Introduction
Literature Review
CSR Communications and Environmental Claims
References | Journal | Method | Independent variables | Dependent variables | Selected findings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wagner et al. (2009) |
Journal of Marketing
| Experiment | Communication strategy (i.e., proactive vs. reactive strategies, corporate claims) | Consumer reactions (e.g., corporate hypocrisy, CSR credibility, brand attitudes) | Consumer reactions (corporate hypocrisy) are more negative when claims are disconfirmed by corporate social irresponsibility events (proactive strategy) |
Vaccaro and Echeverri (2010) |
Journal of Business Ethics
| Survey | Communication strategy (i.e., perceived transparency) | Consumer reactions (i.e., willingness to engage in pro-environmental behavior) | Consumers’ perceptions of transparency of the utility bill increase their willingness to participate in environmental programs |
Parguel et al. (2011) |
Journal of Business Ethics
| Experiment | Communication strategy (i.e., independent sustainability ratings) | Consumer reactions (e.g., corporate brand evaluations) | Poor sustainability ratings result in lower corporate brand evaluations. This effect is explained through the mediating mechanism of perceived firm intrinsic/extrinsic motives |
Chen and Chang (2013) |
Journal of Business Ethics
| Survey | Consumer perceptions (e.g., greenwashing) | Consumer reactions (i.e., word of mouth) | Perceptions of greenwashing lower green word-of-mouth through the parallel mediation of perceived quality and satisfaction |
Nyilasy et al. (2014) |
Journal of Business Ethics
| Experiment | Communication strategy (e.g., green vs. corporate communication, CEP) | Consumer reactions(e.g., brand attitudes, purchase intentions) | Negative effect of a firm’s low performance on brand attitudes becomes stronger in the presence of green advertising compared to general corporate advertising |
Kang et al. (2016) |
Journal of Marketing Research
| Econometric modeling | CSR orientation (e.g., slack, good management, insurance, penance) |
Financial performance
| Testing four CSR strategies [(1) slack resources → CSR; (2) CSR → performance, (3) CSR offsets past CSI; (4) CSR insures against future CSI] provides support only for Strategy 2 |
Brulhart et al. ( 2017) |
Journal of Business Ethics
| Survey | CSR orientation (e.g., stakeholder orientation, environmental proactivity) |
Financial performance
| Environmental proactivity has a positive impact on profitability. Environmental proactivity is correlated to stakeholder orientation, leading to combined positive effects on profitability |
Specificity of Environmental Claims and Regulations
Hypotheses Development
The Information Specificity of Environmental Claims and External Disconfirming Information
Skepticism Toward the Claim, Credibility Toward the Company
Experiment 1: The Information Specificity of Environmental Claims and Disconfirming Information
Method
Participants and Design
Stimulus Development
Dependent Measures
Results
Manipulation Checks
Purchase Intentions
Brand Attitudes
Discussion
Experiment 2: Moderated Serial Mediation through Green Skepticism and Corporate Credibility
Method
Participants and Design
Stimulus Development
Dependent Measures
Results: Mean Differences
Manipulation Checks
Purchase Intentions
Brand Attitudes
Corporate Credibility
Green Skepticism
Results: Structural Equation Modeling and Process Evidence
Measurement Model
Scale and scale items | β | CR | AVE |
---|---|---|---|
Green skepticism |
0.922
|
0.797
| |
Green Co. Paper’s claims are misleading | 0.893 | ||
I do not believe Green Co. Paper’s claims | 0.913 | ||
Green Co. Paper’s claims are not true | 0.871 | ||
Corporate credibility
|
0.972
|
0.921
| |
Dishonest–Honest | 0.971 | ||
Untrustworthy–Trustworthy | 0.974 | ||
Insincere–Sincere | 0.934 | ||
Brand attitudes |
0.979
|
0.940
| |
Bad–Good | 0.962 | ||
Unfavorable–Favorable | 0.972 | ||
Negative–Positive | 0.974 |
Green skepticism | Corporate credibility | Brand attitudes | |
---|---|---|---|
Green skepticism |
0.797
|
0.712
|
0.540
|
Corporate credibility | − 0.844 |
0.921
|
0.683
|
Brand attitudes | − 0.735 | 0.827 |
0.940
|
Specified paths |
B
| SE | Sig. | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Env. claims × Disc. info | → | Green skepticism | 0.16 | 0.08 | * |
Env. claims × Disc. info | → | Corporate credibility | − 0.08 | 0.05 | p = 0.151 |
Env. claims × Disc. info | → | Brand attitudes | − 0.07 | 0.06 | p = 0.239 |
Env. claims × Disc. info | → | Purchase intentions | − 0.12 | 0.08 | p = 0.133 |
Environmental claims | → | Green skepticism | − 0.24 | 0.08 | ** |
Environmental claims | → | Corporate credibility | 0.07 | 0.05 | p = 0.225 |
Environmental claims | → | Brand attitudes | 0.05 | 0.06 | p = 0.389 |
Environmental claims | → | Purchase intentions | − 0.02 | 0.08 | p = 0.840 |
Disconfirming information | → | Green skepticism | 0.35 | 0.08 | *** |
Disconfirming information | → | Corporate credibility | − 0.01 | 0.06 | p = 0.967 |
Disconfirming information | → | Brand attitudes | − 0.10 | 0.06 | p = 0.077 |
Disconfirming information | → | Purchase intentions | − 0.11 | 0.08 | p = 0.190 |
Green skepticism | → | Corporate credibility | − 0.91 | 0.06 | *** |
Green skepticism | → | Brand attitudes | − 0.12 | 0.10 | p = 0.222 |
Green skepticism | → | Purchase intentions | − 0.12 | 0.15 | p = 0.404 |
Corporate credibility | → | Brand attitudes | 0.75 | 0.09 | *** |
Corporate credibility | → | Purchase intentions | 0.51 | 0.13 | *** |