. Smith, K.T., 2014. Millennial’s interpretations of green terminology. Acad. Market. Stud. Vakratsas, D., Ambler, T., 1999. How advertising works: what do we really know? J. 18 (1), 55–68. J. Mark. 63 (1), 26–43. Smith, K.T., Brower, T.R., 2012. Longitudinal study of green marketing strategies that van der Linden, S., 2018. Warm glow is associated with low-but not high-cost sustainable influence millennials. J. Strateg. Mark. 20 (6), 535–551. behaviour. Nat. Sustain. 1 (1), 28–30. Sörqvist, P., Langeborg, L., 2019. Why people harm the environment although they try to VanDyke, M.S., Tedesco, J.C., 2016. Understanding green content strategies: An analysis treat it well: an evolutionary-cognitive perspective on climate compensation. Front. of environmental advertising frames from 1990 to 2010. Int. J. Strateg. Commun. 10 Psychol. 10, 348. (1), 36–50. Sörqvist, P., Haga, A., Langeborg, L., Holmgren, M., Wallinder, M., Nöstl, A., Marsh, J.E., Wang, S., Wang, J., Yang, F., Wang, Y., Li, J., 2018. Consumer familiarity, ambiguity 2015a. The green halo: Mechanisms and limits of the eco-label effect. Food Qual. tolerance, and purchase behavior toward remanufactured products: the implications Prefer. 43, 1–9. for remanufacturers. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 27 (8), 1741–1750. Sörqvist, P., Haga, A., Holmgren, M., Hansla, A., 2015b. An eco-label effect in the built Wiedmann, T., Minx, J., 2008. A definition of 'carbon footprint'. Ecol. Econ. Res. Trends 1 environment: performance and comfort effects of labeling a light source (2008), 1–11. environmentally friendly. J. Environ. Psychol. 42, 123–127. Wiedmann, K.P., Hennigs, N., Behrens, S.H., Klarmann, C., 2014. Tasting green: an Spence, A., Pidgeon, N., 2010. Framing and communicating climate change: the effects of experimental design for investigating consumer perception of organic wine. Br. Food distance and outcome frame manipulations. Glob. Environ. Chang. 20 (4), 656–667. J. 116 (2), 197–211. Stets, J.E., Burke, P.J., 2000. Identity theory and social identity theory. Soc. Psychol. Q. Worldwide initiatives to ban fossil fuel advertisements, 2022. Reclame Fossielvrij. https: 224–237. //verbiedfossielereclame.nl/only-words/. Stryker, S., 1987. Identity theory: Developments and extensions. In: Yardley, K., Xu, L., Yu, F., Ding, X., 2020. Circular-looking makes green-buying: how brand logo Honess, T. (Eds.), Self and Identity: Psychosocial Perspectives. John Wiley & Sons, shapes influence green consumption. Sustainability 12 (5), 1791. Oxford, England, pp. 89–103. Xu, W., Jin, X., Fu, R., 2021. The influence of scarcity and popularity appeals on Sun, Y., Luo, B., Wang, S., Fang, W., 2021. What you see is meaningful: does green sustainable products. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 27, 1340–1348. advertising change the intentions of consumers to purchase eco-labeled products? Yadav, R., Pathak, G.S., 2016. Young consumers’ intention towards buying green Bus. Strateg. Environ. 30 (1), 694–704. products in a developing nation: Extending the theory of planned behavior. J. Clean. Taufique, K.M.R., Polonsky, M.J., Vocino, A., Siwar, C., 2019. Measuring consumer Prod. 135, 732–739. understanding and perception of eco-labelling: item selection and scale validation. Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., Oates, C.J., 2010. Sustainable consumption: green Int. J. Consum. Stud. 43 (3), 298–314. consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sustain. Dev. 18 (1), 20–31. Tellis, G.J., Fornell, C., 1988. The relationship between advertising and product quality Yu, N., Shen, F., 2013. Benefits for me or risks for others: a cross-culture investigation of over the product life cycle: A contingency theory. J. Mark. Res. 25 (1), 64–71. the effects of message frames and cultural appeals. Health Commun. 28 (2), Testa, F., Iraldo, F., Tessitore, S., Frey, M., 2011. Strategies and approaches green 133–145. advertising: an empirical analysis of the Italian context. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. Dev. Zajonc, R.B., 1968. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 9 (2p2), 10 (4), 375–395. 1–27. Testa, F., Pretner, G., Iovino, R., Bianchi, G., Tessitore, S., Iraldo, F., 2020. Drivers to Zhang, H., Sun, J., Liu, F., Knight, J.G., 2014. Be rational or be emotional: Advertising green consumption: a systematic review. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 1–55. appeals, service types and consumer responses. Eur. J. Mark. 48 (11− 12), Thøgersen, J., 2005. How may consumer policy empower consumers for sustainable 2105–2126. lifestyles? J. Consum. Policy 28 (2), 143–177. Zubair, M., Wang, X., Iqbal, S., Awais, M., Wang, R., 2020. Attentional and emotional Thøgersen, J., Nielsen, K.S., 2016. A better carbon footprint label. J. Clean. Prod. 125, brain response to message framing in context of green marketing. Heliyon 6 (9), 86–94. e04912. 12