MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Consumer Perceptions of Ethical Supply Chains and Their Effect on Brand Loyalty

2024· preprint· en· W4399749403 on OpenAlexaff
Samantha Reynolds

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEthics in Business and Education
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyBrand loyaltyPerceptionBusinessSupply chainMarketingAdvertisingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study explores consumer perceptions of ethical supply chains and their implications for brand loyalty in contemporary markets. Ethical supply chain practices, encompassing sustainability, transparency, and social responsibility, are increasingly pivotal in shaping consumer attitudes and behaviors. A semi-structured interview approach was utilized to gather insights from a diverse sample of consumers, revealing nuanced perspectives on how ethical considerations influence brand preferences and loyalty. Findings indicate that consumers value brands that demonstrate genuine commitment to ethicality, viewing transparency and accountability in supply chain operations as essential for building trust and credibility. Emotional responses such as admiration and respect were commonly associated with brands perceived as ethical, highlighting the emotional resonance of ethical supply chain practices in consumer decision-making processes. Challenges such as greenwashing and perceived discrepancies between brand promises and actions underscore the importance of authentic communication in aligning consumer perceptions with brand behaviors. The COVID-19 pandemic further emphasized the role of ethical supply chains in ensuring business resilience and consumer trust during global disruptions. Brands that exhibited ethical leadership during the crisis reinforced their reputational capital and strengthened relationships with ethically conscious consumers. This study contributes to understanding the strategic imperative for businesses to integrate and communicate ethical supply chain practices effectively, thereby fostering sustainable competitive advantages and enhancing long-term brand loyalty. Future research directions include exploring evolving consumer expectations, emerging ethical challenges, and innovative strategies for embedding ethicality into supply chain management.This qualitative study explores consumer perceptions of ethical supply chains and their implications for brand loyalty in contemporary markets. Ethical supply chain practices, encompassing sustainability, transparency, and social responsibility, are increasingly pivotal in shaping consumer attitudes and behaviors. A semi-structured interview approach was utilized to gather insights from a diverse sample of consumers, revealing nuanced perspectives on how ethical considerations influence brand preferences and loyalty. Findings indicate that consumers value brands that demonstrate genuine commitment to ethicality, viewing transparency and accountability in supply chain operations as essential for building trust and credibility. Emotional responses such as admiration and respect were commonly associated with brands perceived as ethical, highlighting the emotional resonance of ethical supply chain practices in consumer decision-making processes. Challenges such as greenwashing and perceived discrepancies between brand promises and actions underscore the importance of authentic communication in aligning consumer perceptions with brand behaviors. The COVID-19 pandemic further emphasized the role of ethical supply chains in ensuring business resilience and consumer trust during global disruptions. Brands that exhibited ethical leadership during the crisis reinforced their reputational capital and strengthened relationships with ethically conscious consumers. This study contributes to understanding the strategic imperative for businesses to integrate and communicate ethical supply chain practices effectively, thereby fostering sustainable competitive advantages and enhancing long-term brand loyalty. Future research directions include exploring evolving consumer expectations, emerging ethical challenges, and innovative strategies for embedding ethicality into supply chain management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.283
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicEthics in Business and EducationFrench-language works237,207