The Relationship Between Consumers’ Religiosity and Risk Perceptions Surrounding the Use of SNS

Int. J. Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2013 21

Copyright 2013 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

The relationship between consumers religiosity and risk perceptions surrounding the use of SNS

Thamer Ahmad Baazeem*, Ursula-Sigrid Bougoure and Larry Neale QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George St., GPO BOX 2434, Brisbane QLD 4001, Australia E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author

Abstract: Religion remains a significant influence on many consumers lives, affecting consumer behaviour in terms of moral standards, thoughts, judgments, attitudes, and actions. In previous research, religion has been shown to affect consumer decision making, and ethical judgments towards the marketers and the communication tools they use. However, due to the sensitivity of issues surrounding religious beliefs and actions, religiosity related to consumer behaviour has remained an under-researched area. Furthermore, social networking sites (SNS) such as Twitter and Facebook have become a significant part of millions of lives around the world. The importance of religion and the importance of SNSs in peoples lives provide high possibility for interactive relationships between them. Hence, there is still a need not only to develop a theoretical explanation of how individual religiosity impacts consumer behaviour, but also to improve our theoretical understanding of the relationship between consumers religiosity and risk perceptions surrounding the use of SNS. Based on insight from Hunt-Vitells General Theory of Marketing Ethics (1986), this paper develops a conceptual argument that aims to improve our theoretical understanding of the relationship between consumers religiosity and risk perceptions surrounding the use of SNS.

Keywords: consumer religiosity; social networking; consumer risk perceptions; consumer behaviour.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Baazeem, T.A., Bougoure, U-S. and Neale, L. (2013) The relationship between consumers religiosity and risk perceptions surrounding the use of SNS, Int. J. Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.2132.

Biographical notes: Thamer Ahmad Baazeem is a PhD student at QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.

Ursula-Sigrid Bougoure is a Lecturer in Marketing at QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.

Larry Neale is an Associate Professor in Marketing at QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.

22 T.A. Baazeem et al.

This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled The impact of consumer religiosity on consumer perceived risks of using social networking sites presented at 2nd Global Islamic Marketing Conference, Abu Dhabi, January 2012.

1 Introduction

Individual religiosity plays an important role in constructing knowledge, beliefs, values and social normative systems (Swimberghe et al., 2011). Accordingly, religiosity has an effect on determining buyer behaviour. This means that some businesses may experience major consumer criticism when they have made marketplace moves that upset some consumers sense of religion and religious values. For instance, Wal-Mart in the USA experienced consumer backlash from its regular customers when it decided to adopt the term holiday instead of the culturally appropriate Christian term for Christmas. Similar criticism was meted out by Wal-Marts consumers when it announced its support for same sex marriages (Swimberghe et al., 2011).

Additionally, in Saudi Arabia, where Saudis believe that religion is the most significant element of their identity (Moaddel, 2006) and religious power continues to be exercised by religious scholars in tandem with political leaders (Kechichian, 1986), interestingly, when any new technology is imported into the country, religious scholars and many citizens accuse these products of being potentially damaging to the religiously conservative nature of the country. This is particularly the case with products that improve lifestyle and communication such as mobile cameras and the internet. This criticism has consistently occurred over the past 100 years, from the time of market entry of telephones to Saudi Arabia, through to todays social networking sites (SNS) such as Facebook and Twitter. While such forms of technology faced much religious criticism when first introduced to Saudi Arabia, they are now popular with the general public as well as the conservative religious scholars. In fact, according to Alriyadh, a Saudi newspaper, as of May 2010, 2.3 million Saudis use Facebook; yet when Facebook was first introduced to the country, some religious scholars highly criticised its use. Also, according to Asharq Al-Awsat, a Saudi newspaper based in London, at the end of 2010 the percentage of Saudis who use Twitter has increased by 240% since the end of 2009. Such changes in Saudi consumer behaviour are not understood and pose a number of questions. Why has there been such a huge transition from mass, religious criticism to mass consumer adoption? Do religious scholars have an influence on consumer behaviour? What happened to the religious criticisms and why have they been relaxed while Saudi Arabia remains such a religiously conservative nation? How do consumers perceive the risk of new trends of social networking media? Do marketers need to consider religiosity in Saudi Arabia at all? This paper provides a conceptual research framework based on the general theory of marketing ethics and attempts to address some of these questions.

In doing so, this paper furthers our conceptual knowledge in the area of consumer religiosity by trying to understand the impact of personal religiosity on consumer social and psychological risk perception associated with the adoption and use of SNS technology. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. First, the SNS and their relationship with religions are discussed. Second, religion and religiosity are defined.

The relationship between consumers religiosity and risk perceptions 23

Third, descriptions of previous research that link religiosity with consumer behaviour are discussed. Fourth, consumer risk perceptions are explained. Finally, gap identification, research questions, and a conceptual framework are specified.

1.1 Social networking sites

SNS attract millions of users around the world. According to Boyd and Webb (2008, p.211), social networking is defined as web-based services that allow anyone to create a public or semi-public profile within an enclosed system, articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and view and traverse their list of connections as well as those made by others within the system. Examples of social networking include MySpace, Facebook, Cyworld, Twitter, and Google+.

Recently, many users have integrated these networks into their daily life, especially via the use of sophisticated smart phones. While the technological features of SNS are practically consistent, the cultures behind them are varied (Boyd and Webb, 2008). In line with their pervasiveness in modern life, SNS have increasingly attracted the attention of academic researchers who seek to examine and understand online consumer behaviour (Boyd and Webb, 2008; Sean et al., 2009).

Religiosity affects the relationships and communication behaviour between individuals, families, groups and communities (Choi, 2010; Tarakeshwar et al., 2003), which means it can feature significantly for SNS. While SNSs are very popular among people, especially the younger demographic, there have been growing fears from some religious scholars with regards to the consequences of using these sites (Nyland and Near, 2007). For instance, the amount of time people spend using SNS may inhibit their observance of religious practices. Also, using SNS opens communication between the genders and that might be considered a threat in a conservative Muslim society like Saudi Arabia. Moreover, a recent comment came from the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia in a speech on 27 January 2012 when he warned Muslims about Twitter and said it promotes lies and badly challenges religious and social figures; he ended his talk by asking Muslims to stay away from Twitter. Despite these concerns, there has been a significant lack of research addressing the correlation between religiosity and consumer behaviour in using SNS (Ess et al., 2007; Livingstone, 2008). Before we continue, the following section will define and describe religion and religiosity.

2 Religion and religiosity

Despite research interest spanning decades, there is still no generally accepted definition of religion (Guthrie et al., 1980; Hood et al., 2009). There are practically as many definitions as authors and most of the definitions satisfy only their authors (Hood et al., 2009; Wilkes et al., 1986). However, despite the lack of conventional definition, religion remains one of the most significant components of socio-cultural life, affecting the values, behaviours, individualities, perceptions and beliefs of those who follow it (Cohen and Hill, 2007). Moreover, since religion influences the relationships among individuals, families, groups, communities, and countries (Choi, 2010; Tarakeshwar et al., 2003), it significantly contributes to shaping consumers market-related behaviours.

Personal religiosity is defined by McDaniel and Burnett (1990, p.103), as a belief in God accompanied by a commitment to follow principles believed to be set forth by God.


According to Vitell and Paolillo (2003), personal religiosity represents a central determinant of values and human convictions. Allport and Ross (1967) claim that there are two different forms of religiosity. First, the intrinsic form assigns religion a high significance in organising an individuals life. Second, extrinsic religiosity considers religion a tool to enhance mutual recognition in the social environment. Recent research affirms these two forms of religiosity (see, for example, Clark and Dawson, 1996; Muncy and Vitell, 1992; Swimberghe et al., 2011; Vitell, 2009; Vitell and Paolillo, 2003) Furthermore, demographic characteristics like age, gender, education, and social class highly contribute to the prediction of an individuals level of religiosity (Welch, 1981; Wilkes et al., 1986). For instance, Choi (2010) states that people tend to be more religious as they get older. Moreover, some researchers argue that females are more religious than males (Dutta, 1965; Miller and Hoffmann, 1995). Others observe that middle class and higher educated persons are more religious (Deaton, 2009; Schuman, 1971).

What remains unsolved is the discrepancy between individual behaviour and the prescriptions of religious scholars which may influence individual religiosity (Arland et al., 1992). In order to begin to address this, the following section will discuss the theoretical background of the relationship between consumer religiosity and consumer behaviour.

3 Religiosity and consumer behaviour

Religiosity remains a significant influence in many peoples lives [Hood et al., (2009), p.8]. It affects behaviour in terms of outlining and determining moral standards, thoughts, judgments, attitudes, and actions (Choi, 2010; Schneider et al., 2011). In consumer research, religion and religiosity have enjoyed a long history of research inquiry (Hirschman, 1981; Wilkes et al., 1986). However, this history is not satisfactory to make the area active in terms of the volume of research. Early research on the relationship between religion and consumer behaviour formulated the construct of religious affiliation or denominational membership (Delener, 1994; Hirschman, 1981, 1983). This approach presented inadequate conclusions because of its fundamental assumption that the power of religious affiliation is uniform across religious groups. This led to some difficulties in distinguishing the effects of characteristics of religious affiliation from those of actual religiousness (Swimberghe et al., 2011). To overcome the limitations of this approach, two other approaches have been developed.

The first approach is the concept of general religiosity, introduced by Wilkes et al. (1986). They state that if an individual perceives themselves to be religious, then that perception will control both cognitive and co native aspects of their behaviour. This means that religion is decidedly individual in nature, which makes its effects on consumer behaviour dependent upon on an individuals level of religiosity. According to Schneider et al. (2011), this approach lacks the differentiation between intrinsic and extrinsic religiosity. For example, the three variables included in the study (the importance of religious values, confidence in religious values, and self-perceived religiousness) did not allow Vitell and Paolillo (2003) to empirically assess the relationship between religiosity and consumer behaviour. This was due to the non-differentiation between the items of intrinsic and extrinsic religiosity (Schneider et al., 2011).


The second approach views religiosity from the perspective of religious commitment. Religious commitment is considered to be the degree to which a person has religious beliefs and the frequency of participation in regular religious practices (McDaniel and Burnett, 1990). This approach suggests that religious commitment is crucial in explaining the effect of religion on consumer behaviour (McDaniel and Burnett, 1990; Schneider et al., 2011; Swimberghe et al., 2011). Religious commitment includes two dimensions, an intra-personal dimension, which focuses on personal principles or religious knowledge, and an inter-personal dimension, which concentrates on the level of individual involvement in organised religious activities (McDaniel and Burnett, 1990; Swimberghe et al., 2011).

These two approaches share the concept that the consumer is an individual, whereas the earlier religious affiliation approach considered the religious group to be a whole and assumed individual affiliation to the groups to be consistent. The development of these different methods in determining the relationship between religion and consumer behaviour shows how important consumer religion is and how it has led to further studies in an attempt to gain a richer understanding of the impact of religion on consumer behaviour.

3.1 Linking religiosity with consumer actions

A review of the literature shows established links between religion and consumer behaviour from two different research streams. The first stream focuses on linking religiosity with consumer evaluations and purchasing decisions. For instance, Wilkes et al. (1986) argue that religiosity can be meaningfully related to consumer lifestyle. McDaniel and Burnett (1990) investigated one aspect of religiosity, religious affiliation, and found that religion may be significant in forecasting the significance individuals place on certain retail store evaluative criteria. Delener (1990, 1994) examined the impact of religious affiliations on buyers decision-making processes and found that differential role behaviour changes according to religious influences; religious consumers are less open-minded, less flexible, and more rigid in their decision making. Bailey and Sood (1993) found that people of dissimilar religious affiliations have parallel consumer behaviours across certain circumstances. Other research has tried to build upon earlier work by exploring how shopping and purchasing behaviours are determined by religious affiliation and religiosity in different contexts (see, for example, Mokhlis, 2006; Nittin and Sally, 2004; Sood and Nasu, 1995). Overall, findings suggest that religion is essential in the consumer-purchasing decision-making process.

The second research stream focuses on religion as a variable which may have a major effect on consumer ethical judgments. Reidenbach and Robin (1990, p.640) define ethical judgment as the individuals summary assessment as to the level to which matters or activities in question are morally true or acceptable and are strongly influenced by a persons understanding of fairness, right and wrong, and religious experience. As such, in a consumer context, this means that consumers use their ethical judgments when making marketplace decisions and purchases.

Hunt and Vitell (1986) developed a general theory of marketing ethics, which has formed the basis of subsequent studies (see, for example, Clark and Dawson, 1996; Schneider et al., 2011; Swimberghe et al., 2011; Vitell and Muncy, 1992, 2005; Vitell and Paolillo, 2003). This theory is a process theory of ethical decision making. In particular, it addresses the situation in which individuals comfort issues are perceived to


be containing ethical content (Hunt and Vitell, 2006). It argues that individuals perceive alternatives and evaluate those alternatives based on their personal characteristics, cultural environment, professional environment, industrial environment, and organisational environment. After that, individuals form ethical judgments based on an evaluation of the alternatives. The results of the process are first, intentions and second, behaviour. The theory proposes that ethical judgments differ from intentions because normally intentions are finalised after making ethical judgments (Hunt and Vitell, 2006). Furthermore, this theory drew on two major normative ethical theories in moral philosophy, deontological and teleological (Hunt and Vitell, 1986). According to Hunt and Vitell (2006), in the process of deontological evaluation, individuals evaluate whether the behaviours implied by alternatives are right or wrong. The process involves comparing alternatives with a set of pre-arranged deontological norms, which represent some personal values or standards of moral behaviour. These norms range from personal beliefs about honesty, stealing, cheating, and fairness, to issue-specific beliefs about deceptive advertising, product security, sales, and confidentially of data. In contrast, also according to Hunt and Vitell (2006), in the process of teleological evaluation, individuals concentrate on three constructs. The first is the perceived consequences of alternatives. The second is the probability of each consequence to occur. The third is the desirability or undesirability of each consequence.

In addition, the theory suggests that individuals religiosity contributes to shaping their ethical judgments. The authors included religion among the variables of cultural environment and the variables of personal characteristics, which influence perceptions of circumstances, options, and consequences. Moreover, according to the theory, a person with a high level of religiosity will tend to adhere more to an absolute religious law, or deontology, and be less concerned with situational influences, or teleology, than the person who has a lower level of religiosity (Hunt and Vitell, 1986, 2006; Reidenbach and Robin, 1990). Accordingly, Cornwell et al. (2005) confirm that consumers high in religiosity bestow additional importance to absolute laws and deontology and increasingly reject situational reflections, or teleology.

Swimberghe et al. (2011) confirm that consumers form ethical judgments and evaluate marketers actions. Also, they found that ethical judgments are a major explanatory variable in consumers intentions to voice complaint, third party complaint, and to boycott. Their approach adopts a framework from the general theory of marketing ethics. They make the consumers ethical judgment a mediator between consumer religiosity and consumer behavioural outcomes. They further argue that a consumers ethical judgment arises mainly from how one internalises religious values rather than the participatory or organisational component of their religious experiences. Although their findings support the view that individual religiosity affects the formation of ethical judgments, they ignore other personal characteristics in the theory of marketing ethics affecting consumer ethical judgment such as value systems, belief systems, strength of moral character, cognitive moral development, and ethical sensitivity. Those factors can be grouped as non-religious ethical antecedents. Therefore, distinguishing between the impact of the level of an individuals religiosity and the impact of non-religious ethical antecedents on the formation of ethical judgments will provide better understanding of the relationship between consumer religiosity and consumer behaviour.

Overall, two research streams have investigated the correlation between consumer religiosity and consumer behaviour. The first one focused on the buyers decision-making process. The major finding of this stream was that consumers with a low level of


religiosity tend to be more tolerant, more flexible, and less rigid than people with a higher level of religiosity. The second stream tried to focus on using the approach of the general theory of marketing ethics to identify the relationship. The major finding of this stream was that consumers level of religiosity formed ethical judgments towards companies products and communication tools, which led to consumer complaints, third party complaints or boycotts. However, there is no research which distinguishes between the contribution of the levels of an individuals religiosity and the contribution of non-religious ethical antecedents such as value systems, belief systems, strength of moral character, cognitive moral development, and ethical sensitivity in forming ethical judgments. The concept of distinguishing between the level of religiosity and other antecedents will improve our understanding of the level of importance of religiosity in forming consumers behaviour. The following section briefly explains the consumer risk perception.

4 Consumer risk perception

Consumer risk perceptions are widely considered to be one of the most influential factors affecting consumer behaviour (Mitchell, 1999). In fact, the importance of perceived risk stems from its great potential to explain differences in behaviour of consumers (Mitchell, 1999). It is defined as a consumers subjective feeling that there is some probability that a choice may lead to undesirable outcome [Cunningham, (1967), p.83].

In addition, perceived risk is conceptualised as a multi-dimensional phenomenon (Mitchell and Harris, 2005). The following dimensions have been described by Garner (1986).

1 social, the risk that the selection of the object will negatively influence the perception of others about the buyer

2 financial, the risk that the object used will not return the best possible monetary gain for the consumer

3 physical, the risk that the performance of the object will result in a health hazard to the consumer

4 performance, the risk that the object used will not be realised in a manner that will result in customer satisfaction

5 time, the risk that the consumer will waste time, lose convenience or waste effort in getting the object serviced

6 psychological, the risk that the selection or performance of the object will have a negative effect on the consumers peace of mind or self perception.

These dimensions of perceived risk have been found to significantly affect the consumer decision-making process, particularly at the consumer problem recognition stage [see, for example, Cox, (1967), p.120; Cox and Rich, 1964] and also in post-purchase behaviour (see, for example, LaBarbera and Mazursky, 1983; Mitchell, 1992).

Perceived risk receives special treatment from both practitioners and academics and has been considered in a broad range of areas including intercultural comparisons, food technology, dental services, banking, and apparel catalogue shopping (Mitchell, 1999). In


terms of linking perceived risk with religiosity, Delener (1990) investigated dissimilar characteristics of the predicted relationship between religiosity and perceived risk in purchase decisions of durable goods. Results suggest that religious consumers are more likely to be sensitive to any potentially negative consequences of their buying decisions, such as poor performance of an automobile or a microwave oven, than non-religious consumers. However, this study was limited to durable goods and concentrated on the performance and financial dimensions of perceived risk. The following section specifies the gap identification, research questions, and the conceptual framework.

5 Research questions and conceptual framework

The previous brief review of literature shows that despite the importance of religiosity in the lives of many consumers, there is still much we have to learn (Cleveland and Chang, 2009). For example, few studies have attempted to measure how consumer religiosity affects buyer behaviour in the market place (Swimberghe et al., 2011). Moreover, there are calls in the literature for research that develop a theoretical explanation for how religion affects consumer behaviour (Farah and Newman, 2010; Swimberghe et al., 2011).

Figure 1 Preliminary conceptual model

Non-religious ethical antecedents: Value system Belief system Strength of moral character Cognitive moral development Ethical sensitivity

Consumer religiosity

Consumer ethical

judgments

Perceived risk of using SNS

Psychological risk

Social risk

Source: Adopted from Swimberghe et al. (2011) based on the general theory of marketing ethics (Hunt and Vitell, 2006)

In a conservative Islamic society like Saudi Arabia, using SNS can introduce challenges to the culture, since users may overstep some religious boundaries. From the consumer perspective this may lead to concern about the perception of others about them, and other social risks. Furthermore, it may also lead to an effect on the consumers self perception, or psychological risk perception. These two classes of perceptions are formed by individual religiosity, which leads to our main research question:


RQ1 How does consumer religiosity affect consumer-perceived social and psychological risks associated with the adoption and use of SNS in a conservatively religious society?

The Preliminary Conceptual Model in Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the proposed relationship between religiosity and social and psychological risks associated with SNS using consumer ethical judgment as a mediator based on the general theory of marketing ethics (Hunt and Vitell, 2006; Swimberghe et al., 2011). Also, it distinguishes non-religious ethical antecedents such as value systems, belief systems, strength of moral character, cognitive moral development, and ethical sensitivity (see Figure 1).

However, Wilkes et al. (1986) state that demographics such as age, gender, education, and social class reveal numerous religiosity structural variable relationships of interest. This means that these demographic variables contribute to the relationship between consumer religiosity and consumer-perceived social and psychological risks of using SNS, which leads to our second research question:

RQ2 What are the roles of demographic characteristics, such as age, gender, education, and social class, in forming the relationship between consumer religiosity and consumer-perceived social and psychological risks associated with the adoption and use of SNS?

In addition, some discontinuities may occur between individual behaviour and the guidance of religious scholars, which may influence individual levels of religiosity (Arland et al., 1992). In Saudi Arabia, religious scholars have criticised SNS, claiming that they violate the boundaries of some fundamental religious laws. Some individuals have followed them and others have not. However, with the passage of time, SNS have become highly admired among many individuals, and even among various religious scholars themselves. Previous research has not explained this change of opinion. Characteristics of individual attitudes towards religious leaders may contribute significantly to the model shown in Figure 1 to provide a better understanding of the relationship between religiosity and risk perceptions. This leads to the third research question:

RQ3 How do consumers attitudes towards religious leaders affect the relationship between consumer religiosity and consumer-perceived social and psychological risks associated with the adoption and use of SNS?

6 Conclusions

The main aim of this conceptual article is to improve the theoretical understanding of how religion affects consumer behaviour by providing a comprehensive review of the relevant literature and also by proposing a conceptual framework adopted from the approach of the general theory of marketing ethics. It is assumed that the perceived social and psychological risks of SNS are affected by the level of consumer religiosity and are mediated by consumer ethical judgments. Also, non-religious ethical values and religious ethical values are distinguished. Furthermore, the role of individual demographics and the opinions of religious scholars in constructing the influences of religiosity on consumer risk perception are considered.


Finally, this paper contributes to the current research in three ways. Firstly, it is suggested that distinguishing between non-religious ethical antecedents and religious values will improve our understanding of the relationship between religiosity and consumer-perceived social and psychological risks associated with the adoption and use of SNS. Secondly, exploring the demographic effects on this relationship will improve the understanding of the nature of religiositys influences on consumer behaviour. Thirdly, exploring the role of the opinions of religious scholars on the relationship between religiosity and consumer behaviour will contribute to a theoretical understanding of the role of religiosity in how consumers perceive the risk of any new technology coming to a conservative society.

References Allport, G.W. and Ross, J.M. (1967) Personal religious orientation and prejudice, Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp.432443, doi:10.1037/h0021212. Arland, T., Axinn, W.G. and Hill, D.H. (1992) Reciprocal effects of religiosity, cohabitation, and

marriage, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 98, No. 3, pp.628651. Bailey, J.M. and Sood, J. (1993) The effects of religious affiliation on consumer behavior: a

preliminary investigation, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp.328352. Boyd, D.E. and Webb, K.L. (2008) Interorganizational ethical conflict within alliances: a

conceptual framework and research propositions, Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp.124, doi:10.1080/15470620801946397.

Choi, Y. (2010) Religion, religiosity, and South Korean consumer switching behaviors, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.157171, doi:10.1002/cb.292.

Clark, J.W. and Dawson, L.E. (1996) Personal religiousness and ethical judgements: an empirical analysis, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp.359372, doi:10.1007/bf00382959.

Cleveland, M. and Chang, W. (2009) Migration and materialism: the roles of ethnic identity, religiosity, and generation, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62, No. 10, pp.963971, doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.05.022.

Cohen, A.B. and Hill, P.C. (2007) Religion as culture: religious individualism and collectivism among American Catholics, Jews, and Protestants, Journal of Personality, Vol. 75, No. 4, pp.709742, doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00454.x.

Cornwell, B., Cui, C.C., Mitchell, V. and Schlegelmilch, B. (2005) A cross-cultural study of the role of religion in consumers ethical positions, International Marketing Review, Vol. 22, No. 5, pp.531546.

Cox, D. (1967) Introduction, in Cox, D.F. (Ed.): Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behaviour, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA.

Cox, D. and Rich, S. (1964) Perceived risk and consumer decision-making the case of telephone shopping, Journal of Marketing Research (pre-1986), Vol. 1, No. 000004, pp.3232.

Cunningham, S.M. (1967) The major dimensions of perceived risk, in Cox, D.F. (Ed.): Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behaviour, pp.28108, Graduate School of Business Administration, Boston, MA, USA.

Deaton, A. (2009) Aging, Religion and Health, August, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working Paper No. 15271, [online] http://www.nber.org/papers/w15271 (accessed 18 August 2011).

Delener, N. (1990) The effects of religious factors on perceived risk in durable goods purchase decisions, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp.2738.

Delener, N. (1994) Religious contrasts in consumer decision behaviour patterns: their dimensions and marketing implications, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp.3653.


Dutta, N.K. (1965) Attitudes of university students towards religion, Journal of Psychological Research, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.127130.

Ess, C., Kawabata, A. and Kurosaki, H. (2007) Cross-cultural perspectives on religion and computer-mediated communication, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp.939955, doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00357.x.

Farah, M.F. and Newman, A.J. (2010) Exploring consumer boycott intelligence using a socio-cognitive approach, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp.347355, doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.03.019.

Garner, S. (1986) Perceived risk and information sources in services purchasing, The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, Vol. 24, No. 2, p.49.

Guthrie, S., Agassi, J., Andriolo, K.R., Buchdahl, D., Earhart, H.B., Greenberg, M. and Tissot, G. (1980) A cognitive theory of religion [and comments and reply], Current Anthropology, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp.181203.

Hirschman, E.C. (1981) American Jewish ethnicity: its relationship to some selected aspects of consumer behavior, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp.102102.

Hirschman, E.C. (1983) Cognitive structure across consumer ethnic subcultures: a comparative analysis, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, No. 1, p.197.

Hood, R.W., Hill, P.C. and Spilka, B. (2009) The Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach 4th ed., The Guildford Press, New York, USA.

Hunt, S.D. and Vitell, S. (1986) A general theory of marketing ethics, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.516, doi:10.1177/027614678600600103.

Hunt, S.D. and Vitell, S.J. (2006) The general theory of marketing ethics: a revision and three questions, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp.143153, doi:10.1177/0276146706290923.

Kechichian, J.A. (1986) The role of the Ulama in the politics of an Islamic state: the case of Saudi Arabia, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp.5371.

LaBarbera, P.A. and Mazursky, D. (1983) A longitudinal assessment of consumer satisfaction/dissatisfaction: the dynamic aspect of the cognitive process, Journal of Marketing Research (pre-1986), Vol. 20, No. 000004, pp.393393.

Livingstone, S. (2008) Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression, New Media & Society, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp.393411, doi:10.1177/1461444808089415.

McDaniel, S. and Burnett, J. (1990) Consumer religiosity and retail store evaluative criteria, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp.101112, doi:10.1007/bf02726426.

Miller, A.S. and Hoffmann, J.P. (1995) Risk and religion: an explanation of gender differences in religiosity, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 34, No. 1, p.63.

Mitchell, V-W. (1992) Understanding consumers behaviour: can perceived risk theory help?, Management Decision, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp.2631.

Mitchell, V-W. (1999) Consumer perceived risk: conceptualisations and models, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, Nos. 1/2, pp.163195.

Mitchell, V-W. and Harris, G. (2005) The importance of consumers perceived risk in retail strategy, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39, Nos. 7/8, pp.821837.

Moaddel, M. (2006) The Saudi public speak: religion, gender, politics, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 38, No. 01, pp.79108, doi:10.1017/S0020743806412265.

Mokhlis, S. (2006) The effect of religiosity on shopping orientation: an exploratory study in Malaysia, Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.6474, Cambridge.

Muncy, J.A. and Vitell, S.J. (1992) Consumer ethics: an investigation of the ethical beliefs of the final consumer, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp.297311, doi:10.1016/0148-2963(92)90036-b.


Nittin, E. and Sally, D. (2004) Religious influences on shopping behaviour: an exploratory study, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 20, Nos. 78, pp.683712.

Nyland, R. and Near, C. (2007) Jesus is my friend: religiosity as a mediating factor in internet social networking use, paper presented at The AEJMC Midwinter Conference, 2324 February, Reno, Nevada, USA.

Reidenbach, R.E. and Robin, D.P. (1990) Toward the development of a multidimensional scale for improving evaluations of business ethics, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 9, No. 8, pp.639653, doi:10.1007/bf00383391.

Schneider, H., Krieger, J. and Bayraktar, A. (2011) The impact of intrinsic religiosity on consumers ethical beliefs: does it depend on the type of religion? A comparison of Christian and Moslem consumers in Germany and Turkey, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 102, No. 2, pp.319332, doi:10.1007/s10551-011-0816-y.

Schuman, H. (1971) The religious factor in Detroit: review, replication, and reanalysis, American Sociological Review, February, Vol. 36, pp.3048.

Sean, Y., Debo, D. and Gopal, D. (2009) Extrapolating psychological Insights from Facebook profiles: a study of religion and relationship status, CyberPsychology & Behavior, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp.347350.

Sood, J. and Nasu, Y. (1995) Religiosity and nationality: an exploratory study of their effect on consumer behavior in Japan and the United States, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp.19, doi:10.1016/0148-2963(94)00015-7.

Swimberghe, K., Flurry, L. and Parker, J. (2011) Consumer religiosity: consequences for consumer activism in the United States, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 103, No. 3, pp.115, doi:10.1007/s10551-011-0873-2.

Tarakeshwar, N., Stanton, J. and Pargament, K.I. (2003) Religion, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp.377394, doi:10.1177/0022022103034004001.

Vitell, S. (2009) The role of religiosity in business and consumer ethics: a review of the literature, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 90, No. 0, pp.155167, doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0382-8.

Vitell, S. and Muncy, J. (2005) The Muncy-Vitell consumer ethics scale: a modification and application, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 62, No. 3, pp.267275, doi:10.1007/s10551-005-7058-9.

Vitell, S.J. and Muncy, J. (1992) Consumer ethics: an empirical investigation of factors influencing ethical judgments of the final consumer, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11, No. 8, pp.585597, doi:10.1007/bf00872270.

Vitell, S.J. and Paolillo, J.G.P. (2003) Consumer ethics: the role of religiosity, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 46, No. 2, pp.151162, doi:10.1023/a:1025081005272.

Welch, K.W. (1981) An interpersonal influence model of traditional religious commitment, Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp.8192, doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.1981.tb02210.x.

Wilkes, R., Burnett, J. and Howell, R. (1986) On the meaning and measurement of religiosity in consumer research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.4756, doi:10.1007/bf02722112.

Documents

The Relationship Between Consumers’ Religiosity and Risk Perceptions Surrounding the Use of SNS