Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
OJS: https://revistascientificas.uach.mx/index.php/economicus
ISSN: 3061-8169
How to cite / Como citar:
Chapa, S., & Bravo, O. S. C. (2025). How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude toward boycotting a company in a
multicultural marketplace. Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights, 2(2), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.54167/ejbei.v2i2.1961
Este artículo está bajo los términos de la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución/Reconocimiento NoComercial 4.0 Internacional.
This article is under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internacional License.
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
Article
How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude
toward boycotting a company in a multicultural
marketplace
Cómo los valores culturales y la etnia influyen en la
actitud hacia el boicot a una compañía en un mercado
multicultural
Sindy Chapa 1*, Olivia S. C. Bravo 2
1 Center for Hispanic Marketing Communication, Florida State University, Florida, United States of America;
schapa@fsu.edu; ORCID: 0000-0002-3462-2487
2 Caribbean School of Media and Communication, Faculty of Humanities and Education, The University of the
West Indies, Mona Campus, Kingston, Jamaica; olivia.bravo@uwimona.edu.jm; ORCID: 0000-0002-7914-7990
* Correspondence author / Autor de correspondencia
Received: 01/25/2025; Accepted: 04/13/2025; Published: 07/01/2025.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54167/ejbei.v2i2.1961
Abstract: This study investigates the influence of Hofstede’s cultural values on consumer attitudes toward
boycotting corporations within a multicultural national context. Utilizing data from a diverse U.S. sample
(N=2,574), multiple regression and ANOVA analyses were conducted to examine the predictive power of cultural
dimensions and ethnic differences on boycott attitudes. Results indicate that collectivism, power distance,
masculinity, long-term orientation, and indulgence significantly influence consumers’ boycott attitudes, explaining
a modest but meaningful portion of the variance. Notably, African American/Black participants exhibited the most
positive boycott attitudes, highlighting the interplay of cultural values and socio-historical factors. These findings
underscore the importance of considering both cultural and contextual factors in understanding consumer boycott
behavior, offering valuable insights for marketers and scholars studying multicultural consumer markets.
Keywords: Consumer Boycotts, Cultural Values, Hofstede’s Dimensions, Collectivism, Multicultural Markets,
Ethnic Differences, Consumer Behavior, Attitude Prediction.
JEL Classification: M31, D12, D91.
Sindy Chapa, Olivia S. C. Bravo 2
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
Resumen: Este estudio investiga la influencia de los valores culturales de Hofstede en las actitudes de los
consumidores hacia el boicot a empresas dentro de un contexto nacional multicultural. Utilizando datos de una
muestra diversa de los Estados Unidos (N=2,574), se realizaron análisis de regresión múltiple y ANOVA para
examinar el poder predictivo de las dimensiones culturales y las diferencias étnicas sobre las actitudes hacia el
boicot. Los resultados indican que el colectivismo, la distancia al poder, la masculinidad, la orientación a largo
plazo y la indulgencia influyen significativamente en las actitudes de boicot de los consumidores, explicando una
porción modesta pero significativa de la varianza. De manera destacada, los participantes afroamericanos/negros
mostraron las actitudes más positivas hacia el boicot, lo que resalta la interacción entre los valores culturales y los
factores socio-históricos. Estos hallazgos subrayan la importancia de considerar tanto los factores culturales como
contextuales para comprender el comportamiento del consumidor en boicots, ofreciendo valiosos conocimientos
para mercadólogos y académicos que estudian mercados multiculturales.
Palabras clave: Boicots de Consumidores, Valores Culturales, Dimensiones de Hofstede, Colectivismo, Mercados
Multiculturales, Diferencias Étnicas, Comportamiento del Consumidor, Predicción de Actitudes.
Clasificación JEL: M31, D12, D91.
1. Introduction
Consumers’ refusal to support a brand in protest of its position on social, political, or environmental
issues has become a prevalent response in today’s marketplace (Weber Shandwick, 2018; Vredenburg &
Spry, 2022). In the United States, one in two adults report having boycotted a company (Bruce, 2020),
while in the United Kingdom, the figure stands at one in five (Harmston, 2017). Additionally, a global
study on consumer attitudes toward corporate social responsibility (CSR) found that over half of
respondents would be willing to boycott a brand based on its social or political stance (Harmston, 2017).
These findings suggest that consumer perceptions of CSR increasingly influence purchasing behavior,
with companies perceived as socially irresponsible or unsupportive facing consumer backlash (Palma-
Ruiz et al., 2020). While boycotts may not always result in changes to corporate behavior (King, 2008;
Koku, 2012), they can cause significant harm to a brand’s financial performance, image, and reputation
(Garrett, 1987; Koku, 2012; McDonnell & King, 2013; Pruitt & Friedman, 1986). As such, understanding
the drivers and barriers of consumer boycott behavior has become an area of growing interest among
both academics and practitioners.
While academic interest in consumer boycott behavior has grown, much of the research has focused
on culturally homogeneous marketplaces—contexts characterized by a shared and uniform culture.
However, many of the countries where boycott participation is most prevalent (e.g., U.S., Canada, Italy,
and U.K.; Hoffmann, 2014) are multicultural marketplaces. A multicultural marketplace is defined as a
“place-centered environment (whether physical or virtual) where the marketers, consumers, brands,
ideologies, and institutions of multiple cultures converge at one point of concurrent interaction”
(Demangeot et al., 2015, p. 118).
Despite the unique challenges and opportunities that multicultural marketplaces present to brands,
research remains limited on how consumers’ cultural values interact with and influence boycott behavior
in these complex environments. These marketplaces often include sizable ethnic subcultures (Jamal, 2003)
that can exert substantial economic influence (Korzenny et al., 2017). Purchasing decisions among
consumers within these subcultures are shaped by distinct cultural values (Briley, 2009), yet these values
remain poorly understood by many marketing managers. De Mooij (2022) argues that marketers often
overlook key cultural differences within target segments, opting instead for generalized, universal
How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude toward boycotting a company in a multicultural marketplace 3
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
assumptions. This issue is further complicated by the evolving nature of consumers’ cultural values, as
they navigate diverse sociocultural experiences that shape their beliefs, identities, and purchasing
behavior.
To date, only one study has examined consumer boycott behavior from a multicultural marketplace
perspective. Hoffmann (2014) found a significant relationship between cultural values and consumer
boycott behavior across multiple countries. However, that study did not explore how cultural value
differences influence boycott intentions within a single multicultural market. Thus, while Hoffmann’s
(2014) work provides a foundation, it also highlights the need for deeper inquiry.
Further research is needed to understand how cultural values influence boycott behavior among
and between different cultural groups within a specific multicultural context. Recent cross-cultural
studies suggest that although each country may exhibit characteristic consumption patterns, cultural
influences on consumer behavior are dynamic and context-dependent (Chiu et al., 2014). Consumers may
draw upon the cultural norms most salient in a given context or use consumption to express relational
identity or cultural affiliation (Chiu et al., 2014). Moreover, individuals may adopt value orientations that
diverge from the dominant norms of their ethnic or cultural group (de Mooij & Beniflah, 2017).
Consequently, it is problematic for marketers to assume that all members of a cultural segment will
respond uniformly when deciding whether to boycott a brand.
In response to this gap, the present study investigates how the cultural values of consumers from
different ethnic groups influence their intentions to boycott a company within a multicultural market.
Focusing on the United States—a large, diverse, and prominent site of consumer activism—this research
seeks to identify the cultural values that play a critical role in shaping boycott behavior within and across
ethnic groups.
This study holds considerable relevance for understanding consumer boycotts, multicultural
consumer behavior, global market dynamics, business strategy, social and political impact, ethical
considerations, brand reputation, and academic theory. Cultural values, as emphasized by Hofstede
(1980), Yoo et al. (2011), and Czinkota and Ronkainen (2010), are key determinants of individual attitudes
and responses toward boycott actions. For businesses, understanding these values is essential to crafting
culturally responsive strategies, anticipating potential boycotts, and managing brand reputation.
Academically, this study enriches the literature by deepening our understanding of the complex
interplay between culture and consumer behavior in multicultural settings.
2. Literature review and hypotheses
2.1. Cultural values in a multicultural marketplace
Values are the foundation of a society’s culture (de Mooij, 2022) and a central element of how
individuals define themselves (Sagiv & Schwartz, 2022). They represent enduring beliefs or internal
standards that guide people’s attitudes, preferences, and behaviors (de Mooij, 2022; Schwartz & Bardi,
2001). Values are shaped by a society’s culture, learned through socialization, and may be passed down
intergenerationally (Marcus & Cetin, 2023; Sagiv & Schwartz, 2022).
At the macro level, values manifest as cultural values—those shared by a society or cultural group
(de Mooij, 2022). At the micro level, individuals hold cultural value orientations, which reflect the specific
values each person considers important. The distinction between these two is critical, as individuals may
identify with a cultural group yet prioritize values that differ from those commonly held within that
group (Chiu et al., 2014; de Mooij, 2022).
Theories of values, such as those by Hofstede (2011), and Sagiv and Schwartz (2022), were developed
to classify and compare national cultures. These frameworks propose that all cultural groups possess
similar value dimensions, but each group assigns different levels of importance to them (Gerlach &
Sindy Chapa, Olivia S. C. Bravo 4
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
Eriksson, 2021). Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Framework is the most widely applied, and includes six
dimensions:
1. Power distance (acceptance of unequal power distribution),
2. Individualism vs. collectivism (preference for self/family interests vs. group/community goals),
3. Masculinity vs. femininity (value placed on assertiveness and role differentiation),
4. Uncertainty avoidance (tolerance of ambiguity),
5. Long- vs. short-term orientation (focus on future goals vs. immediate outcomes), and
6. Indulgence vs. restraint (gratification of desires vs. societal regulation of needs).
The United States is one of the most culturally diverse consumer markets. Some studies have found
significant cultural value differences among ethnic groups (Hofstede, 1980, 2011), while others suggest a
convergence of values toward mainstream norms (de Mooij & Beniflah, 2017; Vargas & Kemmelmeier,
2012). For example, using Hofstede’s framework, de Mooij and Beniflah (2017) found that most ethnic
groups in the U.S.—with the exception of Chinese Americans—shared cultural values similar to non-
Hispanic whites. Chinese Americans scored significantly lower on individualism. These findings align
with prior research indicating that Chinese Americans tend to be more collectivistic and less
individualistic than European Americans (Coon & Kemmelmeier, 2001; Oyserman et al., 2002; Vargas &
Kemmelmeier, 2012).
A meta-analysis by Oyserman et al. (2002) also revealed that African Americans scored higher on
individualism than European Americans, while Hispanic Americans did not differ significantly from
European Americans on that dimension. Much of this body of research has focused predominantly on
the individualism–collectivism dimension, often neglecting other aspects of cultural variation.
To address this gap and build upon the findings of de Mooij and Beniflah (2017), the present study
examines all six of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. It employs the Individual Cultural Values Scale
(CVSCALE) developed by Yoo et al. (2011), which enables the measurement of individual-level cultural
values (excluding indulgence/restraint). This distinction is important, as individual value orientations
may not align with group-level cultural norms. Indeed, de Mooij and Beniflah (2017) cautioned against
applying Hofstede’s framework—originally intended for national-level comparisons—to ethnic groups
within the same country, noting that these groups share the same institutions, holidays, and public
figures.
Consequently, this study poses the following research question:
RQ1: What are the significant differences in cultural value orientations among the major racial and ethnic
groups in the United States?
Variations in core values influenced by cultural origins are well documented among consumers
from different ethnic backgrounds (Kim et al., 2002). Cultural theories suggest that social norms, customs,
and unique historical experiences inherent to each group shape cultural values, which in turn influence
consumer behavior (Hofstede, 2011; Triandis, 1998; Luna et al., 2001; Schwartz, 1994). Building on this
theoretical framework, the study also seeks to address a second research question:
RQ2: How do cultural value orientations help explain differences in boycott attitudes across major racial and
ethnic groups in the United States?
2.2. Linking cultural values to attitude towards boycotting
An individual’s attitudes and behaviors are shaped by the norms, beliefs, and values embedded
within their cultural environment (Triandis, 1998). The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991)
offers a theoretical framework to understand how cultural values may influence consumer behavior such
as boycotting. According to TPB, cultural values indirectly shape an individual’s attitudes toward specific
How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude toward boycotting a company in a multicultural marketplace 5
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
behaviors by informing their beliefs about those behaviors and their potential consequences. In the
context of boycotting, cultural values can shape how an individual perceives the efficacy, morality, or
social implications of such an action. These attitudes, in combination with subjective norms and perceived
behavioral control, influence one’s intention to boycott, which in turn predicts actual boycott behavior
(Ajzen, 1991).
Despite the relevance of cultural context to consumer decision-making, there remains a notable gap
in the literature: no prior studies have examined how cultural values influence boycott attitudes within
a single multicultural national context. Most existing research has taken a cross-national approach.
Notably, Hoffmann’s (2014) 36-country study demonstrated that cultural values significantly impact
boycott intention and participation. Using the GLOBE framework (House et al., 2004), Hoffmann found
that five out of the nine cultural value dimensions were significantly correlated with boycott intentions.
Given the established relationship between attitudes and intentions (Ajzen, 1991), and building on
Hoffmann’s (2014) findings, this study aims to examine cultural influences on boycott attitudes at the
intranational level. Accordingly, the third research question guiding this inquiry is as follows:
RQ3: What cultural values are significant predictors of individuals’ attitudes toward boycotting a product or
brand within the United States?
2.3. Hypothesis and methodology
Research on behaviors conceptually adjacent to consumer boycotting suggests that cultural values
may influence individuals’ attitudes toward such actions. For instance, Xu et al. (2021) found that
individuals with low power distance beliefs—which reflect one’s views on inequality in social
hierarchies—were more likely to react negatively toward companies engaged in unethical conduct. This
reaction is partly due to heightened empathy for victims and intensified perceptions of harm and moral
transgression.
Consumer boycotting has often been conceptualized as a prosocial behavior—a voluntary action
intended to benefit others without expectation of personal reward (Klein et al., 2004; Sen et al., 2001).
However, high power distance beliefs have been associated with reduced prosocial behaviors, such as
charitable giving (Winterich & Zhang, 2014). Individuals high in power distance often prefer rigid
hierarchies, discourage emotional expression, and adhere to strict behavioral norms (Carl et al., 2004;
Hofstede, 2011), potentially perceiving boycott behavior as socially inappropriate or destabilizing. Thus,
the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: Power distance negatively affects consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting a company.
Individualism versus collectivism is among the most extensively studied cultural dimensions (Chen
& Unal, 2023; Swaidan et al., 2008). Individualists have been shown to be more likely to engage in
prosocial behaviors such as helping strangers and volunteering (Winterich & Zhang, 2014). However,
collectivists also engage in consumer complaint behavior—conceptually related to boycotting—though
often through different mechanisms (Chapa et al., 2014). While individualists may voice dissatisfaction
publicly, collectivists may prefer a quieter withdrawal to preserve harmony and save face (Markus &
Kitayama, 1991).
Boycotting, however, is a more instrumental and visible behavior than silent exit or private
complaint (Friedman, 1991; Sen et al., 2001). We argue that collectivists may support boycotting if it aligns
with community values, helps redress unethical corporate behavior, or serves to protect the collective
well-being. Therefore:
H2: Collectivism positively affects consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting a company.
Sindy Chapa, Olivia S. C. Bravo 6
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
The masculinity/femininity dimension of culture has primarily been studied in relation to product
preferences and self-concept (Ekebas-Turedi et al., 2021; Kimmel & Tissier-Desbordes, 1999), with limited
attention to its role in boycott behavior. Existing research provides mixed insights: Nelson et al. (2006)
report that masculine cultures feel a stronger obligation to help others, whereas Winterich and Zhang
(2014) find a negative association between masculinity and helping behavior. We posit that individuals
with stronger masculine values may favor boycotting because it can be seen as a direct and forceful way
to correct corporate misconduct—aligning with masculine ideals of assertiveness, leadership, and moral
responsibility (Hofstede, 2011). Thus:
H3: Masculinity positively affects consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting a company.
Uncertainty avoidance reflects the extent to which individuals feel uncomfortable with ambiguity
(Hofstede, 2011). High uncertainty avoidance is associated with preference for stability, resistance to
change, and adherence to rules and traditions. In contrast, low uncertainty avoidance aligns with
openness to change, political engagement, and protest behaviors. Since boycotting is a form of protest
that challenges the status quo (Dekhil et al., 2017; Ritson & Dobscha, 1999), we argue that individuals
with lower uncertainty avoidance may view it more positively. Additionally, research shows that high
uncertainty avoidant consumers tend to exhibit stronger brand loyalty (Lam, 2008), which could inhibit
boycott participation (Dekhil et al., 2017). Therefore:
H4: Uncertainty avoidance negatively affects consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting a company.
Long-term orientation refers to a future-oriented mindset characterized by persistence, planning,
and sacrifice for long-term gains (Hofstede et al., 2010). In contrast, short-term orientation emphasizes
tradition, immediate gratification, and maintaining one’s reputation. Prior studies indicate that long-term
orientation influences both ethical judgment (Nevins et al., 2006) and prosocial behavior (Winterich &
Zhang, 2014). Individuals with a long-term outlook may view boycotting favorably if it serves as a moral
stand that contributes to future improvements in corporate behavior or product quality. Accordingly:
H5: Long-term orientation positively affects consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting a product.
Indulgence reflects the degree to which a culture values gratification, enjoyment, and fun (Hofstede,
2011). Cultures high in indulgence often encourage spontaneous consumption and emotional expression,
sometimes at the expense of long-term financial planning (Nicholls et al., 2000). In the context of
consumer behavior, indulgence may reduce one’s willingness to forgo consumption—central to the act
of boycotting. Nixon’s (1992) account of the South African sports boycott illustrates this tension:
indulgence was in conflict with the self-restraint required for moral action. Based on this interpretation,
we posit:
H6: Indulgence negatively affects consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting a product.
Ethnic identity, closely linked to cultural values, is theorized to influence individual attitudes
(Ajzen, 1991). Research has shown significant variation in boycott participation across ethnic groups in
the U.S., with White consumers more likely to engage in boycott behaviors than their Asian,
Black/African American, and Hispanic counterparts (Baek, 2010; Stepler & Ishizawa, 2021). Based on
these findings, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H7: Consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting a product differ among Non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, African
American/Black, and Asian consumers residing in the United States.
How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude toward boycotting a company in a multicultural marketplace 7
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
3. Method
Data were collected using a national online panel in collaboration with Dynata Marketing. A total of
3,500 surveys were initially completed. After removing incomplete responses and unreliable cases, the
final valid sample comprised 2,574 participants. The sample included 56% females, with a median age of
35 years, a median annual income level between $50,000 and $59,000, and a median educational
attainment of some college education. Regarding ethnic identification, 38% identified as Non-Hispanic
White, 20.5% as Hispanic, 16% as African American or Black, 28% as Asian American, and 2.9% as other
ethnic groups. Additional details on sample characteristics are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Sample characteristics.
Baseline characteristic
sample
%
Gender
Female
43.0
Male
Not listed
56.7
0.3
Marital status
Single
33.3
Married/partnered
51.5.3
Divorced
10.4
Widowed
2.5
Not answered
0.8
With Children
24.1
Highest educational level
Elementary/Middle school
1.2
High school
21.2
Bachelor
27.5
Postgraduate degree
15.7
Employment
Unemployed
36.1
Student
9.3
Employed
52.9
Prefer not to answer
14.0
Ethnicity/Race
Non-Hispanic White
38.7
Hispanic
20.5
African American/Black
16.1
Asian American
21.8
Other
2.9
Age
18-29
27.0
30-44
24.4
45-54
14.5
55-64
16.6
65 +
17.6
Source: Authors.
3.1. Instruments
Hofstede’s five cultural dimensions were measured using the 26-item Cultural Value Scale
(CVSCALE) developed by Yoo et al. (2011), which assesses individual-level values across Power
Distance, Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty Avoidance, and Long-Term Orientation. Items for
each dimension were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). The sixth
Sindy Chapa, Olivia S. C. Bravo 8
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
dimension, Indulgence versus Restraint, was measured using an individual-level scale adapted from
Heydari et al. (2021).
Attitudes toward boycotting large corporations were measured using a 6-item semantic differential
scale adapted from Delistavrou (2022), assessing perceptions of boycotting as useful, advantageous, fair,
good, reasonable, and desirable.
Demographic variables, including ethnicity, age, income, and education, were collected in the
demographic section of the survey.
3.1.1. Validation of the measures
This study’s analyses concentrated on a number of latent constructs, all of which were evaluated
using seven-point scales, as suggested by Hair et al. (2010) for the assessment of continuous variables.
The internal validity of the scales was assessed via exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability
analysis. EFAs confirmed that items loaded on their respective constructs, except for one item from the
Power Distance scale, which was removed due to low factor loading (< 0.40). All constructs demonstrated
acceptable factor variances (> 0.50) and Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities exceeding 0.70, indicating adequate
internal consistency (see Table 2).
Table 2. Exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach’s alphas.
Measure
Factor
Power Distance
People in higher positions should make most decisions without consulting people in lower positions
0.851
People in higher positions should not ask the opinions of people in lower positions too frequently
0.864
People in lower positions should not disagree with decisions by people in higher positions
0.847
People in higher positions should not delegate important tasks to people in lower positions
0.802
Total of Variance
70.8%
Cronbach’s alpha
0.860
Collectivism
Individuals should sacrifice self-interest for the group
0.717
Individuals should stick with the group even through difficulties
0.718
Group welfare is more important than an individual's reward
0.808
Group success is more important than individual success
0.819
Individuals should only pursue their goals after considering the welfare of the group
0.790
Group loyalty should be encouraged even if individual goals suffer
0.772
Total of Variance
59.9%
Cronbach’s alpha
0.863
Masculinity
Men usually solve problems with logical analysis; women usually solve problems with intuition
0.843
Solving difficult problems usually requires an active, forcible approach, which is typical of men
0.873
There are some jobs that a man can always do better than a woman
0.776
It is more important for men to have a professional career than it is for women
0.805
Total of Variance
66.3%
Cronbach’s alpha
0.826
Uncertainty Avoidance
It is important to closely follow instructions and procedures
0.596
Rules and regulations are important because they inform me of what is expected of me
0.877
Standardized work procedures are helpful
0.880
Instructions for operations are important
0.839
It is important to closely follow instructions and procedures
0.851
Total of Variance
66.5%
Cronbach’s alpha
0.856
Long-Term Oriented
I am a long-term planning person
0.805
How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude toward boycotting a company in a multicultural marketplace 9
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
Source: Authors.
4. Results
4.1. Hypotheses testing
Multiple regression was used to test if cultural values significantly predicted consumers’ attitude
towards boycotting. The results showed the model to be significant, F(6, 2574) = 30.04, p < 0.001. However,
the adjusted R2 was 0.07, indicating that cultural values explained less than 10% of the variance in boycott
attitude. In terms of hypotheses testing, the unstandardized coefficients were analyzed. As expected, the
results showed that power distance (B = -0.069, p < 0.001) is a significant negative predictor of attitudes
toward boycotting. That is, the lower the levels of power distance of the consumers, the more likely it is
to have a positive attitude toward boycotting a product or brand. Thus, H1 is supported. See results in
Table 3.
Table 3. Unstandardized coefficient effect of cultural values on attitude towards boycotting.
Effect
Estimate
SE
beta
p-value
Intercept
2.929
0.225
0.000
Power distance
-0.069
0.028
-0.057
0.014
Collectivism
0.177
0.033
0.122
0.000
Masculinity
-0.130
0.026
-0.114
0.000
Uncertainty Avoidance
0.040
0.037
0.025
0.272
Long-Term Orientation
0.083
0.035
0.059
0.019
Indulgence
0.187
0.040
0.116
0.000
Source: Authors.
Next, the regression results showed collectivism (B = 0.177, p < 0.001) to influence consumers’
attitudes toward boycotting. That is, the more group-oriented, the higher the consumer’s attitudes
toward boycotting, and so H2 is supported. In terms of masculinity, the test showed the value (B = -0.13,
p < 0.001) to be a statistically significant predictor. However, contrary to what was hypothesized, the
results showed a negative effect. This means that individuals with less masculine characteristics will be
more prone to express a more positive attitude towards boycotting. Thus, H3 is partially supported.
Giving up today’s fun for success in the future
0.823
Working hard for success in the future
0.823
Total of Variance
70%
Cronbach’s alpha
0.750
Restraint vs Indulgence
I manage my money carefully
0.763
Going resolutely in spite
0.753
Personal Steadiness and stability
0.830
Total of Variance
61.2%
Cronbach’s alpha
0.710
Boycott Perception
Non beneficial/Beneficial
0.853
Useless/Useful
0.887
Unfair/Fair
0.902
Bad/Good
0.923
Unreasonable/ Reasonable
0.916
Undesirable/Desirable
0.895
Total of Variance
80.3%
Cronbach’s alpha
0.950
Sindy Chapa, Olivia S. C. Bravo 10
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
Regarding the effect of the level of uncertainty avoidance, the results showed no significant impact
on attitude toward boycotting. Thus, H4 is rejected. See Table 3. Further, the long-term orientation value
was found to be a significant positive predictor of consumers’ attitudes toward boycotting (B = 0.083, p =
0.019). Thus, H5 is supported. In terms of indulgence vs. restraint, the variable was measured using a
restraint scale as opposed to indulgence. The results showed a significant positive effect (B = 0.187, p <
0.001). Thus, H6 is partially supported. In other words, it was found that consumers who exhibited lower
indulgence were more likely to have a positive attitude toward boycotting.
To compare the effect of attitudes toward boycotting among ethnic groups, a one-way ANOVA
between groups was run between Non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanic Americans, African
Americans/Blacks, and Asian Americans. The results showed a significant group difference (F= 4.06, p =
0.003). Further, a Univariate Bonferroni test indicated a statistical difference when comparing African
Americans/Blacks with Non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans. The mean
difference test showed African Americans had more positive attitudes toward boycotting than Asian
Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Non-Hispanic Whites, in that order. In addition, the results showed
no significant difference between the other three groups. Therefore, H7 is partially supported. See results
in Table 4.
Table 4. One-way ANOVA comparing attitude towards boycotting across ethnic groups.
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
42.114
4
10.529
4.064
0.003
Univariate Bonferroni Test
African American
Mean Difference
Sig.
Non-Hispanic White
0.33846
0.007
Hispanics
0.34845
0.018
Asian Americans
0.36568
0.008
Others
0.55394
0.081
Source: Authors.
4.2. Exploring the research questions
A one-way between-groups ANOVA was conducted to compare cultural value orientations among
Non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanic Americans, African Americans/Blacks, and Asian Americans (RQ1). The
analysis revealed significant differences across ethnic groups in power distance [F(4, 3477) = 5.768, p <
0.001], collectivism [F(4, 3476) = 6.019, p < 0.001], and masculinity [F(4, 3470) = 8.2, p < 0.001]. Post hoc
Bonferroni tests indicated that Non-Hispanic Whites exhibited significantly lower power distance (M =
2.95, SD = 1.49) than both Hispanic Americans (M = 3.23, SD = 1.45) and African Americans/Blacks (M =
3.21, SD = 1.62). Asian Americans reported significantly higher collectivism (M = 4.5, SD = 1.24) compared
to Non-Hispanic Whites (M = 4.42, SD = 1.13), while no other significant differences in collectivism were
observed among the remaining groups. Masculinity scores were significantly lower for Non-Hispanic
Whites (M = 3.45, SD = 1.48) relative to African Americans/Blacks (M = 3.8, SD = 1.49), Hispanic Americans
(M = 3.73, SD = 1.5), and Asian Americans (M = 3.71, SD = 1.34).
A subsequent multiple linear regression analysis assessed the influence of cultural value
orientations on boycott attitudes, revealing a modest yet significant effect (RQ2). Standardized regression
coefficients identified collectivism as the strongest predictor of consumer boycott attitudes (RQ3; see
Table 3). Additionally, lower levels of indulgence and masculinity also significantly predicted more
positive attitudes toward boycotting.
How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude toward boycotting a company in a multicultural marketplace 11
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
5. Discussion and limitations
This study examined cultural values across racial and ethnic groups within a multicultural
intranational context, aiming to identify the key cultural dimensions shaping consumer attitudes toward
boycotting companies. It also recognized the adaptive and dynamic nature of cultural values among
consumers.
Findings demonstrate that cultural values significantly predict consumers’ boycott attitudes in
multicultural markets, aligning with the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991), which posits that
underlying beliefs and values shape behavioral attitudes. Although the overall effect size was modest,
all cultural values except uncertainty avoidance significantly contributed to explaining boycott attitudes.
Collectivism emerged as the most influential predictor: consumers emphasizing group welfare were
more likely to endorse boycotting, likely because such behavior benefits their in-group while preserving
self-esteem and reputation.
Interestingly, Asian Americans reported the highest collectivism but did not express the most
positive boycott attitudes. Conversely, African Americans/Blacks showed the most favorable boycott
attitudes despite having collectivism scores comparable to other groups. This suggests that cultural
values alone do not fully explain boycott attitudes; socio-historical experiences, normative beliefs, and
moral orientations also play important roles. For example, the historical legacy of protest and boycotting
within African American communities (National Humanities Center, 2007) may cultivate a collective
acceptance of such actions as legitimate forms of social response. Furthermore, Swaidan et al. (2008)
found that African American participants high in collectivism and low in masculinity reported greater
moral idealism—adherence to universal moral principles irrespective of context.
The divergence between highest collectivism (Asian Americans) and most positive boycott attitudes
(African Americans/Blacks) highlights the need for marketers and researchers to integrate socio-political
and historical contexts when examining consumer boycott behavior.
Moreover, the fact that African Americans/Blacks had the most positive boycott attitudes contrasts
with prior research indicating higher boycott participation among White consumers (Baek, 2010; Stepler
& Ishizawa, 2021). This suggests a potential attitude-behavior gap. According to the Theory of Planned
Behavior, positive attitudes should predict behavior; however, barriers such as limited access to
substitute products and skepticism about boycott efficacy may inhibit actual participation. Perceived and
actual behavioral control and situational constraints likely influence whether positive attitudes translate
into action. Overall, this exploratory study reinforces the relevance of cultural values in consumer boycott
behavior while acknowledging ethnic differences in values and attitudes.
Despite these contributions, some limitations merit consideration. The use of an online panel sample
raises concerns about potential selection bias; future research should incorporate non-response bias tests
to enhance validity. The relatively small representation of Asians from Western countries limits
generalizability for this subgroup. Additionally, data collection was restricted to the U.S., limiting
applicability to other multicultural contexts. To improve robustness, replication studies in similarly
diverse countries, such as England or Australia, are recommended. Further research should also explore
urban-rural differences and age cohort effects to capture a more comprehensive understanding of
consumer boycott attitudes across demographic segments.
CRediT Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.C., & O.B.; methodology, S.C.; software, O.B.; validation, S.C.;
formal analysis, S.C.; investigation, O.B.; resources, S.C.; data curation, O.B.; writing—original draft preparation,
S.C., & O.B.; writing—review and editing, S.C.; visualization, O.B.; supervision, S.C. “All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.”
Conflicts of Interest: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”
Sindy Chapa, Olivia S. C. Bravo 12
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
Important Note: A preliminary version of this article has been previously published as a pre-print and is available
on SSRN at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4823087 or via DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4823087.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–
211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t
Baek, Y. M. (2010). To Buy or Not to Buy: Who are Political Consumers? What do they Think and How do they
Participate? Political Studies, 58(5), 1065–1086. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00832.x
Briley, D. A. (2009). Cultural Influence on Consumer Motivations: A Dynamic View. In: C. Nakata (Ed.) Beyond
Hofstede. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230240834_9
Bruce, G. (2020, July 15). Half of Americans Have Boycotted a Brand. YouGov.
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/30888-brand-boycotts
Carl, D., Gupta, V., & Javidan, M. (2004). Power Distance. In V. Gupta, P. Dorfman, M. Javidan, P. Hanges, & R.
House (Eds.), Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies (pp. 513–563). Sage
Publications.
Chapa, O., Hernandez, M. D., Wang, Y. J., & Skalski, C. (2014). Do Individualists Complain More than Collectivists?
A Four-Country Analysis on Consumer Complaint Behavior. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 26(5),
373–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2014.933089
Chen, C., & Unal, A. (2023, June 21). Individualism-Collectivism: A Review of Conceptualization and
Measurement. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and
Management. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.350
Chiu, C. Y., Kwan, L. Y. Y., Li, D., Peng, L., & Peng, S. (2014). Culture and consumer behavior. Foundations and Trends
in Marketing, 7(2), 109–179. https://doi.org/10.1561/1700000032
Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2001). Cultural Orientations in the United States: (Re)Examining Differences
among Ethnic Groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 348–364.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032003006
Czinkota, M. R., & Ronkainen, I. A. (2011). Global business: positioning ventures ahead. Routledge.
https://www.routledge.com/Global-Business-Positioning-Ventures-Ahead/Czinkota-
Ronkainen/p/book/9780415801942
de Mooij, M., & Beniflah, J. (2017). Measuring Cross-Cultural Differences of Ethnic Groups within Nations:
Convergence or Divergence of Cultural Values? The Case of the United States. Journal of International Consumer
Marketing, 29(1), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2016.1227758
de Mooij, M. (2022). Global Marketing and advertising: Understanding cultural paradoxes (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
Dekhil, F., Jridi, H., & Farhat, H. (2017). Effect of Religiosity on the Decision to Participate in a Boycott. Journal of
Islamic Marketing, 8(2), 309–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/jima-01-2013-0008
Delistavrou, A. (2022). Theory of Planned Behaviour and Boycotting: The Moderating Role of Socio-Political Control
and Demographics. EuroMed Journal of Business, 17(2), 270–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/emjb-02-2021-0020
Demangeot, C., Broderick, A. J., & Craig, S. C. (2015). Multicultural Marketplaces. International Marketing Review,
32(2), 118–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/imr-01-2015-0017
Ekebas-Turedi, C., Cilingir Uk, Z., Basfirinci, C., & Pinar, M. (2021). A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Gender-Based Food
Stereotypes and Consumption Intentions among Millennial Consumers. Journal of International Consumer
Marketing, 33(2), 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2020.1771644
Friedman, M. (1991). Consumer Boycotts: A Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda. Journal of Social Issues,
47(1), 149–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1991.tb01817.x
Garrett, D. E. (1987). The Effectiveness of Marketing Policy Boycotts: Environmental Opposition to Marketing. Journal
of Marketing, 51(2), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251128
Gerlach, P., & Eriksson, K. (2021). Measuring Cultural Dimensions: External Validity and Internal Consistency of
Hofstede’s VSM 2013 Scales. Frontiers in Psychology, 12: 662604. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.662604
How cultural values and ethnicity influence attitude toward boycotting a company in a multicultural marketplace 13
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
Harmston, S. (2017, April 7). One in Five Consumers Have Boycotted a Brand. YouGov.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/04/07/one-five-consumers-have-boycotted-brand
Heydari, A., Laroche, M., Paulin, M., & Richard, M. O. (2021). Hofstede's individual-level indulgence dimension:
Scale development and validation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62, 102640.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102640
Hoffmann, S. (2014). Does National Culture Impact Consumer Boycott Prevalence? A Multi-Country Study. European
Journal of International Management, 8(2), 141–59. https://doi.org/10.1504/ejim.2014.059580
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, Leadership, and Organization: Do American Theories Apply Abroad? Organizational
Dynamics, 9(1), 42–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(80)90013-3
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in Psychology and
Culture, 2(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind: Intercultural
Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Jamal, A. (2003). Marketing in a Multicultural World: The Interplay between Marketing, Ethnicity and Consumption.
European Journal of Marketing, 37(11/12), 1599–1620. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560310495375
Kim, J., Forsythe, S., Gu, Q., & Jae Moon, S. (2002). Cross-cultural consumer values, needs and purchase behavior",
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19(6), 481-502. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760210444869
Kimmel, A. J., & Tissier-Desbordes, E. (1999). Males, masculinity, and consumption: An exploratory investigation.
European Advances in Consumer Research, 4, 243–251.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/12811075ecf671fd7e2335df07ac21e5/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=7206596
King, B. G. (2008). A Political Mediation Model of Corporate Response to Social Movement Activism. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 53(3), 395–421. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.53.3.395
Klein, J. G., Smith, N. C., & John, A. (2004). Why We Boycott: Consumer Motivations for Boycott Participation.”
Journal of Marketing, 68(3), 92–109. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.3.92.34770
Koku, P. S. (2012). On the Effectiveness of Consumer Boycotts Organized through the Internet: The Market Model.
Journal of Services Marketing 26(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041211199698
Korzenny, F., Chapa, S., & Korzenny, B. A. (2017). Hispanic marketing: The power of the new Latino consumer (3rd ed.).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315688824
Lam, D. (2008). Cultural Influence on Proneness to Brand Loyalty. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 19(3),
7–21. https://doi.org/10.1300/j046v19n03_02
Luna, D., & Forquer Gupta, S. (2001). An Integrative Framework for Cross-cultural Consumer Behavior. International
Marketing Review, 18(1), 45–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330110381998
Marcus, J., & Cetin, E. (2023). Genetic Predictors of Cultural Values Variation between Societies. Scientific Reports
13(1), 7986. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-34845-x
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation.
Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.98.2.224
McDonnell, M.-H., & King, B. (2013). Keeping up Appearances: Reputational Threat and Impression Management
after Social Movement Boycotts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(3), 387–419.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839213500032
National Humanities Center. (2007). The making of the African American identity: Volume III, 1917-1968. Toolbox
Library: Primary Resources in U.S. History and Literature.
https://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/maai3/maai3.htm
Nelson, M. R., Brunel, F. F., & Supphellen, M., & Manchanda, R. V. (2006). Effects of Culture, Gender, and Moral
Obligations on Responses to Charity Advertising across Masculine and Feminine Cultures. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 16(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1601_7
Nevins, J. L., Bearden, W. O., & Money, B. (2006). Ethical Values and Long-Term Orientation. Journal of Business
Ethics, 71(3), 261–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9138-x
Sindy Chapa, Olivia S. C. Bravo 14
Economicus Journal of Business and Economics Insights 2025 2(2), 1–14
Nicholls, J. A. F., Li, F., Mandokovic, T., Roslow, S., & Kranendonk, C. J. (2000). US-Chilean mirrors: shoppers in two
countries. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(2), 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010317187
Nixon, R. (1992). Apartheid on the Run: The South African Sports Boycott. Transition, 58, 68–88.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2934968
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking Individualism and Collectivism: Evaluation of
Theoretical Assumptions and Meta-Analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 3–72. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-
2909.128.1.3
Palma-Ruiz, J. M., Castillo-Apraiz, J., & Gómez-Martínez, R. (2020). Socially responsible investing as a competitive
strategy for trading companies in times of upheaval amid COVID-19: Evidence from Spain. International Journal
of Financial Studies, 8(3), 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs8030041
Pruitt, S. W., & Friedman, M. (1986). Determining the Effectiveness of Consumer Boycotts: A Stock Price Analysis of
Their Impact on Corporate Targets. Journal of Consumer Policy, 9(4), 375–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00380573
Ritson, M., & Dobscha, S. (1999). Marketing heretics: resistance is/is not futile. ACR North American Advances, 26(1),
159.
Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (2022). Personal Values across Cultures. Annual Review of Psychology, 73(1), 517–546.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-125100
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond Individualism/Collectivism: New Cultural Dimensions of Values. In U. Kim, H. C.
Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S.-C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and
Applications (pp. 85–119). Sage Publications.
Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value Hierarchies across Cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 268–
90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032003002
Sen, S., Gürhan-Canli, Z., & Morwitz, V. (2001). Withholding Consumption: A Social Dilemma Perspective on
Consumer Boycotts. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 399–417. https://doi.org/10.1086/323729
Stepler, R., & Ishizawa, H. (2021). Immigrant Voices: How Do Patterns of Expressive Forms of Civic Engagement
Differ across Immigrant Generation? Societies Without Border, 12(2), 1–22.
https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1286&context=swb
Swaidan, Z., Rawwas, M. Y. A., & Vitell, S. J. (2008). Culture and Moral Ideologies of African Americans. Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 16(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679160203
Triandis, H. C. (1998). Individualism and collectivism. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429499845
Vargas, J. H., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2012). Ethnicity and Contemporary American Culture. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 44(2), 195–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022112443733
Vredenburg, J., & Spry, A. (2022). Consumer activism and social movements. In The Routledge Companion to Marketing
and Society (pp. 109-123). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003028079-10
Weber Shandwick (2018, January 30). Battle of the wallets: The changing landscape of consumer activism.
https://webershandwick.com/news/battle-of-the-wallets-the-changing-landscape-of-consumer-activism
Winterich, K. P., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Accepting Inequality Deters Responsibility: How Power Distance Decreases
Charitable Behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), 274–93. https://doi.org/10.1086/675927
Xu, H., Bolton, L. E., & Winterich, K. P. (2021). How Do Consumers React to Company Moral Transgressions? The
Role of Power Distance Belief and Empathy for Victims. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(1), 77–101.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucaa067
Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lenartowicz, T. (2011). Measuring Hofstede’s Five Dimensions of Cultural Values at the
Individual Level: Development and Validation of CVSCALE. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(3–
4), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2011.578059