Une information et une compréhension insuffisantes des éléments constitutifs du prix d’un produit peuvent conduire à des perceptions négatives de la justice du prix et à des comportements négatifs envers le produit. La transparence des coûts est un moyen de dévoiler ces éléments. Les recherches antérieures testent rarement le rôle de la justice des prix dans le processus de transparence des coûts et privilégient l’étude des produits conventionnels sans prendre en compte d’autres types de produits (e.g., produits Fairtrade). En outre, l’étude de l’effet modérateur de caractéristiques des consommateurs (e.g., le niveau de représentation) est absente. Pour combler ces lacunes, nous menons deux expérimentations en ligne. Nos résultats montrent que la justice des prix joue un rôle clé dans la relation entre la transparence des coûts et l’intention d’achat. Cet effet est plus fort pour les produits Fairtrade que pour les produits conventionnels. Enfin, cet effet est plus important pour les consommateurs ayant un niveau de représentation élevé.
AdamsJS (1965) Inequity in social exchange. In: BerkowitzL (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 2. NewYork et Londres: Academic Press, 267–299.
2.
AlbuOBFlyverbomM (2019) Organizational transparency: conceptualizations, conditions, and consequences. Business and Society58(2): 268–297.
3.
AyadiNParaschivCRoussetX (2017) Online dynamic pricing and consumer-perceived ethicality: Synthesis and future research. Recherche et Applications En Marketing (English Edition)32(3): 49–70.
4.
Bambauer-SachseSMangoldS (2010) Does a marketer’s responsibility for a surcharge moderate price partitioning effects? In: CampbellMCInmanJPietersR (éds) Advances in Consumer Research (37. : 333–339.
5.
BassoFBouilleJTroivilleJ (2021) Are you up for fair-trade products? Vertical dimension as a metaphorical representation of virtuous consumption. Journal of Business Research135: 508–518.
6.
BechwatiNNSisodiaRSShethJN (2009) Developing a model of antecedents to consumers’ perceptions and evaluations of price unfairness. Journal of Business Research62(8): 761–767.
7.
BeetsSDBeetsMG (2019) An absence of transparency: the charitable and political contributions of US Corporations. Journal of Business Ethics155(4): 1101–1113.
8.
BodurHOTofighiMGrohmannB (2016) When should private label brands endorse ethical attributes?Journal of Retailing92(2): 204–217.
9.
BoltonLEWarlopLAlbaJW (2003) Consumer perceptions of price (un) fairnessJournal of Consumer Research29(4): 474–491.
10.
BrunkKHDe BoerC (2020) How do consumers reconcile positive and negative CSR-related information to form an ethical brand perception? A mixed method inquiry. Journal of Business Ethics161: 443–458.
11.
BuellRWKimTTsayCJ (2017) Creating reciprocal value through operational transparency. Management Science63(6): 1673–1695.
12.
BürginDWilkenR (2022) Increasing consumers’ purchase intentions toward fair-trade products through partitioned pricing. Journal of Business Ethics181(4): 1015–1040.
13.
CaillebaPCasteranH (2010) Do ethical values work? A quantitative study of the impact of fair trade coffee on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics97(4): 613–624.
14.
CampbellMC (1999a) Pricing strategy & practice “Why did you do that?” The important role of inferred motive in perceptions of price fairness. Journal of Product & Brand Management8(2): 145–153.
15.
CampbellMC (1999b) Perceptions of price unfairness: antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing Research36(2): 187–199.
16.
CarterKJayachandranSMurdockMR (2021) Building a sustainable shelf: the role of firm sustainability reputation. Journal of Retailing97(4): 507–522.
17.
CarterRECurryDJ (2010) Transparent pricing: theory, tests, and implications for marketing practice. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science38(6): 759–774.
18.
CoderreFSirieixLValette-FlorenceP (2022) The facets of consumer-based food label equity: measurement, structure and managerial relevance. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services65: 102838.
19.
CooperRRossTW (1984) Prices, product qualities and asymmetric information: the competitive case. The Review of Economic Studies51(2): 197–207.
20.
CoutellePGall-ElyMLRivièreA (2020) Price and value: Towards new research perspectives. Recherche et Applications En Marketing (English Edition)35(3): 2–6.
21.
Di DomenicoGPremazziKCuginiA (2022) “I will pay you more, as long as you are transparent!”: an investigation of the pick-your-price participative pricing mechanism. Journal of Business Research147: 403–419.
22.
Didi AlaouiMCovaV (2021) Psychological distance as a working tool for managers. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition)36(4): 43–69.
23.
DufeuIFerrandiJ-MGabrielPLe Gall-ElyM (2014) Socio-environmental multi-labelling and consumer willingness to pay. Recherche et Applications en Marketing29(3): 35–56.
24.
EyalTLibermanNTropeYWaltherE (2004) The pros and cons of temporally near and distant action. Journal of personality and social psychology86(6): 781.
25.
FergusonJLEllenPS (2013) Transparency in pricing and its effect on perceived price fairness. Journal of Product and Brand Management22(5/6): 404–412.
26.
FergusonJLEllenPSBeardenWO (2014) Procedural and distributive fairness: determinants of overall price fairness. Journal of Business Ethics121(2): 217–231.
27.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
28.
FreyBSPommerehneWW (1993) On the fairness of pricing—an empirical survey among the general population. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization20(3): 295–307.
29.
GazleyAHuntAMcLarenL (2015) The effects of location-based-services on consumer purchase intention at point of purchase. European Journal of Marketing49(9/10): 1686–1708.
30.
GillaniAKutaulaSLeonidouLCChristodoulidesP (2021) The impact of proximity on consumer fair trade engagement and purchasing behavior: the moderating role of empathic concern and hypocrisy. Journal of Business Ethics169(3): 557–577.
31.
GouldnerAW (1960) The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. American Sociological Review161–178.
32.
GrimmelikhuijsenSGMeijerAJ (2012) Effects of transparency on the perceived trustworthiness of a government organization: evidence from an online experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory24(1): 137–157.
33.
HabelJSchonsLMAlaviSWiesekeJ (2016) Warm glow or extra charge? The ambivalent effect of corporate social responsibility activities on customers’ perceived price fairness. Journal of Marketing80: 84–105.
34.
HawsKLBeardenWO (2006) Dynamic pricing and consumer fairness perceptions. Journal of Consumer Research33(3): 304–311.
35.
HayesAF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. Methodology in the social sciences. New York: The Guilford Press.
36.
HenselerJRingleCMSarstedtM (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science43: 115–135.
37.
HerrmannAXiaLMonroeKBHuberF (2007) The influence of price fairness on customer satisfaction: an empirical test in the context of automobile purchasesJournal of Product & Brand Management16: 49–58.
38.
HolbrookMBHirschmanEC (1982) The experiential aspects of consumption: consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research9(2): 132–140.
39.
HomansGC (1961) Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
40.
HomburgCLauerKVombergA (2019) The multichannel pricing dilemma: do consumers accept higher offline than online prices? International Journal of Research in Marketing36(4): 597–612.
41.
HufnagelGSchwaigerMWeritzL (2022) Seeking the perfect price: consumer responses to personalized price discrimination in e-commerce. Journal of Business Research143: 346–365.
42.
HultmanJAxelssonB (2007) Towards a typology of transparency for marketing management research. Industrial marketing management36(5): 627–635.
43.
InmanJJNikolovaH (2017) Shopper-facing retail technology: a retailer adoption decision framework incorporating shopper attitudes and privacy concerns. Journal of Retailing93(1): 7–28.
44.
IsabellaGMazzonJADimokaA (2017) Impacts of product type and representation type on the perception of justice and price fairness. Journal of Business Research81: 203–211.
45.
JacobyJ (1976) Consumer and industrial psychology: prospects for theory corroboration and mutual contribution. In: DunnetteMD (éd.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1031–1061.
46.
JambulingamTKathuriaRNevinJR (2011) Fairness-trust-loyalty relationship under varying conditions of supplier-buyer interdependence. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice19(1): 39–56.
47.
JosiassenALukasBAWhitwellGJ (2008) Country-of-origin contingencies: competing perspectives on product familiarity and product involvement. International Marketing Review25(4): 423–440.
48.
JungSChoHJJinBE (2020) Does effective cost transparency increase price fairness? An analysis of apparel brand strategies. Journal of Brand Management27(5): 495–507.
49.
KahnemanDKnetschJLThalerRH (1986) Fairness and the assumptions of economics. Journal of Business S285–S300.
50.
KangJHustvedtG (2014). Building trust between consumers and corporations: the role of consumer perceptions of transparency and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics125(2): 253–265.
51.
KarjalainenKMoxhamC (2013) Focus on Fairtrade: propositions for integrating Fairtrade and supply chain management research. Journal of Business Ethics116(2): 267–282.
52.
KellerAVogelsangMTotzekD (2022) How displaying price discounts can mitigate negative customer reactions to dynamic pricing. Journal of Business Research148: 277–291.
53.
KonukFA (2019) The influence of perceived food quality, price fairness, perceived value and satisfaction on customers’ revisit and word-of-mouth intentions towards organic food restaurantsJournal of Retailing and Consumer Services50: 103–110.
54.
Koschate-FischerNHuberIVHoyerWD (2016) When will price increases associated with company donations to charity be perceived as fair?Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science44: 608–626.
55.
LammingRCCaldwellNDHarrisonDAPhillipsW (2001) Transparency in supply relationships: concept and practice. Journal of Supply Chain Management37(3): 4–10.
56.
Lee-WingateSNSternB (2007) Perceived fairness: conceptual framework and scale development. Advances in Consumer Research34: 400.
57.
LibermanNTropeY (1998) The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: a test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology75(1): 5–18.
LinY-CChangC-CA (2012) Double standard: the role of environmental consciousness in green product usage. Journal of Marketing76(5): 125–134.
60.
Lins de Holanda CoelhoGHanelPHPWolfLJ (2020) The very efficient assessment of need for cognition: developing a six-item version. Assessment27(8): 1870–1885.
61.
LoweB (2015) Commentary: “Should consumers request cost transparency?” Cost transparency in consumer markets. European Journal of Marketing49(11/12): 1992–1998.
62.
LuchsMGNaylorRWIrwinJRRaghunathanR (2010) The sustainability liability: potential negative effects of ethicality on product preference. Journal of Marketing74(5): 18–31.
63.
LukSTKSharmaPChenISN (2013) Shopping motivation as a moderator in the retail service evaluation. Journal of Services Marketing27(1): 40–48.
64.
MohanBBuellRWJohnLK (2020) Lifting the veil: the benefits of cost transparency. Marketing Science39(6): 1105–1121.
65.
NguyenBSimkinLKlausPChenJ (2015) Fairness quality: a conceptual model and multiple-item scale for assessing firms’ fairness–an exploratory study. Journal of Marketing Management31(11–12): 1181–1206.
66.
PfefferJLangtonN (1993) The effect of wage dispersion on satisfaction, productivity, and working collaboratively: evidence from college and university faculty. Administrative Science Quarterly38(3): 382–407.
67.
PieniakZAertsensJVerbekeW (2010) Subjective and objective knowledge as determinants of organic vegetables consumption. Food Quality and Preference21(6): 581–588.
68.
PortesAN’goalaGCasesA-S (2020) Digital transparency: Dimensions, antecedents and consequences on the quality of customer relationships. Recherche et Applications En Marketing (English Edition)35(4): 72–98.
69.
ReczekRWTrudelRWhiteK (2018) Focusing on the forest or the trees: how abstract versus concrete construal level predicts responses to eco-friendly products. Journal of Environmental Psychology57: 87–98.
70.
RohTSeokJKimY (2022) Unveiling ways to reach organic purchase: green perceived value, perceived knowledge, attitude, subjective norm, and trust. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services67: 102988.
71.
RossiterJRPercyLDonovanRJ (1991) A better advertising planning grid. Journal of Advertising Research31(5): 11–21.
72.
SchleenbeckerRHammU (2013) Consumers’ perception of organic product characteristics. A review. Appetite71: 420–429.
73.
SchmidtGBJettinghoffWM (2016) Using Amazon Mechanical Turk and other compensated crowdsourcing sites. Business Horizons59(4): 391–400.
74.
SeptiantoFKemperJParamitaW (2019) The role of imagery in promoting organic food. Journal of Business Research101: 104–115.
75.
SeptiantoFKemperJATjiptonoFParamitaW (2021a) The role of authentic (vs. hubristic) pride in leveraging the effectiveness of cost transparency. Journal of Business Ethics174(2): 423–439.
76.
SeptiantoFLeeMSPutraPG (2021b) Everyday “low price” or everyday “value”? The interactive effects of framing and construal level on consumer purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services58: 102317.
77.
ShengSBaoYPanY (2007) Partitioning or bundling? Perceived fairness of the surcharge makes a difference. Psychology & Marketing24(12) : 1025–1041.
78.
SimintirasACDwivediYKKaushikGRanaNP (2015) Should consumers request cost transparency?European Journal of Marketing49(11/12): 1961–1979.
79.
SimonsonITverskyA (1992) Choice in context: tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research29(3): 281–295.
80.
SinghN (2015) Commentary: what’s behind the price tag: understanding cost transparency?European Journal of Marketing49(11/12): 1987–1991.
81.
SirieixLDelanchyMRemaudHZepedaLGurviezP (2013) Consumers’ perceptions of individual and combined sustainable food labels: a UK pilot investigation: consumers’ perceptions of sustainable food labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies37(2): 143–151.
82.
SlepianMLMasicampoEJAmbadyN (2015) Cognition from on high and down low: verticality and construal level. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology108(1): 1–17.
83.
TarrahiFEisendMDostF (2016) A meta-analysis of price change fairness perceptions. International Journal of Research in Marketing33: 199–203.
84.
TotiJFMoulinsJL (2017) Ethical sensitivity: conceptualization and new scale development. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition)32(3) : 6–27.
85.
TropeYLibermanN (2010) Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review117(2): 440.
86.
UrbanyJEMaddenTJDicksonPR (1989) All’s not fair in pricing: an initial look at the dual entitlement principle. Marketing Letters1: 17–25.
87.
VaidyanathanRAggarwalP (2003) Who is the fairest of them all? An attributional approach to price fairness perceptions. Journal of Business Research56(6): 453–463.
88.
VallacherRRWegnerDM (1989) Levels of personal agency: individual variation in action identification. Journal of Personality and Social psychology57(4): 660–671.
89.
van DoornJVerhoefPC (2011) Willingness to pay for organic products: differences between virtue and vice foods. International Journal of Research in Marketing28: 167–180.
90.
VoesterJIvensBLeischnigA (2017) Partitioned pricing: review of the literature and directions for further research. Review of Managerial Science11: 879–931.
91.
WeinerB (1986) An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion. New York: Springer.
92.
WilliamsLESteinRGalgueraL (2014) The distinct affective consequences of psychological distance and construal level. Journal of Consumer Research40(6): 1123–1138.
93.
XiaLRoggeveenAL (2022) How collective stress affects price fairness perceptions: the role of nostalgia. Journal of Business Research152: 361–371.
94.
XiaLMonroeKBCoxJL (2004) The price is unfair! A conceptual framework of price fairness perceptions. Journal of Marketing68(4): 1–15.
95.
YoonSJ (2013) Antecedents and consequences of in-store experiences based on an experiential typology. European Journal of Marketing47(5/6): 693–714.
96.
ZhuK (2004) Information transparency of business-to-business electronic markets: a game-theoretic analysis. Management Science50(5): 670–685.
