5 ms·
Who sponsored/paid for the research - that is also important. Indeed, it is liker saying that more green, let's say Europe, is full of cheats compared to USA, w
by ilkhd2 17y ago
Who sponsored/paid for the research - that is also important.
Indeed, it is liker saying that more green, let's say Europe,
is full of cheats compared to USA, where people are "more conventional".
There was by the way report that many studies are fraudulent nowadays. Perhaps this is the case.
- araneae 17y agoThe title of the article is a little misleading, I think. It's really not about how being green makes you a cheater any more than being about how voting for Obama makes you a racist. I don't think the research is implying anything in particular about people who buy green, other than the fact that they believe they are doing something moral. Other self-perceived moral acts will presumably also result in an increased likelihood of cheating later as well.
- potatolicious 17y agoWell, slightly OT but my work is actually in the green field (employer shall remain unnamed for this one). What we've found is that there's a huge difference between opinion polls on consumers' desire for green stuff, and their actions. Everyone says, for example, that they'd be willing to pay X% extra to buy a similar product that is environmentally responsible - but in reality that number is actually very, very close to 0%. This is very frustrating to me - consumers talk a lot of shit about companies needing to be environmentally responsible, but from the metrics I've seen first-hand, even making them pay a single penny extra for it is too much.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- solutionyogi 17y agoI am surprised that you would expect anything else. As Milton Friedman famously said, 'Never listen to what people say. Look at how they vote with their feet.' http://www.druglibrary.org/special/friedman/socialist.htm http://www.druglibrary.org/special/friedman/socialist.htm
- potatolicious 17y agoWell, it was pretty obvious the polls weren't going to be on the dot, but I was expecting consumers to claim to be willing to pay Y, but in reality only pay X, where X < Y. I never expected X = 0.
- sliverstorm 17y agoX != 0 lim($price -> 0) [ c * $price ] = X (Consider values less than $0.01 to be legal) You're essentially right, but not quite. P.S. make sure if you make your product more 'green' people are aware of this. If it's not clear, people may not understand why the price is higher, and when presented with two goods you believe are completely equal you will naturally choose the cheaper one.
- CWuestefeld 17y agoI wonder if the price differed much in the study, between "green" and conventional products. Perhaps those who bought green felt like they were forced to spend more, and were owed something because of unfair pricing rather than moral superiority.
- scott_s 17y agoThere is a difference between fraudulent (purposefully misrepresenting something) and wrong.
- ilkhd2 17y agoOh, yeah - that what I meant - fraudulent. Delebirately make a bad research/sensationalist research to get publicity, so necessary in academic world.