1. Introduction

Business ethics has been the center of attraction for researchers and scholars from several decades as there is ample amount of conceptual and empirical work available (Crane et al., 2019). Indeed, marketing has various ethical issues since it is the main exchange platform where dealings between buyers and sellers occur (Tsalikis & Fritzsche, 2013). Despite its importance, limited research has focused on how consumers perceive their own ethical behaviour (Muncy & Vitell, 1992). As central figures in the marketing process, understanding consumers' ethical perspectives is crucial without this, gaining a comprehensive view of ethical dynamics remains incomplete (Lui, Tong, & Wong, 2012). Instead of condemning business ethics solely or fleeting the onus on the market itself, it is also prolific to emphasize the concerns pertaining to consumers unethical behaviour. If researchers continue to give attention to ethics of suppliers, it would lead to dearth and partial comprehension of business ethics (Vitell & Muncy, 1992). The widespread economic losses caused by counterfeiting and piracy, along with the rise of globalization and the rapid expansion of the Internet, have highlighted various consumer ethics concerns. These developments have sparked growing academic interest in the field over the past three decades (Chatzidakis & Mitussis, 2007). It is a fact that consumer ethics has gained the worldwide attention of researchers, managers, practitioners and regulators due to recent frauds, scams, scandals and unfair practices in the corporate sector (Charzidakis & Maclaran, 2020). Since consumer behaviour encompasses the processes of purchasing, using, and discarding products and services, each phase inherently involves significant ethical considerations (Vitell, 2003). There are billions of consumers in the world aspiring for different products and services and consumer ethics involve the degree to which specific behaviour is regarded as right or wrong, fair or unfair (Vitell et al., 2016). Vitell and Muncy (1992) conceptualized consumer ethics as the deliberate act of purchasing, utilizing, and disposing of products and services in alignment with personal values, moral standards, and established norms. Essentially, consumer ethics pertains to the ethical choices and behaviours exhibited by individuals within the marketplace. Further contributions by Vitell (2003), Chiu et al. (2009), and Rad and Hidalgo (2018) emphasize that consumer ethics involves how individuals recognize

caused. Later, Vitell and Muncy (2005) suggested that individuals are more likely to act ethically when they maintain a positive attitude toward businesses. Moreover, a deeper insight into consumer ethics can assist both governmental bodies and organizations in developing educational and regulatory frameworks aimed at reducing the adverse impacts of unethical consumer practices (Arli, 2017). The literature on consumer ethics is vast but yet fragmented (Culiberg, 2015; Le & Kieu, 2019). During the last three decades, several researchers have enriched the literature by exploring and validating many scales. The pioneer and most exemplary contribution have been done by Muncy and Vitel (1992). The Consumer Ethics Scale (CES), developed by the authors, has been widely utilized by researchers across different countries. Over the years, a substantial body of literature has emerged, comprising diverse concepts, theoretical models, and empirical insights aimed at exploring the associations between consumer ethics and related constructs. Due to the inherent complexity of this domain, the findings across studies have often been inconsistent and lack a unified perspective. Although multiple research streams have attempted to capture the multidimensional nature of consumer ethics, a consolidated understanding of its evolution over the past thirty years remains underexplored. This study aims to bridge that gap by providing a comprehensive synthesis of historical and contemporary research, while also outlining a future research agenda, through the integration of bibliometric analysis and literature review. The primary objective of this study is to examine the current landscape of research in the field of consumer ethics with the following questions decoding the extent of the study: To explore the current publication trends in consumer ethics in terms of time, journals, discipline, authors, associated countries and institutions. To perform bibliometric review of all the studies that have been conducted on consumer ethics till now. To examine the influential studies and themes of research in this field. To investigate how consumer ethics have evolved over the years.

2. Literature Review

This study investigates the body of consumer ethics research spanning a period of 25 years, from 1997 to 2021. Relevant literature was identified through a keyword-based search conducted in the SCOPUS database, which yielded approximately 300 articles

Chinese consumers and highlighted that diverse cultural factors significantly influence consumer ethical standards. According to Fullerton, Kerch and Dodge (1996), young, more educated and high-income group people are prone to accept unethical behavior as compared to older and less income group people. According to Rawwas, Vitell, and Al-Khatib (1994), Lebanese consumers exhibited comparatively lower concern toward ethical consumption, characterized by a tendency toward relativism and Machiavellianism, and demonstrated less idealism than their Egyptian counterparts. Rallapalli et al. (1994) undertook an exploratory investigation into how various personality traits influence consumers’ ethical beliefs. In a cross-cultural comparison, Rawwas, Patzer, and Klassen (1995) observed that Irish consumers displayed greater apathy toward ethical consumption issues relative to consumers in Hong Kong. Furthermore, Babin and Griffin (1995) examined the influence of age on ethical consumer behavior and found that adolescents were more inclined toward unethical practices such as shoplifting. Additionally, Rawwas (1996), in his empirical analysis of Austrian consumers, revealed that their ethical decision-making largely depends on situational factors and perceived outcomes.

Religiosity

Religious orientation is one of the personal factors acting as an antecedent of consumer ethics (Vitell, 2009). The general theory of marketing implies that ethical beliefs rely upon personal traits and religion is one of the drivers of consumer ethics (Patwardhan, Keith, & Vitell, 2012; Singhapakdi et al., 2013; Vitell, Paolillo, & Singh, 2006; Vitell & Paolillo, 2003). Religiosity refers to the extent to which individuals adhere to and internalize the doctrines, values, and teachings associated with their religious faith (Allport & Ross, 1967). Religiosity comprises of two types, viz., intrinsic and extrinsic. A person with intrinsic religiosity leads his life as per his religion whereas a person with extrinsic religiosity uses his religion for personal benefits like making friends, achieving goals, etc (Arli, 2017). The study by Agarwala, Mishra and Singh (2019); Arli (2017) showed that intrinsic and extrinsic religiosity significantly impact consumer ethical behavior. Furthermore, Patwardhan, Keith and Vitell (2012) opined that there exists an affirmative association amid intrinsic religiousness and ideas that questionable consumer

conduct by lowering pro-social inclinations. This contrast in outcomes also explains why extrinsic religious orientation has often been criticized for casting a negative impression of religion (Donahue, 1985). Furthermore, while some studies have found no significant relationship between extrinsic religiosity and consumer ethics (Vitell et al., 2005, 2007), recent research suggests that individuals with extrinsic religious orientation may be more inclined to engage in unethical consumer behaviours (Arli, 2017; Arli & Pekerti, 2016, 2017). Arli and Pekerti (2016) observed that for Australian consumers, extrinsic religiosity is associated with unethical behaviours such as actively and passively benefitting, engaging in questionable practices, and participating in "no harm, no foul" activities-those perceived by some as acceptable since they do not directly harm others, like duplicating software. Arli (2017) reaffirmed these findings using a different sample of Australian consumers. Arli and Pekerti (2017) found that for religious consumers in Indonesia, extrinsic religiosity is linked with greater acceptance of overtly illegal actions, passive unethical behaviour, legally permissible yet misleading practices, and “no harm, no foul” activities. In contrast, among religious Australian consumers, extrinsic religiosity was associated mainly with tolerance of illegal and legally deceptive actions. In a study conducted by Arli, Septianto, and Chowdhury (2021), it was found that extrinsic religiosity can lead consumers toward unethical consumption, primarily driven by feelings of ethnocentrism and moral superiority. Additionally, Arli (2017) emphasized the role of religiosity as a key antecedent in shaping consumer ethical behaviour. Indeed, the results depicted that consumers with intrinsic religiosity tend to adhere more towards ethics than those with extrinsic religiosity. Chang, Vitell, and Lu (2019) found that consumers who exhibit strong relationship orientation and religious commitment are more likely to reject ethically questionable behaviors. In contrast, factors such as favorable attitudes toward business practices and an increased affection for money tend to have a moderate impact on shaping consumers’ unethical beliefs. Similarly, Agarwala, Mishra and Singh (2019); Arli and Tjiptono (2018); Arli (2017); Schneider, Krieger and Bayraktar (2011); Vitell, Paolillo and Singh (2006) opined that consumers with high intrinsic religiosity are more inclined to support consumer social responsibility, as their behaviour is guided by strong moral

who possess a strong internal locus of control or adhere to personal belief systems are more likely to reject unethical practices in the marketplace. Besides, spiritual people perform recycling and purchase goods and services most of the time from companies who claim to be ethical in their operations. Furthermore, Chowdhury and Fernando (2013) conducted a study in which spiritual well-being was examined in relation to consumer ethical beliefs and it was found that lived communal well-being demonstrated a negative association with both the active/illegal and passive dimensions, while showing a positive relationship with the 'no harm, no foul' and 'doing good/recycling' dimensions. In contrast, lived personal well-being was negatively linked to active/illegal behaviors but positively aligned with the 'no harm, no foul' and 'doing good/recycling' aspects. Furthermore, lived transcendental well-being was inversely related to the passive, active/legal, and 'no harm, no foul' dimensions. Finally, lived environmental well-being exhibited a negative correlation with the active/legal and 'no harm, no foul' dimensions.

Idealism and Relativism

Idealism, relativism, individualism, collectivism, moral emotions and relationship of buyer-seller have also been explored in order to determine consumer ethics. Consumer ethics has been investigated through two perspectives, that is, idealism and relativism along with the deontological and teleological approach to ethics (Al-Khatib, Stanton & Rawwas, 2005; Shanahan & Hyman, 2003; Vitell & Hunt, 2015). Furthermore, the consumer ethics scale was considered suitable in studies relating to personality traits, idealism/relativism, religious beliefs and ethical judgments (Tjipotono, Arli & Winit, 2017). Culiberg (2015) found individualism and collectivism positively impact consumer ethics. Consumers who are having high guilt and shame traits rejected unethical situations and conduct (Arli, Leo & Tjiptono, 2016). Also, Shaw and Shiu (2002) opined that ethical obligations and self-identity influence consumer ethics due to the reason that behavioral intentions are pertinent in determining the consumer’s actions. Besides, Chowdhury (2018) considered intrinsic and quest religiosity as antecedents and regarded four dimensions of consumer ethics scale as negative and unethical whereas personal moral philosophies particularly idealism and relativism have been identified as

and female respondents were influenced by religiosity and spiritual well-being respectively whereas attitude towards money did not impact ethical beliefs of Indian consumers.

The study concluded that individuals exhibiting strong religious beliefs are more likely to perceive questionable actions as unethical. According to Chowdhury (2017), emotional intelligence is one of the causes of consumers' ethical actions and concluded that individuals who judge/evaluate their own emotions would reject unethical acts whereas accept ethical actions like doing good. Similarly, Haung and Lu (2017); Vitell, Singh and Paolillo (2007) opined that an individual’s attitude towards business made his/her loyalty to a particular shop or retailer which stimulate a consumer to maintain a good relationship with the seller and never let a consumer to behave unethically. Furthermore, Papaoikonomou, Ryan and Ginieis (2011) concluded that ethically-minded consumers behave morally in their actions while Rallapalli, Vitell, Wiebe and Barnes (1994) opined that people with autonomy not considered illegal and questionable behavior as unethical whereas the need for social desirability never let people to behave unethically since they are conscious about their social image. Similarly, Lu, Chang and Chang (2015) examined the impact of consumer personality traits on green purchase intention through the mediation of consumer ethical beliefs and found that consumers holding high ethical beliefs purchased environmentally friendly products. However, Vitell, Singhapakdi and Thomas (2001) examined how consumers make up their decisions regarding situations involving ethical issues and revealed that most of the consumers’ ethical judgments were based on ethical norms rather than thinking about its perceived consequences while making behavioral intention towards ethical issues. Moreover, Vitell (2015) found that consumers had not paid more prices for socially responsible products even if the product was considered to be very important. However, they were willing to purchase a socially responsible product if the price and quality were reasonable as compared to other substitutes. Similarly, Uusitalo and Oksanen (2004) explored ethical consumerism in Finland and found that ethics did not influence consumer choice behavior as they were not sure which firms followed ethical practices. Furthermore, ethical obligation and self-identity were significant factors informing consumers’

a key construct within consumer behavior studies (Muncy & Eastman, 1998). Given that both materialism and consumer ethics concern the consumption process, their interrelationship presents an avenue for deeper investigation. Unlike consumer ethics, materialism has been defined through varying scholarly lenses. For instance, Ward and Wackman (1971, p. 422) described materialism as a perspective that considers material possessions and financial assets essential to personal well-being and societal advancement. Building on this, Richins and Dawson (1992) viewed materialism as a value system where possessions are crucial for status expression and shaping one’s desired self-image. Common across definitions is the centrality of possessions in achieving happiness and social standing, emphasizing acquisition as a vital life pursuit. However, contrasting views exist. Belk (1985) argued that individuals scoring high on materialism tend to report lower life satisfaction, identifying materialism as a potential root of discontent. These conflicting perspectives have heightened scholarly curiosity regarding materialism's detrimental effects. Muncy and Eastman (1998), in their empirical work, established a negative association between materialism and consumer ethics, indicating that materialistic individuals may adopt less ethical consumption patterns. Further evidence from Lu and Lu (2010) indicated that highly materialistic Indonesian consumers were more inclined to engage both actively and passively in ethically questionable behaviors. This suggests that materialistic tendencies may undermine moral standards, as ethical restraint could hinder the pursuit of material desires. Additionally, their study highlighted that idealism significantly predicted ethical restraint, while relativism showed no such association. This implies that Indonesian consumers rely more on idealistic values than relativistic perspectives when making ethical judgments. Similarly, research by Lui, Tong, and Wong (2012) in Hong Kong revealed only a weak and statistically insignificant link between materialistic values and unethical consumer behavior, suggesting cultural variations in how materialism influences ethical decision-making. However, adolescents with a high level of materialism and love of money would adopt unethical practices whereas adolescents with a low level of materialism and love of money would adopt ethical practices (Flurry & Swimberghe, 2016). Moreover, self-esteem, materialism and power

reveal structural relationships within the literature (Dzikowski, 2018). Indicators such as the number of publications and total citations offer insights into the productivity and impact of research contributions. Overall, bibliometric methods help in synthesizing large volumes of academic output and offer clarity through visual mapping of relationships between key elements in the literature (Bindra et al., 2020; Singh & Dhir, 2019; Singh et al., 2021; Shaik & Dhir, 2020).

In the above figure, each color represents a node in a network which further symbolize the occurrence of the keyword. As per the figure, the frequently occurring keyword is consumer ethics followed by other key words like ethics, religiosity, materialism and so on.

A set of top 10 journals was identified using two primary criteria: the volume of publications related to consumer ethics and their citation rankings as per the Thomson Reuters citation index. Table 1 presents these leading 20 journals in alphabetical order. From this selection, a total of 234 articles were chosen for in-depth analysis, as illustrated in (Figure 1).

4. DISCUSSION

These findings indicate that consumer ethics is a developing, advancing, and diversifying research field. It is a budding subject matter with a remarkable history of 30 years. Evidently, research in this sphere has developed considerably since the year 2000. Although the United States was the foremost explorer and a primary country in this arena. Indeed, recent trend indicates steady global dissemination of consumer ethics research. The current study provides a comprehensive literature review by showing up various determinants of consumer ethics and recommended the implication to encourage consumer ethical behaviour and restrain the unethical behavior of consumers. This review is an endeavour to assimilate the scattered research studies in one frame. The vast review done between 1997 to 2022 explored the various determinants, mediators, moderators and consequences of consumer ethical behaviour. The paper has tried to include all the relevant studies prevailing in the arena of consumer ethics. Furthermore, it presents a comprehensive knowledge of the keywords, most relevant journals, leading journals in consumer ethics, country wise citation, influential authors and

1. implication is that unethical behaviour of consumers, viz., shoplifting, deceptive returns, piracy will cause financial loss to the companies while consumer ethics like purchasing, consuming and disposing off ethically will increase profits of retailers and over all well-being of society.
2. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

At last, this paper has thrown the spotlight on an exhaustive and detailed account of the work in the field of consumer ethics. Most of the studies on consumer ethics are carried in developed countries as very few studies seem to be conducted in developing countries. More research is required in Asian context and developing nations. No doubt, during the last 10 years consumer ethics have evolved and enriched by various researchers, however gaps are still existing. There are ample number of future opportunities which can further be explored. Different new theories, traits and methodologies can be examined. Furthermore, more new models can be framed in order to enhance the knowledge about consumer ethics. In addition, future studies can focus on budding markets where there is dearth of research. Advance statistical tools, observations, qualitative methods appear more relevant and productive in construing ethical behavior of consumers. In the future, researchers may consider more databases such as Web of Science and Google Scholar among others. Also, investigating the importance of social media in persuading consumers to be ethical seems very prominent to study in near future. On the other hand, antecedents like materialism, individualism, demographic variables, moral attentiveness, compassion, generosity, self-conception, self-answerability, self – esteem, culture, religion and ethical blindness can be explored in upcoming research. Moreover, social comparison, peer pressure, trust in advertising and demographic factors such as age, gender, education, income and so on can also be investigated as moderators in relation to consumer ethics. Nevertheless, the outcomes of consumer ethics have almost been absent. Therefore, more work needs to be done on the consequences of consumer ethical behavior. To wrap up, consumer ethics plays a paramount role in today’s scenario as more and more people are becoming self-centred and materialistic without taking into consideration environment, humans, animals and sustainability in

Figure 4: Citation of Countries

Figure 5: Citation of documents

Figure 6: Co-authorship of Countries

Figure 7: Co-citation of cited authors

Figure 11: Year wise average total article citation

Table 1: Most Relevant Sources

Table 2: Annual Scientific Publication

Table 2 shows the annual research paper publications over the last 26 years and the maximum number (97) articles were published in 2022. The recent years have seen an upward trend in the number of articles published.

Table 3: Main Information About Data

Table 4: Document Types