<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<modsCollection xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:slims="http://slims.web.id" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd">
<mods version="3.3" id="41494">
 <titleInfo>
  <title>Are boycott motives rationalizations?</title>
 </titleInfo>
 <typeOfResource manuscript="no" collection="yes">mixed material</typeOfResource>
 <genre authority="marcgt">bibliography</genre>
 <originInfo>
  <place>
   <placeTerm type="text">Hoboken, New Jersey</placeTerm>
   <publisher>John Willey &amp; Sons</publisher>
   <dateIssued>May/Jun 2013</dateIssued>
  </place>
 </originInfo>
 <language>
  <languageTerm type="code"></languageTerm>
  <languageTerm type="text"></languageTerm>
 </language>
 <physicalDescription>
  <form authority="gmd"></form>
  <extent>p. 214 - 222</extent>
 </physicalDescription>
 <note>Previous models of boycott motivation are incomplete because they only &#13;
consider beliefs and attitudes. This article argues that consumers' &#13;
proximity to the consequences of the critical actions of a company is &#13;
the primary trigger of the desire to boycott. As consumers need to &#13;
justify this desire, they search for supportive arguments. Thus, the &#13;
arguments consumers give to explain why they are boycotting or not are &#13;
pre-decisional rationalizations rather than independent rational &#13;
considerations. Consequently, the paper suggests that scholars need to &#13;
respecify the antecedents identified in prior studies. These constructs &#13;
are mediator variables of the indirect influence of proximity on boycott&#13;
 participation. The paper tests the assumptions on the basis of survey &#13;
data gathered from 544 consumers using the example of a real boycott &#13;
that was called in response to factory relocation. The model proposed &#13;
was tested by means of partial least squares regression analysis. The &#13;
mediation hypotheses were examined using simple and multiple mediation &#13;
tests. The empirical study confirms that boycott motives are mainly &#13;
rationalizations of a pre-existing desire to boycott, which is &#13;
contingent on proximity. Managerial implications and avenues for further&#13;
 research are proposed.[ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]&lt;br&gt;</note>
 <note type="statement of responsibility"></note>
 <classification></classification>
 <identifier type="isbn">14720817</identifier>
 <location>
  <physicalLocation>Perpustakaan - Sekolah Tinggi Manajemen PPM Pusat Informasi Manajemen</physicalLocation>
  <shelfLocator></shelfLocator>
 </location>
 <recordInfo>
  <recordIdentifier>41494</recordIdentifier>
  <recordCreationDate encoding="w3cdtf">2014-07-08 00:00:00</recordCreationDate>
  <recordChangeDate encoding="w3cdtf">2014-07-08 00:00:00</recordChangeDate>
  <recordOrigin>machine generated</recordOrigin>
 </recordInfo>
</mods>
</modsCollection>