When do hedonic appeals backfire? Credibility, scepticism and the disconnect between emotional engagement and pro-environmental intention

Abstract

This study examines why emotional engagement with hedonic sustainability communication does not always translate into pro-environmental behavioural intention. Drawing on the Persuasion Knowledge Model and Truth-Default Theory, it investigates consumer responses to pleasure- and comfort-based hotel food-waste messages. A sequential mixed-method design combined a laboratory experiment, projective interviews, and a follow-up online experiment testing green scepticism. Findings show no robust statistically significant physiological differentiation across message types, but substantial differences in perceived credibility, sincerity and emotional meaning. Pleasure-based appeals were interpreted as enjoyable but superficial and less trustworthy; comfort-based appeals were warmer and more relational, yet both hedonic appeals produced lower behavioural intention than the control message. Green scepticism strengthened this negative effect, particularly for comfort-based appeals. The findings suggest that hedonic sustainability communication operates less through heightened physiological arousal than through interpretive credibility evaluation, particularly among sceptical consumers.