Consumer perceived authenticity of organizational corporate social responsibility (CSR) statements: a test of attribution theory

• Published in: Social responsibility journal 2022-05, Vol.18 (4), p.875-893
• Main Authors: Moehl, Suhana, Friedman, Barry A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Ascription; Attribution theory; Authenticity; Behavior; Business; Causality; Competition; Competitors; Consumers; Distinctiveness; Employees; Environmental performance; Experimental design; Generalizability; Human rights; Individual psychology; Internet access; Marginality; Marketing; Materiality; Older people; Passengers; Polls & surveys; Social psychology; Social responsibility; Stakeholders; Stockholders; Sustainable development; Symbols; Time use; Transparency; Variance analysis
• ISSN: 1747-1117; 1758-857X
• DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-07-2020-0296

Purpose This study aims to explore how consumers judge corporate social responsibility (CSR) authenticity. Kelley’s covariation attribution theory (Kelley, 1973) was deployed to explain information consumers use that leads to either a substantive or symbolic attribution. Design/methodology/approach In total, 101 consumers were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions and responded to an online survey: an organization whose CSR practices were unique (low consensus), across their business (low distinctiveness) and over time (high consistency), practiced CSR like competitors (high consensus), in few areas if their business (high distinctiveness) and just initiated their CSR activities (low consistency) or no relevant CSR information (control). The dependent variables were consumer’s substantive attribution, symbolic attribution and the extent that consumers’ reported that consensus, distinctiveness and consistency were important in judging CSR authenticity in general. ANOVA and Scheffe post hoc tests were conducted as appropriate. Findings Consumers in the first experimental condition ascribed greater substantive attribution than consumers in the control group and marginality more than the second experimental condition. On the other hand, these same consumers also ascribed greater symbolic attribution than did the control group. After consumers were shown an organization whose CSR activities were unique, practiced across their business and for a long time reported that distinctiveness and consistency were more important in judging authenticity in general. Research limitations/implications The survey respondents constituted a convenience sample; however, they were randomly assigned to conditions. This randomization enabled an experimental design capable of making causal statements. The Linkedin platform is mainly used by white-collar individuals and does not incorporate the entire spectrum of airline passengers from other industries, and therefore, may limit generalizability to other industrial sector populations. The sample age was somewhat young and may not be representative of older individuals and young teenagers. Like all online surveys, individuals without internet access did not have an opportunity to participate. Future research should deploy larger sample sizes and greater demographic diversity (e.g. age, country and income). Practical implications Executives must lead and engage stakeholders in their organizations’ CSR initiatives. M