Bridging Who They Are with Who They Thought They’d Be: The Effects of Gen Zers’ Subjective Well-Being on Their Boycott Responses to Online and Offline Unethical Situations.

This article examines how subjective well-being influences Generation Z's (Gen Zers, born 1997–2012) responses to unethical situations encountered online and offline, particularly their intentions to enact or support boycotts. The study integrates moral reasoning domains—ethical idealism, self-congruence, self-expression, and the desire to make a difference—and situational factors such as online versus offline context and first-person versus third-person perspective. Findings indicate that higher subjective well-being among Gen Zers increases their likelihood to actively enact boycotts but decreases their tendency to merely support boycotts, suggesting a preference for authentic action over symbolic gestures. Additionally, unethical situations experienced indirectly (third-person) elicit stronger boycott intentions than those experienced firsthand (first-person), and online contexts do not necessarily increase boycott intentions. The research highlights Gen Z's strong ethical values and identity congruence in consumption choices, with implications for brands aiming to engage this socially conscious generation.