How Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Attributes Affect Consumer Purchase Intention

100 Pages·2014·2.26 MB·English

How Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Attributes
Affect Consumer Purchase Intention

by

Ran Yang

A Thesis
Presented to
The University of Guelph

In partial fulfillment of requirements
for the degree of
Master of Science
in
Marketing and Consumer Studies

Guelph, Ontario, Canada

© Ran Yang, May, 2014
ABSTRACT

HOW CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) ATTRIBUTES
AFFECT CONSUMER PURCHASE INTENTION

Ran Yang Advisor:
University of Guelph, 2014 Dr. Towhidul Islam

This thesis is an investigation of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and its
influence on consumers’ ethical decision-making and consumption behavior,
primarily from a moral perspective. The main objective of this study is to explore
consumers’ justice-related decision-making and ethical behavior in the consumption
environment. Additionally, we seek to investigate whether providing extensive
information regarding different degrees of justice restoration potential can play an
important role in strengthening or weakening support for ethical products. Individual
preferences were identified using a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE), in which
products from two categories are selected: an athletic shoe and a bar soap. The results
provide strong evidence for the effectiveness of deontic justice, and also illustrate that
the degree of justice restoration potential has a significant impact on preference for
products with social attributes. Thus, this study shows that such factors can affect
consumer purchase intention with regard to products with Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) attributes in both categories.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to personally thank the following people who supported me
throughout the entire process of this Master’s thesis with my sincere gratitude.

Firstly, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Towhidul Islam for his patient
supervision, guidance and support through all the stages of this thesis. Secondly, I
would like to thank my committee member Dr. Jian Zhou for his support during this
long process. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. May Aung for accepting to chair
my defense and providing follow-up feedback.

Additionally, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Dr. Lefa Teng, Dr.
May Aung, Dr. Timothy Dewhirst and Dr. Vinay Kanetkar for their teaching and to
Dr. Lianne Foti, Dr. Paul Anglin and Dr. Sergio Meza for their encouragement.

I also would like to thank Ms. Lisa Cauley, Ms. Cori Wells, Ms. Rita Raso and
Ms. Domenica Alderton for their assistance throughout my time in this MSc.
Program.

Finally, I would like to thank my parents, my host family and their all relatives,
and my friends for their love, acceptance, understanding, supporting, and great
confidence in me through all these years.

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS PAGES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................. viii
LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................ ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................... 4
2.1 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND CSR ATTRIBUTES .......................... 4
2.1.1 Definition of Corporate Social Responsibility ............................................. 4
2.1.2 CSR Activities and Attributes ...................................................................... 5
2.1.3 Willingness to Pay ........................................................................................ 7
2.2 ETHICAL CONSUMERS AND ETHICAL CONSUMPTION ........................................ 8
2.3 DEONTIC JUSTICE ............................................................................................ 12
2.4 JUSTICE RESTORATION POTENTIAL ................................................................. 17
2.5 THE ROLE OF INFORMATION IN ETHICAL PURCHASE INTENTION AND
INFORMATION ACCELERATION .................................................................................. 20
2.6 RESEARCH GAPS ............................................................................................. 25

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES, CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND
HYPOTHESES .......................................................................................................... 27
3.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES .................................................................................. 27
3.2 CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND HYPOTHESES ........................................................ 28
3.2.1 Study 1: Moderation Analysis .................................................................... 28
3.2.2 Study 2: Moderated Moderation Analysis .................................................. 29
iv
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...................................................... 30
4.1 TYPE OF STUDY .............................................................................................. 30
4.2 SAMPLING PLAN AND SAMPLE SIZE ................................................................ 31
4.3 DATA COLLECTION METHODS ........................................................................ 33
4.4 DEVELOPMENT OF RESEARCH INSTRUMENT ................................................... 34
4.5 DATA ANALYSIS PLAN .................................................................................... 36
4.6 PRE-TEST ........................................................................................................ 36

CHAPTER 5 RESEARCH FINDINGS ................................................................... 38
5.1 STUDY 1 .......................................................................................................... 38
5.1.1 Sample Characteristics ............................................................................... 38
5.1.2 Analysis of Deontic Justice ........................................................................ 38
5.1.3 Product Category: Athletic Shoes .............................................................. 39
5.1.3.1 Main Effect Findings ........................................................................... 39
5.1.3.2 Interaction Effect Findings: H1a and H1b .......................................... 40
5.1.4 Product Category: Bar Soap ...................................................................... 43
5.1.4.1 Main Effect Findings ........................................................................... 43
5.1.4.2 Interaction Effect Findings: H1c and H1d .......................................... 44
5.2 STUDY 2 .......................................................................................................... 47
5.2.1 Sample Characteristics ............................................................................... 47
5.2.2 Analysis of Deontic Justice ....................................................................... 47
5.2.3 Product Category: Athletic Shoes ............................................................. 48
5.2.3.1 Interaction Effect Findings: H2a ......................................................... 48
5.2.4 Product Category: Bar Soap ...................................................................... 50
5.2.4.1 Interaction Effect Findings: H2b ........................................................ 50
5.3 MODEL SELECTION ......................................................................................... 52

CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION ............................................. 54
6.1 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) ATTRIBUTES ............................. 54
6.1.1 Product Category: Athletic Shoes .............................................................. 54
6.1.2 Product Category: Bar Soap ....................................................................... 55
6.2 DEONTIC JUSTICE ............................................................................................ 55
6.2.1 Product Category: Athletic Shoes .............................................................. 56
6.2.2 Product Category: Bar Soap ....................................................................... 56
6.3 JUSTICE RESTORATION POTENTIAL: THE INFLUENCE OF INFORMATION .......... 58
6.3.1 Product Category: Athletic Shoes .............................................................. 58
6.3.2 Product Category: Bar Soap ....................................................................... 59

v
CHAPTER 7 CONTRIBUTIONS, LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
...................................................................................................................................... 61
7.1 CONTRIBUTIONS ............................................................................................. 61
7.1.1 Theoretical Contributions ........................................................................... 61
7.1.2 Methodological Contributions .................................................................... 62
7.1.3 Managerial Contributions ........................................................................... 63
7.2 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH ........................................................... 63

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 66
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................ 73
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Study 1 Summary of Main Effects of Athletic Shoes .................................... 39
Table 2 Study 1 Summary of Interaction Effects of Athletic Shoes ........................... 40
Table 3 Study 1 Summary of Main Effects of Bar Soap ............................................. 43
Table 4 Study 1 Summary of Interaction Effects of Bar Soap .................................... 44
Table 5 Study 2 Summary of Interaction Effects of Athletic Shoes ........................... 48
Table 6 Study 2 Summary of Interaction Effects of Bar Soap .................................... 50
Table 7 Model Selection Information ......................................................................... 52

vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Study 1 Conceptual Model ........................................................................... 28
Figure 2 Study 2 Conceptual Model ........................................................................... 29
Figure 3 Hypothesis 1a Findings ................................................................................ 41
Figure 4 Hypothesis 1b Findings ................................................................................ 42
Figure 5 Hypothesis 1c Findings ................................................................................ 45
Figure 6 Hypothesis 1d Findings ................................................................................ 46
Figure 7 Hypothesis 2a Findings ................................................................................ 49
Figure 8 Hypothesis 2b Findings ................................................................................ 51
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Pre-test Survey ...................................................................................... 73
Appendix B: Pre-test Videos Manipulation Check ..................................................... 75
Appendix C: Survey ................................................................................................... 76
Appendix D: Balanced Incomplete Block Design (BIBD) ......................................... 87
Appendix E: Interaction Effects Analysis .................................................................. 88

ix
CHAPTER 1 Introduction

Consumer Social Responsibility (ConSR) and ethical consumption by consumers
have received increasing attention as companies increasingly align themselves with the
principles of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Consumers are increasingly taking a
company’s CSR status and backgrounds into account when making purchasing decisions
and, in doing so, are engaging in socially aware consumption. Arana and Leon (2009)
summarize four influential social attributes that characterize the effects of companies’
CSR actions upon the choice of products by consumers: labor, environmental, animals
and cultural. Previous literature have demonstrated that consumers favor companies that
exhibit business ethics, show positive attitudes towards the ethical and social attributes of
a product, and are willing to engage in social awareness of consumption behavior (Auger
et al., 2003, 2008). Previous research have illustrated that ethical consumption is driven,
to a good degree, by consumers’ attitudes toward social consciousness. Consumers have
not only an interest in social justice but also a moral obligation to be responsive to
business practices that uphold justice.

This research will examine deontic justice and the degree of justice restoration
potential in order to highlight how consumer concerns about justice for others and the
possibility of restored justice for victims can play pivotal roles in determining the
selection of products with ethical attributes.

1