International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhm

Which CSR message most appeals to you? The role of message framing,
psychological ownership, perceived responsibility and customer
altruistic values
Yeonjung Alice Kang *, Melissa A. Baker
Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Isenberg School of Management, University of Massachusetts, 121 Presidents Dr. Amherst, Amherst, MA 01003,
USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: COVID-19 has led the hospitality industry to increase focus on the role of corporate social responsibility (CSR)
CSR message messages that can increase positive brand behaviors. Thus, Study 1 examines the effects of CSR message and
Psychological ownership customer altruism using a 2 (CSR message: cause promotion vs. advocacy advertising) × 2 (Customer altruistic
Altruistic value
values: high vs. low) between-subjects experimental design. Building upon Study 1′ s findings, Study 2 in­
Perceived responsibility
vestigates the effect of psychological ownership and the mediating role of perceived responsibility using a 2 (CSR
message: psychological ownership vs. cause promotion) × 2 (Customer altruistic values: high vs. low) between
subjects’ experiment. Results show the interaction effect of altruistic value and the moderated mediation effect of
perceived responsibility, contributing to the gaps surrounding CSR messages as well as providing implications for
hospitality businesses to optimize the application of CSR messages.

1. Introduction
In the hospitality industry, understanding the role of corporate social
responsibility (CSR) is more important than ever as COVID-19 has had a
detrimental impact on businesses (Baker, 2021; He and Harris, 2020).
Decreases in customer traffic, profits, and purchasing has led to many
firms shifting their focus towards CSR initiatives as a sign of hope (Ou
et al., 2021). This is because effective CSR practices during crises in­
crease media attention (Ahn et al., 2020) and positively influence
customer brand evaluations and firm performance (He and Harris,
2020). For example, Jersey Mike’s Subs promotes a CSR campaign that
donates a portion of their sales to healthcare workers, seniors, and those
in need during the pandemic (Forbes, 2020). Hilton Hotels created a
Team Member Assistance Fund to help team members who suffered a
direct impact from COVID-19 and made donations to local food pantries
(Hilton, 2020). As a result, the promotion of these CSR activities sup­
ports both charities but also serve as a marketing tactic to lead to pos­
itive customer behavioral intentions for the firm itself.
Most crises are those that are attributed to the firm (PR issues, food
safety) or those that are uncontrollable (Berbekova and Baker, 2020)
such as the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, the crisis is contextual­
ized as the COVID-19 pandemic because of its detrimental impact on
businesses including lower customer counts with many firms struggling
to re-attract customers (He and Harris, 2020). There is a surprising lack
of research where the firm is also a victim (Schoofs and Claeys, 2021) so
the COVID-19 pandemic is an important victim type crisis that can build
upon the hospitality, management, CSR, and crisis management litera­
ture. The hospitality industry in particular is extremely sensitive to
victim type crises (Qiu et al., 2021). Moreover, customer demands and
purchasing behaviors shifted drastically during and post crisis (Kantar,
2020), making it much more critical for a business to devising effective
marketing approaches for survival (Wang et al., 2020).
Furthermore, despite the importance of CSR initiatives, the current
body of research mainly focuses on industry classification, size, profit­
ability and firm performance (Shin et al., 2021), creating several
important gaps. If a firm’s ultimate goal of CSR is to have customers
support not only the cause but also the brand, message framing is a
critical yet under-researched variable that can provide value to the CSR
literature and theory. In other words, how firms deliver CSR messages
can be an important judgment factor of customer brand behaviors.
Grounded in congruence theory (Pérez et al., 2019; Zasuwa, 2017),
when there is a congruence between people and messaging (Herrmann
et al., 2013), it generates positive outcomes. However, most CSR studies
examine the congruence effect between the brand and CSR message

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: yeonjungkang@umass.edu (Y.A. Kang), mbaker@isenberg.umass.edu (M.A. Baker).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103287
Received 13 July 2021; Received in revised form 19 June 2022; Accepted 8 July 2022
Available online 22 July 2022
0278-4319/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker
(Pérez et al., 2019; Zasuwa, 2017), rather than investigating the rela­
tionship between CSR message and customer value propositions. As
such, examining the concept of altruistic value, the desire to make the
society a better place to live (Boer and Fischer, 2013), can be incredibly
beneficial. This is because when customers receive a firm’s CSR mes­
sage, customer altruistic values will play a critical role in customer
behavior because customer altruistic values are highly related to pro­
social attitudes and behaviors (Zasuwa, 2016). Thus, the first study
identifies the role of customer altruistic values with different messaging
strategies of cause promotion and advocacy advertising.
Building upon the first study, the second study adopts psychological
ownership theory because it has received less attention and is largely
unknown (Li et al., 2021). Psychological ownership refers to the feeling
that something is “mine” (Pierce et al., 2003) and is recently gaining
attention in marketing due to its role in deriving key consumer outcomes
(Peck et al., 2021). When such ownership is presented using the naming
effect, it increases customer behavior (Peck et al., 2021). However,
psychological ownership has not been investigated with regards to CSR
messages, despite the fact that the concept involves customer engage­
ment. Customer participation plays a crucial role in the success of CSR
marketing, and firms seek to develop strategies to engage consumers in
CSR efforts (Huang and Liu, 2020). The effectiveness of donation appeal
messages is vital, especially during times of crises to provide insight into
effective CSR marketing strategies (Shin et al., 2021); yet has surpris­
ingly been neglected in the research (Huang and Liu, 2020). Further­
more, research is needed to accentuate customer engagement in
donation campaigns and to investigate what types of donation messages
arouse such engagement (Hwang et al., 2021). As such, this research
examines the application of psychological ownership to CSR message,
particularly in the hospitality and tourism research to better understand
relief programs and supporting the local community. Specifically, the
research examines how different types of messages appeal not only to
those who are already likely to support (high altruistic customers) but
examines how to gain more support from those with low altruism,
expanding upon both theory and practice.
The study contributes by examining the effectiveness of different
CSR messages: advocacy promotion, cause promotion, and psychologi­
cal ownership messaging. To be specific, Study 1 examines CSR advo­
cacy versus cause promotion and customer altruism during a victim
crisis event (COVID-19). Study 2 further contributes by examining cause
versus psychological ownership messaging which is largely overlooked
within CSR domain (Li et al., 2021). The findings indicate that psy­
chological ownership message appeals to low altruistic individuals,
which leads to positive marketing outcomes. This is especially important
given that 75% of customers in the U.S. identify themselves as low al­
truists (Long and Krause, 2017). Lastly, understanding the psychological
mechanism of individuals having low altruistic values with the feeling of
responsibility is critical as this customer segment remains as blue ocean,
an unexploited market yet producing high profitability. Findings of the
research can suggest important implications for the business practi­
tioners and builds upon the CSR, branding, altruism, congruence theory,
and psychological ownership theory literature.
2. Literature review
2.1. CSR during COVID-19
CSR refers to a business organization’s principles of social re­
sponsibility as they relate to the firm’s social relationships (Wood,
1991). Substantial CSR research examines it with relation to market
evaluations (Shin et al., 2021). However, little has examined the impact
of crisis management responses and CSR (Huang and Liu, 2020; Shin
et al., 2021), despite the fact that crises management firm actions (Ou
et al., 2021), and how firms form strategies during and post crises
(Berbekova and Baker, 2020), are vital to firm performance. In partic­
ular, there is a dearth of research that examines victim type crises, where
2
International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287
the firm is also a victim (Schoofs and Claeys, 2021). This is especially
important to examine as customers still form attitudes as to how firms
respond during crises, and the hospitality and tourism industry is
especially sensitive to victim crises (Qiu et al., 2021).
While there are numerous ways to classify CSR, this research focuses
on CSR as marketing communications related to cause and advocacy
promotion (Kotler and Lee, 2005). The concept of CSR is almost exclu­
sively examined with the focus on firm responsibility, thus neglecting
collective impact from customers and communities (Su et al., 2021). As
such, how a firm articulates its CSR through message framing and
communication strategies (Ou et al., 2021) is crucial because this can
protect the business from the negative crisis (Coombs, 2014) and attract
customers back to the firm. Hence, the current study adopts a
marketing-based approach and defines CSR as a marketing tool through
message framing with aims to identify the relationship between CSR
communication and customer behavior.
CSR is a commitment to improve community well-being through
discretionary business practices and contributions of resources (Giaco­
mini et al, 2021). Surprisingly, however, there are limited studies that
focus on understanding the impact of crises on customer behavior (Yuan
et al., 2020). Industry research finds that 81% of customers consider a
brand’s involvement in CSR as a deciding factor in buying from the
brand during COVID-19 (Edelman, 2020). Therefore, for both research
and industry, it is crucial to understand the impact of CSR during the
crisis such as pandemic and how it influences customer behaviors.
2.2. CSR message framing
The effectiveness of donation appeal messages is critical to develop
effective CSR marketing strategies, particularly during times of crises
such as COVID-19 (Shin et al., 2021). The majority of CSR research fo­
cuses on the CSR-brand fit and financial performances (Shin et al.,
2021). However, from the perspective of long-term success, firms should
aim to obtain both customer brand and initiative support. Despite the
importance of different CSR messages communication in marketing ac­
tivities, there is a dearth of research on message framing (Woodroof
et al., 2019). As the role of message framing is crucial to consumer’s
reactions to pro-social practices (Baker et al., 2014), such effect can also
be applicable to firms implementing CSR messages, particularly related
to advocacy framing (Huang and Liu, 2020).
Two important yet under-researched types of message frames
include advocacy advertising and cause promotion. Advocacy framing
deals with social issues that focus on the philanthropic message and is
generally independent from direct purchasing of the sponsor’s product
(Menon and Kahn, 2003). In other words, advocacy framing focuses on
the fact that customers should be advocates- regardless of purchases
made with the brand. Cause promotion refers to activities that promise a
donation based on a purchase of the brand (Andreasen, 1996). Cause
promotion occurs when a firm contributes or donates revenues to a so­
cial cause with the aim of obtaining a return in terms of image and
reputation (Giacomini et al., 2021). Stated differently, when customers
make a purchase with the brand, the brand will also make a donation to
the cause.
To understand the effects of different CSR messages on customer
brand evaluations, signaling theory can provide explanations in which
individuals experience information asymmetry based firms CSR message
communications (Schaefer et al., 2020). According to signaling theory, a
brand’s communication of CSR messages can be interpreted as signals
and evaluated differently. Therefore, CSR message framing plays a
crucial role as a signal in the CSR evaluation-making process (Schaefer
et al., 2020).
2.3. Behavioral outcomes of CSR
Customer participation plays a critical role in the success of CSR
marketing (Huang and Liu, 2020). Customers want firms to engage in
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287

CSR activities, however, it is also important to have customers support high altruist customers when receiving advocacy advertising messages.
not only the cause, but also the brand (Huang and Liu, 2020; Coombs, Therefore, the congruence effect will be more prominent when the
2014). Purchase intention is defined as the degree to which consumers company presents advocacy advertising CSR to high altruists, where
intend to buy products (Wu et al., 2012). Intention to support is defined they explicitly show stronger purchase intention and brand support
as the likelihood of individuals to support or recommend the brand (Lee compared to low altruists. Stated differently, when individuals with high
et al., 2017). Word of mouth (WOM) refers to interactive communica­ altruistic values encounter a CSR message content that explicitly dem­
tion between consumers regarding their opinions or thoughts about a onstrates social concern or support, they can experience a congruence
firm (de Matos and Rossi, 2008) where WOM is one of the most between their values and the signal of CSR message, thereby producing
important variables in measuring the effects of CSR activities (Peloza positive outcome.
and Shang, 2011).
Hypothesis 1. (a-c): There is an interaction effect between CSR mes­
Despite its importance, not all CSR practices yield positive brand
sages and customer altruistic values on (a) purchase intention (b)
behavior. Research finds a skepticism effect grounded in attribution
intention to support and (c) positive WOM, meaning customers with
theory (Vlachos et al., 2009), indicating when customers perceive at­
high altruistic value have stronger brand behaviors than those with low
tributions of CSR motives as doubtful or profit-seeking, this results in
altruistic value when advocacy advertising is presented.
negative attitudes and supporting intentions. As such, it is plausible to
posit that different CSR messages, such as cause promotion, might have
3. Methods and results
conditional effects on customer behavior.
3.1. Design and procedures
2.4. The moderating role of customer altruistic values
Study 1 investigates the moderating effect of customer altruistic
One noticeable gap in the CSR literature is that it does not account
values and CSR message framing and purchase intention, intention to
for message framing related to individual differences (Xie et al., 2019).
support, and positive WOM. A 2 (CSR message: cause promotion vs.
Boer and Fischer (2013) define altruistic values as the human desire to
advocacy advertising) × 2 (Customer altruistic values: high vs. low)
make society a better place to live, which has a positive relationship
between-subjects experimental study was conducted. We adopted our
with prosocial attitudes and behaviors. This is because when a firm is
stimuli by providing a brief description for each of the two CSR messages
engaging in prosocial behaviors to help people in need, customers with
(e.g., cause promotion and advocacy advertising) based on the previous
high altruism tend to have more positive perceptions of the firm because
literature (Menon and Kahn, 2003).
individuals possessing altruistic values regard the welfare of others as
In the scenario, participants are randomly assigned one of the two
important (Schwartz, 1992).
conditions (cause promotion or advocacy advertising) and asked to
The effect of customer altruism and CSR can be explained by
imagine a visit to a fictitious restaurant, where they see a CSR marketing
congruence theory. Congruence theory explains when congruency oc­
flyer. The study implements a hypothetical scenarios with a fictitious
curs, individuals’ information processing fluency increases (Herrmann
brand as this limits the confounding effects of brand familiarity (Leg­
et al., 2013), thereby enhancing communication efficiency and attrac­
endre et al., 2020). Following Menon and Kahn’s (2003) procedures, the
tion. When CSR messages interact with customers values, individuals
cause promotion message states that a donation to medical workers will
perceive CSR messages as congruent, positively influencing their be­
be based on the sale of the restaurant. Conversely, the advocacy
haviors (Kang et al., 2019).
advertising message encourages the consumer to engage in some action
However, research examining the effect of altruism during a crisis,
or behavior describes that there is an urgent need to help for medical
such as the coronavirus pandemic, is largely non-existent, despite the
workers and should you be one of them.
importance of the desire to make society a better place being critical
The study contextualized CSR message as support for medical
during a global pandemic (He and Harris, 2020). Nevertheless, literature
workers during COVID-19 based on the importance of industry practical
only examines how customer altruistic values interact with cause pro­
relevance and current literature (CNBC, 2020; Tong et al., 2021). This is
motion (Zasuwa, 2016), not with advocacy advertising. Thus, it is
because healthcare workers and services are a critical group that hotels
plausible to investigate how customer altruistic values and crisis context
and foodservice supported during the COVID-19 pandemic (Hao et al.,
influence customer behaviors when different types of CSR messages are
2020). For example, the American Hotel and Lodging Association and
presented. This should also be investigated not just with those with high
Hilton Hotels provided support to healthcare workers during the coro­
altruism, but also how to gain greater acceptance from those with lower
navirus pandemic (Boley, 2020). Participant’s altruistic values were not
altruism, which remains a current gap in the literature.
manipulated but measured because the nature of the variables leads to
Furthermore, CSR research addresses the relationship between an
the measurement of human values (Romani et al., 2013).
individual’s personal values and CSR (Hemingway and Maclagan, 2004)
and the moderating role of person’s social value orientations in the
3.2. Participants
effectiveness of perceived organization’s engagement in CSR (Du et al.,
2010). Moreover, Romani et al. (2013) find a positive relationship be­
Data were collected from a nationwide online marketing pool,
tween CSR activity and altruistic values on customer behaviors. Spe­
MTurk, a useful tool for social science and experimental studies
cifically, they explain that the congruence between the company’s effort
(Buhrmester et al., 2011). To ensure the quality of the data, respondents
to make contributions to social welfare and an individual’s own moral
had to pass quality check questions related to attention checks, the study
values generates positive perceptions and behaviors. The findings pro­
context and qualifications for minimum accuracy (Kim and Baker, 2019;
vide support that high altruists tend to feel stronger gratitude when
Rouse, 2015). After removing the responses that failed to answer quality
companies engage in prosocial CSR practices, thereby presenting
check questions, the study had a total of 184 usable responses.
advocacy behaviors such as positive word-of-mouth. In other words,
Approximately 56.5% of the respondents were male, 84.3% of house­
customers with high altruistic values might have positive perceptions
hold income ranged between $25 K and $99.9 K, 77.4% were Caucasian
towards both cause promotion and advocacy advertising. This is because
and 21.7% African American, 80.4% completed 2-year or 4-year college
these CSR messages focus on supporting communities and activate
programs, and age ranged between 25 and 44 years old.
prosocial values. Thus, the congruence effect will be more prominent for
high altruists than low altruists. However, the congruence effect would
not exist when low altruists receive advocacy advertising message. This
is because there would be a significant difference between the low and

3
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker
3.3. Measurement
The manipulation check items for the CSR message included, “In this
scenario, the restaurant states that when you purchase from them, they
will also donate proceeds to the medical workers” and “In this scenario,
the restaurant states that every purchase you make from ABC restaurant
supports medical workers.” Customer altruistic values were measured
using five items (α = 0.88) (Romani et al., 2013) including “Helping:
working for the welfare of others”, and “Cooperation: increasing positive
returns for the community”. Purchase intention is measured with three
items (α = 0.82) (Maxwell-Smith et al., 2020) including “I would be
willing to buy items from this brand”. Intention to support is measured
with four items (α = 0.86) (Lee et al., 2017) including “How likely would
you be to support this brand in the future?”. Positive word-of-mouth is
measured with three items (α = 0.87) (Xie et al., 2015) including “I
intend to say positive things about this brand to friends, relatives and
other people”. All items of manipulation check, realism check, purchase
intention, positive word-of-mouth were measured on a 7-point
Likert-type scale anchoring between (1) Strongly disagree and (7)
Strongly agree. Customer altruistic values were measured on a 7-point
scale anchored between (1) Not at all important and (7) Very much
important. Intention to support items were measured on a 7-point scale
anchored between (1) Not at all likely and (7) Very likely.
3.4. Manipulation check
Participants answered that the scenario was realistic (M=5.69) and
manipulation checks on CSR message (Mcause-promotion=5.00, Madvocacy-
format=3.44, t = 9.01, p < .001) were successful.
4. Results
To test the hypotheses, this study conducted spotlight analyses using
PROCESS model 1 (Hayes, 2018). This analysis method identified main
and two-way interaction effects and handled the continuous nature of
customer altruistic values variable. To be specific, the study adopted
PROCESS analysis to identify the moderation effect more easily (Hayes,
2018). Also, the customer altruistic values are associated with human
beliefs that is difficult to manipulate. Such variable needs to be
measured from respondents to clearly examine the effect of customer
altruistic values on customer behaviors. By adopting pick-a-point
approach, the study adopted values + /− 1 standard deviation from
the mean to verify high and low levels of measured variable (Legendre
et al., 2018; Spiller et al., 2013). Due to this reason, this study used
spotlight analysis to handle the continuous nature of the customer
altruistic values variable.
Table 1 presents that all the models are predictable in explaining
approximately 27% of total variance (R2 =.26,.27,.27) and there is
significant interaction effect between CSR message and customer
altruistic values on purchase intention (b = 0.32, t = 2.38, p < .05).
Fig. 1 demonstrates an interaction effect of CSR message and
Table 1
Regression Results of Purchase Intention, Intention to Support, and Positive WOM on Customer Altruistic Values and CSR Message.
Purchase Intention Intention to Support
Variable b (SE) t b (SE)
Constant 4.31 (0.67) 6.43
CSR -2.18 (0.80) -2.74 * *
ALT 0.20 (0.11) 1.82
CSR×ALT 0.32 (0.13) 2.38 *
R2 0.26
Note: n = 184. se = standard error; CSR = CSR message; ALT = customer altruistic values. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.
International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287
customer altruistic values on purchase intention, which indicates that
customer altruistic values had more pronounced effects on purchase
intention when customers receive advocacy CSR (MLow ALT = 4.59, MHigh
ALT = 5.70). However, customer altruistic values did not show signifi­
cant differences on purchase intention when customers encounter cause
promotion CSR (MLow ALT = 5.26, MHigh ALT = 5.69). Also, customer
altruistic values did not significantly influence customers intention to
support the brand when the brand presents CSR message (Cause pro­
motion: MLow ALT = 5.38, MHigh ALT = 5.96; Advocacy format: MLow ALT =
4.68, MHigh ALT = 5.75). Lastly, customer altruistic values did not have
moderating effect on the relationship between CSR message and positive
WOM (Cause promotion: MLow ALT = 5.14, MHigh ALT = 5.76; Advocacy
format: MLow ALT = 4.46, MHigh ALT = 5.59). Hence, Hypothesis 1-a was
supported while Hypothesis 1-b and 1-c were not supported.
5. Discussion
The results of Study 1 find that for individuals with high altruism, the
message framing type (cause vs. advocacy) does not have a significant
result in behavioral intentions. A possible explanation for this is because
these individuals have a high concern for others and will always be the
most likely to support others in need. This means the support from high
altruists is likely no matter what the CSR message is, indicating that
companies practicing CSR can act as enough cue for their positive be­
haviors. However, for individuals with low altruism, cause promotion is
a more effective messaging strategy than advocacy advertising. As such,
for advocacy message framing where individuals are asked to help
support, it is less effective considering different levels of altruistic
values. For cause promotion where part of sales is donated, it affects
both high and low altruism customers more. Therefore, the results of
Study 1 warrant more investigation of the importance of cause promo­
tion as a message framing and customer altruistic value.
6. Study 2
Study 2 seeks to build upon the results of Study 1 by investigating the
effects of cause promotion vs. psychological ownership message
framing, the moderating role of altruistic value and the mediating effects
of perceived responsibility.
7. Literature review
7.1. Psychological ownership message framing
Psychological ownership is the feeling that something is “mine” and
is increasingly receiving attention in marketing (Peck et al., 2021). One
of the routes to elicit psychological ownership is investment of oneself,
where an individual customizes (Hair et al., 2016) or names a product
(Stoner et al., 2018). Because the naming activity requires time, effort,
and ideas to create, the investment of self into the cause leads an indi­
vidual to become more involved with the cause, increasing feelings of
Positive WOM
t b (SE) t
4.10 (0.70) 3.77 (0.71) 5.30
5.88
-1.80 (0.83) -1.80 (0.84) -2.14 *
-2.18 *
0.27 (0.12) 0.29 (0.12) 2.46 *
2.35 *
0.23 (0.14) 0.24 (0.14) 1.67
1.66
0.27 0.27
4
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker
Fig. 1. Interaction Effect of Customer Altruistic Values (ALT) and CSR Mes­
sages on Purchase Intention, Intention to Support, and Positive WOM. Note:
Low ALT (− 1 SD) = 4.74, High ALT (+1 SD) = 6.89.
ownership toward that cause (Jussila et al., 2015). However, such effect
can also be applied to ideas and words (Pierce et al., 2003). As such, the
examination of psychological ownership with relation to cause promo­
tion CSR messages can provide important implications to theory, firms,
and society (He and Harris, 2020), building upon the current gaps in the
literature.
Research finds psychological ownership is obtainable through indi­
vidual customization (Hair et al., 2016) or naming of an entity (Stoner
et al., 2018). Hence, this research applies the construct of psychological
ownership to CSR messages and operationalizes it by the investment of
5
International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287
self to a cause through naming the donation. Psychological ownership
via the naming effect can create a much stronger effect compared to
solely presenting cause promotion because psychological ownership
enhances advocacy and stewardship behavior (Peck et al., 2021). That
is, when customers participate in naming the donation, they might
perceive psychological ownership toward the cause (e.g., donation to
medical workers), and such process can create increased positive brand
advocacy.
Of the limited research on psychological ownership, it is mostly
investigated within organizational contexts or where products are
consumed (Spears and Yazdanparast, 2014). Despite its importance in
customer behaviors, psychological ownership has not been investigated
with regards to CSR messages. Therefore, this research builds upon the
current CSR and message framing literature by investigating the effect of
psychological ownership within CSR.
7.2. Customer citizenship behavior
While it is important to measure traditional customer behavioral
outcomes such as brand advocacy and WOM, it is also important to
identify co-creation behavior such as customer citizenship behavior
(CCB). CCB is defined as voluntary (extra-role) behavior that provides
extraordinary value to the firm but is not necessarily required (Yi and
Gong, 2013). CCB is an important type of co-creation behavior that is
helpful, constructive gestures exhibited by customers that they volun­
tarily engage in (Kim and Baker, 2020). No literature to date has
examined CSR and CCB, despite the fact that firms want customers to
support meaningful causes. Surprisingly, the limited research on the
impact of psychological ownership on customer citizenship behavior,
calling for more research (Li et al., 2021). Specifically, two dimensions
of CCB, advocacy and tolerance (Yi and Gong, 2013) can provide
meaningful insights into this and future research. Advocacy refers to
recommending the firm to others (Groth, 2005), as commitment to the
marketing of the brand’s interests beyond the customer’s. Tolerance
refers to a willingness to be persistent when the inadequate brand ser­
vice is delivered (Lengnick-Hall et al., 2000).
Building upon this line of thought, stewardship behavior refers to
actions in service of ensuring the welfare of a target, which is an
outcome of psychological ownership (Peck et al., 2021). Research find
that social cues increase stewardship behaviors by stimulating in­
dividual’s self-perception (Allen, 1982; Miller et al., 1975). Also, recent
findings show that consumers who experience an increase in psycho­
logical ownership of a public good likely to present stewardship be­
haviors and is mediated by perceived responsibility (Peck et al., 2021).
Specifically, when there are cues of psychological ownership, it stimu­
lates the responsibility to care for the good, which results in stewardship
behavior. Understanding stewardship behavior in psychological
ownership and CSR research not only provides insights of individuals’
prosocial behavior (Peck et al., 2021) but also helps understanding how
customers would react toward a negative information about the firm,
where scant work has done. Psychological ownership diffuses re­
sponsibility, ultimately increasing stewardship behavior, and the actions
in service of ensuring the welfare of a target (Peck et al., 2021). That
said, it is crucial to examine how the application of psychological
ownership to social welfare-related cue such as CSR message can stim­
ulate customers perceived responsibility with different moral values. As
such, extending psychological ownership effect to measure customer
citizenship and stewardship behavior is necessary.
Hypothesis 2. (a-c): Psychological ownership message framing has
positive effect on (a) purchase intention (b) CCB and (c) stewardship.
7.3. The moderating role of altruistic value
The findings of Study 1 indicate that high altruistic customers
generally present positive brand behavior, not constrained to types of
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker
CSR message. That is, high altruists might have positive perceptions
towards various CSR messages. As high altruists want to benefit com­
munities and give back, there is likely less of a difference between
different CSR message framing. However, as a majority of the population
identifies as low altruists (Long and Krause, 2017), it is critical to see
how different CSR messages impact low altruists differently. This is
because scholars argue the strategic importance of investigating the
effect of CSR on customers having low social involvement because these
customers are the unexploited markets in CSR, representing profitable
targets (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005). Despite its importance, no research
has examined how CSR message interacts with customers with low
altruistic value whose intent to involve in prosocial activity is lower than
those with high altruistic. Investigating customer segments with
different value propositions is important because it can contribute to the
mixed findings of CSR message (Peloza and Shang, 2011; Woodroof
et al., 2019). Moreover, by identifying the way to appeal to individuals
generally present low brand supporting behavior, it can establish a ho­
listic approach to maximize the effect of CSR.
Peck et al. (2021) find the role of psychological ownership in pro­
moting perceived responsibility. According to psychological ownership,
there are individual differences in traits which result in different
behavior (Pierce et al., 2003). This study argues that psychological
ownership stimulates perceived responsibility from those with low
altruistic values. As to why psychological ownership might act as a
positive cue to customers with low altruistic value, the study argues that
psychological ownership stimulates perceived responsibility from those
with low altruistic values. When individuals are asked to participate in
investment of self via naming the donation, the effect of psychological
ownership toward the cause will be more prominent for low altruistic
customers, which increases perceived responsibility. As the high altru­
istic customers readily sense high social responsibility toward the cause
indicating a general support no matter what the CSR message is, it is
plausible to assume that psychological ownership effect is stronger to
low altruistic customers. That is, psychological ownership can play a
crucial role in stimulating psychological mechanism (e.g., re­
sponsibility) of individuals with low altruism when the cue is embedded
in CSR message. Conventionally, low altruistic customers present less
prosocial behavior than high altruistic customers. However, by engaging
in psychological ownership message framing, it can stimulate low al­
truists’ perceived responsibility.
Hypothesis 3. (a-c): Customer altruistic values moderate the effect of
psychological ownership on perceived responsibility, such that the effect
of psychological ownership on perceived responsibility is prominent for
customers with low altruistic values than those with high altruistic
values.
7.4. The mediating role of responsibility
Psychological ownership acts as an antecedent of responsibility, the
feelings of caring and the proactive notion of responsibility. When in­
dividuals feel closely related to the object, their willingness to protect or
enhance that identity leads to an increased feeling of responsibility
(Dipboye, 1977). This means that the role of responsibility is important
in psychological ownership and affects customer behavior through
facilitating the feelings of responsibility (Li et al., 2021).
Despite the importance of responsibility in understanding consumer
behavior, the altruism literature mainly focuses on the effect of re­
sponsibility on customers with high altruism, indicating they tend to
have high sense of responsibility about social causes due to their nature
value proposition (Schwartz, 1994). However, this research argues that
implementing psychological ownership makes individuals behave in the
best interest of principals (e.g., support for social cause) rather than in
their personal interests (e.g., low altruistic values that generally show
less prosocial and brand supporting behavior) because of their psycho­
logical principals (Pierce et al., 2003). If customers with low altruism
6
International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287
receive psychological ownership message framing where the psycho­
logical principal emphasizes the value of social cause, it can precede the
effect of their personal interests. This is because the implementation of
psychological ownership CSR can increase perceive responsibility from
individuals with low altruistic values, which affects their brand sup­
porting behaviors. As such, psychological ownership can be a message
framing cue that stimulates the perceived responsibility, which ulti­
mately shapes customer behavior toward “care for the social cause.”
Comparing to individuals with high altruistic values who readily sense
the responsibility for the prosocial activity, those with low altruistic
values might be more affected by a psychological ownership message as
it boosts responsibility leading to increased brand behaviors. This means
the increased brand behavior based on the psychological ownership
effect is obtainable via increased responsibility from low altruistic cus­
tomers. Hence, the study posits that the interaction effect of psycho­
logical ownership and customer altruistic value on brand behavior will
be examined via accentuating perceived responsibility, a key mediator
of the proposed relationship.
Hypothesis 4. (a-c): Perceived responsibility mediates the joint effect
of psychological ownership and customer altruistic values on (a) pur­
chase intention (b) CCB and (c) stewardship.
8. Methods and results
8.1. Design and procedures
Study 2 adopts a similar 2 (CSR message: psychological ownership
vs. cause promotion) × 2 (Customer altruistic values: high vs. low) be­
tween subjects’ experiment. This study builds upon the findings from
Study 1, examining the moderated mediation effect of perceived re­
sponsibility on the relationship between CSR message and purchase
intention, CCB and brand stewardship. Similar to the Study 1, the sce­
narios depict a fictitious restaurant brand that presents CSR message.
Following Peck et al. (2021)’s procedures, psychological ownership
message asks participants to write down the name of “their” donation
and this proportional donation will be made in their name.
8.2. Participants
Data were obtained from a nationwide online marketing pool,
MTurk. To ensure the generalizability on the effect of context, COVID-
19, there was 6 months of interval time for data collection in between
the two studies. The same quality control measures were used to ensure
the quality of the data (Mattila et al., 2020). After eliminating the re­
sponses that failed to answer quality check questions, the study had a
total of 187 usable responses. Approximately 62.6% of the respondents
were male, household income ranged between $25 K and $99.9 K,
73.3% were Caucasian and 11.2% African American 78.6% attended a 2
or 4-year college (78.6%), and respondents’ age ranged between 25 and
54 years old.
8.3. Measurement
The identical variable measures for customer altruistic values and
purchase intention were adopted (α = 0.89; 0.82) (Maxwell-Smith et al.,
2020; Romani et al., 2013). The manipulation check items for psycho­
logical ownership CSR message included, “I feel like this is MY dona­
tion”, “I feel a very high degree of personal ownership of this donation”,
and “I feel like this donation belongs to me.” Perceived responsibility
was measured with four items (Peck et al., 2021) (α = 0.93) including “I
feel a sense of responsibility to donate to the fight against COVID-19.”
Using Yi and Gong’s (2013) scale, CCBT, a willingness to be persistent
when the inadequate brand service is delivered (Lengnick-Hall et al.,
2000), was measured with three items (α = 0.79) including “If the ser­
vice is not delivered as expected at ABC restaurant, I would be willing to
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287

put up with it.” CCBA, recommending the firm to others (Groth, 2005), Table 3
was measured with three items (α = 0.92) including “I would say posi­ Conditional indirect effects of CSR message on purchase intention.
tive things about the ABC restaurant brand to others.” Brand steward­ Altruistic value level b se CI95
ship, responsible supervision of the welfare of a brand (Peck et al., 2021;
Mediator: perceived Mean – 1 SD (4.56) 0.34 0.14 0.07–0.61
Peck and Shu, 2018), was measured with three items (α = 0.94) (Gong, responsibility
2018) including “I would defend the ABC restaurant brand image when Mean (5.76) 0.14 0.09 -0.05–0.32
others criticize it.” All items were measured on a 7-point Likert-type Mean + 1 SD (6.95) -0.07 0.14 -0.33–0.22
scale anchoring between (1) Strongly disagree and (7) Strongly agree.

Table 4
8.4. Manipulation check
Conditional indirect effects of CSR message on CCBT.

Participants answered that the scenario was realistic (M=5.71). Altruistic value level b se CI95

Manipulation checks on CSR message (MPO=5.68, MCP=3.86, t = 8.72, Mediator: perceived Mean – 1 SD (4.56) 0.24 0.11 0.05–0.46
p < .001) and naming the donation (MPO=1.09, MCP=2.23, t = − 15.42, responsibility
Mean (5.76) 0.10 0.07 -0.03–0.24
p < .001) were successful.
Mean + 1 SD (6.95) -0.05 0.10 -0.24–0.15

8.5. Results
Table 5
To test the moderated mediation model, the study adopted PROCESS Conditional indirect effects of CSR message on CCBA.
Model 7 (Hayes, 2018), which explains estimates of the conditional (i.e., Altruistic value level b se CI95
low vs. high altruistic value) indirect effects of the causal variable (i.e.,
Mediator: perceived Mean – 1 SD (4.56) 0.30 0.13 0.07–0.58
psychological ownership vs. cause promotion message) on the depen­
responsibility
dent variables (purchase intention, CCB, and stewardship) through the Mean (5.76) 0.12 0.08 -0.04–0.29
proposed mediator (responsibility) along with the direct effect of the Mean + 1 SD (6.95) -0.06 0.12 -0.31–0.17
causal variable on the outcome variables. First, Table 2 presents that the
models are predictable explaining total variance (R2 =.28,.44,.23,.33,
.40). The result indicate significant main effect of psychological Table 6
ownership on perceived responsibility (b = 2.33, t = 2.42, p < .05), Conditional indirect effects of CSR message on brand stewardship.
CCBT (b = 0.45, t = 2.85, p < .01), CCBA (b = 0.39, t = 2.60, p < .05),
Altruistic value level b se CI95
and brand stewardship (b = 0.56, t = 3.13, p < .01), while the effect on
Mediator: perceived Mean – 1 SD (4.56) 0.43 0.17 0.10–0.79
purchase intention is slightly above than significance level (b = 0.25,
responsibility
t = 1.95, p = .053). There is interaction effect between the CSR message Mean (5.76) 0.17 0.12 -0.05–0.40
and customer altruistic values on perceived responsibility (b = − 0.36, Mean + 1 SD (6.95) -0.08 0.17 -0.44–0.26
t = − 2.18, p < .05). Perceived responsibility has significant effect on
purchase intention (b = 0.48, t = 11.42, p < .001), CCBT (b = 0.34,
t = 6.43, p < .001), CCBA (b = 0.43, t = 8.58, p < .001), and brand not mediate the relationship between CSR message and outcome vari­
stewardship (b = 0.60, t = 10.12, p < .001). Therefore, Hypothesis 2-a-c ables including purchase intention (LCI: − 0.33, UCI: 0.22), CCBT (LCI:
and 3-a-c were supported. − 0.24, UCI: 0.15), CCBA (LCI: − 0.31, UCI: 0.17), and stewardship
Fig. 2 demonstrates an interaction effect of CSR message and behavior (LCI: − 0.44, UCI: 0.26). The index of moderated mediation for
customer altruistic values on perceived responsibility, which indicates purchase intention, CCBT, CCBA, and brand stewardship also was sig­
that customers with low altruistic values experience a significant in­ nificant (index: − 0.17, SE: 0.08, LCI: − 0.34, UCI: − 0.01; index: − 0.12,
crease in perceived responsibility when psychological ownership was SE: 0.06, LCI: − 0.25, UCI: − 0.00; index: − 0.15, SE: 0.08, LCI: − 0.32,
presented (MCP = 3.88, MPO = 4.59). However, such effect was not UCI: − 0.01; index: − 0.21, SE: 0.11, LCI: − 0.44, UCI: − 0.01) showing
presented among customers with high altruistic values (MCP = 5.73, MPO that it explains a test of the equality of the power of mediation (Hayes,
= 5.59). 2018). Hence, the moderated mediation model supported Hypothesis
Moreover, the moderated mediation results show that for the pur­ 4-a-c.
chase intention, CCBT, CCBA, and brand stewardship, the effects of CSR
message were mediated by perceived responsibility for the customers 9. General discussion
with low altruistic values (lower confidence interval [LCI]: 0.07, 0.05,
0.07, 0.10; upper confidence interval [UCI]: 0.61, 0.46, 0.58, 0.79). Study 1 applies signaling and congruence theory to examine the role
However, when altruistic value was high, perceived responsibility did of CSR message (advocacy vs. cause promotion) and customer altruistic

Table 2
Model Coefficients for the PROCESS Model 7.
Perceived Responsibility Purchase Intention CCBT CCBA Brand Stewardship

Variable b (se) t b (se) t b (se) t b (se) t b (se) t

Constant 0.35 (0.61) .58 2.66 (0.22) 12.27 * ** 2.86 (0.27) 10.64 * ** 2.81 (0.25) 11.04 * ** 1.10 (0.30) 3.63 * **
CSR 2.33 (0.97) 2.42 * 0.25 (0.13) 1.95 0.45 (0.16) 2.85 * * 0.39 (0.15) 2.60 * 0.56 (0.18) 3.13 * *
ALT 0.77 (0.11) 7.28 * **
CSR × ALT -0.36 (0.16) -2.18 *
PR 0.48 (0.04) 11.42 * ** 0.34 (0.05) 6.43 * ** 0.43 (0.05) 8.58 * ** 0.60 (0.06) 10.12 * **
R2 0.28 0.44 0.23 0.33 0.40

Note: n = 187. se = standard error; CSR = CSR message; ALT = customer altruistic values; PR = perceived responsibility; CCBT = CCB Tolerance; CCBA = CCB
Advocacy
* p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001

7
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker
Fig. 2. Interaction Effect of CSR Message and Customer Altruistic Values on
Perceived Responsibility. Note: Low ALT (− 1 SD) = 4.56, High ALT
(+1 SD) = 6.95.
values on brand behaviors. The results indicate that for high altruists,
their intention to support and positive WOM do not significantly differ
by the types of CSR message. This might be attributed to the nature of
their altruism and desire to make the world a better place, thus not
having a preference for specific CSR messaging. However, the study
finds an interaction effect between CSR message and customer altruistic
values on purchase behavior, such that high altruistic customers tend to
purchase from the brand when advocacy advertising message is pre­
sented. That is, customer value propositions (e.g., altruism) influence
the congruence effect between CSR message and customers’ purchase
behavior. The result shows congruence effect can be applied to CSR
message and customer value proposition, which extends the current
theoretical knowledge that mainly examines the brand-CSR activity
congruence (Pérez et al., 2019).
As to why customers with high altruistic value are more likely to
purchase rather than giving support or positive WOM toward a brand,
the study argues the nature of the variables and crisis context contribute
to the different results. To be specific, purchase intention is directly
related to customer buying behavior. That is, in crisis, such as COVID-
19, customers with high altruistic values have high prosocial behavior
expressed through purchasing a brand. Given that the hospitality busi­
nesses have experienced financial turmoil during COVID-19 (CNBC,
2020), customers might perceive offering financial help is what the
companies need the most. Previous research address that COVID-19
fundamentally changes customer purchasing behaviors (Kantar, 2020),
which necessitates for a firm to developing effective marketing (Wang
et al., 2020). To answer this, the finding clarifies the role of CSR mar­
keting message in increasing customer purchase.
Study 2′ s results indicate that psychological ownership positively
influences CCB and stewardship. Also, psychological ownership
partially influences purchase intention as it is significant at the .052
(p = .052). This means that rather than following the conventional
practice of advocacy or cause promotion, adopting psychological
ownership creates better outcomes for both high and low altruistic
customers. The results answer calls for an extension of psychological
ownership effect that mainly examines its impact within organizational
context (Li et al., 2021), into the customer domain. Also, the result
broadens the psychological ownership to conceptually related context
(e.g., CSR activity) where previous research test its effect on the prod­
ucts only (Peck et al., 2013; Spears and Yazdanparast, 2014).
Results also find that altruism moderates the role between CSR
message framing and perceived responsibility. This interaction shows
that customers with low altruistic values experience a significant in­
crease in perceived responsibility when the psychological ownership
message framing is used in CSR. This is because the adoption of
8
International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287
psychological ownership might better stimulate the sense of re­
sponsibility from the individuals who usually have low motives in
responding to prosocial movement. Conversely, consistent with Study
1′ s finding that high altruistic customers’ brand behaviors are not con­
strained to certain type of CSR message, their perceived responsibility
does not differ depending on the type of CSR messages. Such finding is
important because it provides holistic understanding of different
customer segments, in which scholars especially call for influencing
individuals with low involvement in CSR (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005).
Also, as previous literature mainly examines the role of high altruistic
customers (Boer and Fischer, 2013; Schwartz, 1992), the finding es­
tablishes the comprehensive understanding of CSR effectiveness on in­
dividuals with different value propositions.
Lastly, there is a partial mediating role of responsibility in the
interaction effect of psychological ownership and altruistic values on
purchase intention, CCB and brand stewardship. This shows the signif­
icance of responsibility, a key mediator, in that psychological ownership
message framing increases the sense of responsibility from customers
with low altruistic values, thereby creating positive outcomes including
brand advocacy and stewardship. That is, the outcomes of applying
psychological ownership for these customers is obtainable through
enhancing their perceived responsibility, the antecedent of various
brand behaviors. Such behaviors not only include purchase intention but
encompass the broader spectrum such as voluntary and protective
behavior toward the company. A possible explanation for this mecha­
nism is that as psychological ownership effect becomes prominent, it
emphasizes the value of societal cause (Pierce et al., 2003). Our results
align with responsibility literature that finds ownership is an antecedent
to responsibility.
Embedding psychological ownership in prosocial messages diffuses
feeling of responsibility, which ultimately increases the importance of
the highlighted principals such as “care for the society.” Therefore, re­
sponsibility is a key factor for customers with low altruistic values to
understand. That is, psychological ownership stimulates the social mo­
tives (e.g., responsibility) by altering low altruists’ focus from self-
interest to socially responsible, thereby increasing purchase intention,
brand advocacy and stewardship behavior. The results provide an
explanation of how and why individuals having lower interest in CSR
become advocative to the brand that participates in socially responsible
practice while employing effective CSR message. This is meaningful
because the ultimate purpose of CSR is to achieve maximized outcomes.
10. Theoretical implications
This research provides theoretical implications amending significant
gaps in the literature. First, the study contributes to the CSR literature by
building upon CSR message marketing framing (Huang and Liu, 2020),
as little research examines CSR message framing in marketing activities
(Woodroof et al., 2019). As such, the study examines the effectiveness of
CSR by adopting three different types of CSR message framing: advocacy
promotion, cause promotion, and psychological ownership. The result of
this study identifies that psychological ownership and cause promotion
are most effective during victim crises such as COVID-19. Thus, the
study contributes to the gaps on CSR by examining the importance and
how message framing, particularly during victim type crises such as
COVID-19, is critical to aid in brand evaluations and to assist commu­
nities (Huang and Liu, 2020).
Next, the research contributes theoretically by examining the effec­
tiveness of different message framing appeals. Previous research largely
focuses on the congruence effect between company and CSR cause/
message (Pérez et al., 2019; Schaefer et al., 2020), which requires
further testing of congruence on various CSR messages and customer
values. Without extending its effect spectrum to customers and their
value proposition, it fails to understand the effect of CSR more
completely. This study reveals the role of high altruistic values in
increasing customers’ buying behavior, suggesting that marketing
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker
advocacy advertising message enhances buying intention from cus­
tomers who value social welfare during a crisis such as COVID-19.
Therefore, the finding of this study shows that the congruence theory
is applicable to the customer altruistic values context, which expands
the applicability of the theory into the CSR marketing and customer
behavior research by increasing theoretical applicability.
Moreover, the research builds upon CSR and message framing by
investigating psychological ownership, which has not been investigated
with relation to CSR and within customer domain. As such, this research
answered the calls for studies that examine psychological ownership
construct within the customer domain (Li et al., 2021). Results find that
psychological ownership CSR accentuates various customer behaviors
including advocacy and voice behavior, indicating this message framing
is most effective with both high and low altruistic customers. That is, the
CSR message can extend its effect from social concerns to brand support
by incorporating “psychological principal”. Therefore, the findings not
only help the comprehensive understanding of CSR but also identify the
significant role of psychological ownership in creating customer brand
behaviors.
Third, this research contributes theoretically by examining the
moderating role of customer altruism. Previous research focuses on
gaining more participation from high altruistic individuals, who are
already most likely to support causes. However, few studies have
investigated how to gain increased participation from low altruistic
customers. This is especially important as majority of people in U.S. have
low altruism (75%) where less than 25% identify as highly altruistic
(Long and Krause, 2017). The finding indicates that implementing
psychological ownership stimulates perceived responsibility from those
with low altruistic values. This contributes to a maximization of the CSR
effectiveness and customer altruism by identifying the strategy to appeal
to customers having low brand supporting behavior.
Finally, the study finds a plausible reason to explain why customers
with low altruistic values present brand behavior after encountering
psychological ownership message by understanding the mediating role
of perceived responsibility. Failing to understand various customer
segments possessing different interests and values prohibits how in­
dividuals’ psychological process toward firms’ CSR would work. The
findings indicate that psychological ownership stimulates the sense of
responsibility for social cause, thereby increasing purchase intention,
citizenship, and stewardship behavior from customers with low altru­
istic values. As such, the study identifies the responsibility as the un­
derlying mechanism and as vital attribute in encouraging individuals’
prosocial tendencies and their brand behavior. Such effect is prominent
when businesses promote psychological ownership message for those
who have low altruistic values. This contributes to the knowledge of
psychological ownership and customer behavior in various segments.
Such finding contributes to the academic concerns that necessitates the
behavior examination from customers having low participation in pro­
social behavior (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005). Therefore, the study ex­
tends the psychological ownership theory by examining the moderating
role of customer altruistic values and mediating role of perceived re­
sponsibility in terms of customer brand behavior.
11. Managerial implications
This study suggests that if a hospitality business aims to implement
CSR messages in attempt to increase customer brand behavior, it should
communicate its messages while considering marketing situation and
customer value proposition. First, advocacy advertising message in­
creases purchase intention from customers having high altruistic values.
Such finding is beneficial to firms where they have experienced financial
turmoil during the crisis. That is, unlike the cause promotion that re­
quires an expenditure, proportional donation, advocacy advertising
would not impose a financial burden because it does not accompany
with expenditures yet encourages buying behavior for those who care
about social welfare. Therefore, when companies experience financial
9
International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287
difficulty during the crisis, they should implement advocacy advertising
by targeting high altruistic customers. In this way, customers who value
social welfare perceive company’s CSR message more favorably. For
example, firms should strategically present CSR messages by empha­
sizing social issues related to welfare to appeal to targeted customers. By
doing so, such messages provoke customers who are highly altruistic,
which ultimately increases hospitality business’s financial perfor­
mances, which is what the companies need the most at the time of
COVID-19.
However, in a situation where businesses possibly make a donation,
the study argues that implementing psychological ownership to CSR
message is the most effective strategy because it not only accentuates
purchase intention but also brand advocacy behaviors. Moreover, such
effect is not confined to a certain market segment but can be applied
more broadly to customers with both low and high altruistic value. As
such, firms should actively promote psychological ownership CSR
message by asking customers’ participation. That is, CSR messages
should appeal to customers that companies make donation together with
customer when they participate in self-investment activity (e.g., naming
effect). When firms make customers engage in naming the donation with
the “together” slogan embedded in the CSR message, customers’
involvement facilitates psychological ownership process. As a result,
businesses can achieve positive outcomes such as purchase intention and
customer brand behaviors. To reinforce its effect, firms can also send a
confirmation with a thank you note to customers who participate in such
practice. Hence, the findings show that adopting psychological owner­
ship CSR is the best donation strategy to obtain the positive results from
broad spectrum of customer segment. Firms can promote the best CSR
message that contributes to the long-term success in the competitive
market as well as to build stronger customer relationship.
Furthermore, the findings of the study emphasize the role of psy­
chological ownership that appeals to those with low altruistic values as
well as the mediating role of perceived responsibility. This is crucial
because although companies actively practicing CSR usually receive
strong support from altruistic customers, it is ambiguous on how to
obtain positive outcomes from customers having low altruistic values.
The findings indicate that companies should focus on accentuating low
altruists’ perceived responsibility when implementing psychological
ownership CSR message. For example, rather than simply appealing for
donation, firms should strategically develop CSR communication stra­
tegies when targeting to customers with low altruistic values. This
should be carefully employed by explicitly providing information
regarding the importance of CSR practice and severity of crisis (e.g.,
COVID-19) embedded in the message. By doing so, it can stimulate low
altruistic customers’ perceived responsibility by making them exposed
to the context. Nowadays, companies practicing CSR tend to ask cus­
tomers for financial contribution, which imposes a responsibility solely
on customers’ side. However, such practices can cause a backfire which
does more harm than good. Thus, hospitality businesses should take
initiative when addressing CSR message that it is the brand that makes
the donation while appreciating customers’ participation in naming the
donation. Showing the “togetherness” will be beneficial to the firm
because it can facilitate the prosocial-related notion, thereby making
customers being tolerant, advocative, and protective toward the brand.
Overall, the findings indicate that considering different CSR mes­
sages and customer segments will be beneficial to the company. Major
hotel companies such as Hilton Hotels & Resorts, Marriott International,
and InterContinental Hotel group engaged in CSR during the COVID-19
pandemic, specifically focusing on health care workers (Shin et al.,
2021). As such, hospitality businesses should actively utilize various
CSR messages while understanding the market situation such as
COVID-19 where providing support for medical workers is essential,
which not only increases financial performance but also can create
customers’ advocacy and extra-role behavior. The findings provide im­
plications of how to overcome detrimental crisis by engaging in socially
responsible behavior. Doing so also helps in the long term because
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287

customer would remember such prosocial practices the companies br/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8ZM6DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=andrew+haye

s+process&ots=20AcsP1h2z&sig=grnEMU3LOIBEl4rhl_PFxVANVCU&redir_e
employ despite of the dark time.
sc=y#v=onepage&q=andrewhayesprocess&f=false〉.
He, H., Harris, L., 2020. The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on corporate social
12. Limitation and future research responsibility and marketing philosophy. J. Bus. Res. 116, 176–182.
Hemingway, C.A., Maclagan, P.W., 2004. Managers’ personal values as drivers of
corporate social responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics 50 (1), 33–44.
As with any research, our examination is not without limitations. Herrmann, A., Zidansek, M., Sprott, D.E., Spangenberg, E.R., 2013. The power of
First, although the research contextualizes COVID-19 as a crisis due to simplicity: processing fluency and the effects of olfactory cues on retail sales.
J. Retail. 89 (1), 30–43.
the time and economic sensitivity, future studies can examine the var­ Hilton (2020, March 26). Hilton corporate response to COVID-19. Hilton. 〈https://news
iables with different types of crises or test its effect during normal time. room.hilton.com/corporate/news/hilton-corporate-response-to-covid19〉.
Second, future research should seek to use other qualitative and quan­ Huang, H., Liu, S.Q., 2020. “Donate to help combat COVID-19!” How typeface affects the
effectiveness of CSR marketing? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 32 (10), 3315–3333.
titative methods such as field study to measure actual customer be­ Hwang, Y.H., Choi, S., Mattila, A.S., 2021. Rounding up for a cause: the joint effect of
haviors, where the current study adopted fictitious scenario-based donation type and crowding on donation likelihood. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 93,
experiment because of the pandemic where the on-site approaches are 102779.
Jussila, I., Tarkiainen, A., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., 2015. Individual psychological
highly restricted. Third, the testing of boundary condition within
ownership: concepts, evidence, and implications for research in marketing. J. Mark.
advocacy advertising in that what other factors can increase marketing Theory Pract. 23 (2), 121–139.
outcomes is necessary. Fourth, future study should extend the testing of Kang, A.Y., Legendre, T.S., Cartier, E.A., 2019. Personality congruence among brands,
CSR effects by incorporating variables such as personal involvement and recruiters, and applicants during the anticipatory socialization process. J. Hosp.
Tour. Res. 43 (8), 1302–1325.
a level of concern related to COVID-19. Lastly, although the result shows Kantar. (2020, February). Coronavirus outbreak’s impact on China’s consumption. 〈htt
the effect of psychological ownership on purchase intention close to the ps://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/OptUHteL3zGVHahnDolRDg〉.
significance level (p = .052), such relationship needs further testing. Kim, W.C., Mauborgne, R., 2005. Value innovation: a leap into the blue ocean. J. Bus.
Strategy 26 (4), 22–28.
Kim, K., Baker, M.A., 2020. Paying it forward: the influence of other customer service
References recovery on future co-creation. J. Bus. Res. 121, 604–615.
Kim, Y.S., Baker, M.A., 2019. Observer reactions to other customer incivility: emotional
labor, gratitude, loyalty to employee and tipping intention. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp.
Ahn, J.S., Assaf, A.G., Josiassen, A., Baker, M.A., Lee, S., Kock, F., Tsionas, M.G., 2020.
Manag. 31 (3), 1292–1308.
Narcissistic CEOs and corporate social responsibility: Does the role of an outside
Kotler, P., Lee, N., 2005. Best of breed: When it comes to gaining a market edge while
board of directors matter? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 85, 102350.
supporting a social cause,“corporate social marketing” leads the pack. Soc. Mark. Q.
Allen, C.T., 1982. Self-perception based strategies for stimulating energy conservation.
11 (3–4), 91–103.
J. Consum. Res. 8 (4), 381–390.
Lee, S., Bolton, L.E., Winterich, K.P., 2017. To profit or not to profit? The role of greed
Andreasen, A.R., 1996. Profits for nonprofits: find a corporate partner. Harv. Bus. Rev. 74
perceptions in consumer support for social ventures. J. Consum. Res. 44 (4),
(6), 47–50.
853–876.
Baker, M.A., 2021. Educational distancing: a mixed-methods study of student
Legendre, T.S., Baker, M., Warnick, R., Assaf, A., 2020. Worldview-based hospitality
perceptions in the time of coronavirus. J. Hosp. Tour. Educ. 10–15.
brand support: belief in a just world theory perspectives. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp.
Baker, M.A., Davis, E.A., Weaver, P.A., 2014. Eco-friendly attitudes, barriers to
Manag. 32 (3), 1089–1107.
participation, and differences in behavior at green hotels. Cornell Hosp. Q. 55 (1),
Legendre, T., Warnick, R., Baker, M., 2018. The support of local underdogs: system
89–99.
justification theory perspectives. Cornell Hosp. Q. 59 (3), 201–214.
Berbekova, A., Baker, M.A., 2020. Crisis management and tourism experiences. In The
Lengnick-Hall, C.A., Claycomb, V., (Cindy), Inks, L.W., 2000. From recipient to
Routledge Handbook of Tourism Experience Management and Marketing.
contributor: examining customer roles and experienced outcomes. Eur. J. Mark. 34
Routledge, pp. 580–589.
(3/4), 359–383.
Boer, D., Fischer, R., 2013. How and when do personal values guide our attitudes and
Li, S., Qu, H., Wei, M., 2021. Antecedents and consequences of hotel customers’
sociality? Explaining cross-cultural variability in attitude-value linkages. Psychol.
psychological ownership. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 93, 102773.
Bull. 139 (5), 1113–1147.
Long, M.C., Krause, E., 2017. Altruism by age and social proximity. PLOS One 12 (8),
Boley, M. (2020, April 10). How hotels are supporting healthcare workers during COVID-
e0180411.
19. CVENT. 〈https://www.cvent.com/en/blog/hospitality/hotels-supporting-hea
Mattila, A.S., Luo, A., Xue, X., Ye, T., 2020. How to avoid common mistakes in
lthcare〉.
experimental research? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 33 (1), 367–374.
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., Gosling, S.D., 2011. Amazon’s mechanical Turk: a new
Maxwell-Smith, M.A., Barnett White, T., Loyd, D.L., 2020. Does perceived treatment of
source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 6 (1), 3–5.
unfamiliar employees affect consumer brand attitudes? Social dominance ideologies
Coombs, W.T., 2014. Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, And
reveal who cares the most and why. J. Bus. Res. 109, 461–471.
Responding. Sage Publications.
Menon, S., Kahn, B.E., 2003. Corporate sponsorships of philanthropic activities: When do
CNBC (2020, April 14). Delivering donated meals to coronavirus workers is helping keep
they impact perception of sponsor brand? J. Consum. Psychol. 13 (3), 316–327.
these restaurants in business. (n.d.). CNBC. 〈https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/14/
Miller, R.L., Brickman, P., Bolen, D., 1975. Attribution versus persuasion as a means for
restaurants-surviving-helping-by-sending-meals-to-covid-19-workers.html〉.
modifying behavior. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 31 (3), 430–441.
de Matos, C.A., Rossi, C.A.V., 2008. WOM communications in marketing: a meta-analytic
Ou, J., Wong, I.K.A., Huang, G.Q.I., 2021. The coevolutionary process of restaurant CSR
review of the antecedents and moderators. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 36 (4), 578–596.
in the time of mega disruption. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 92, 102684.
Dipboye, R.L., 1977. A critical review of Korman’s self-consistency theory of work
Peck, J., Barger, V.A., Webb, A., 2013. In search of a surrogate for touch: the effect of
motivation and occupational choice. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 18 (1), 108–126.
haptic imagery on perceived ownership. J. Consum. Psychol. 23 (2), 189–196.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., Sen, S., 2010. Maximizing business returns to corporate social
Peck, J., Kirk, C.P., Luangrath, A.W., Shu, S.B., 2021. Caring for the commons: using
responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 12 (1),
psychological ownership to enhance stewardship behavior for public goods. J. Mark.
8–19.
85 (2), 33–49.
Edelman (2020, May 5). 2020 Edelman trust barometer spring update: trust and the
Peck, J., Shu, S.B. (Eds.), 2018. Psychological Ownership And Consumer Behavior.
covid-19 pandemic. Edelman. 〈https://www.edelman.com/research/trust-2020-spr
Springer.
ing-update〉.
Peloza, J., Shang, J., 2011. How can corporate social responsibility activities create value
Forbes (2020, November 22). Community giving differentiating it as a brand. (n.d.).
for stakeholders? A systematic review. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 39 (1), 117–135.
Forbes. 〈https://www.forbes.com/sites/garystern/2020/08/03/jerseys-mikes-subs-
Pérez, A., del Mar García de los Salmones, M., Liu, M.T., 2019. Maximising business
community-giving-differentiating-it-as-a-brand/?sh=621261103983〉.
returns to corporate social responsibility communication: an empirical test. Bus.
Giacomini, D., Martini, M., Sancino, A., Zola, P., Cavenago, D., 2021. Corporate social
Ethics 28 (3), 275–289.
responsibility actions and organizational legitimacy at the peak of COVID-19: A
Pierce, J.L., Kostova, T., Dirks, K.T., 2003. The state of psychological ownership:
sentiment analysis. Corp. Gov.: Int. J. Bus. Soc. 21 (6), 1043–1058.
integrating and extending a century of research. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 7 (1), 84–107.
Gong, T., 2018. Customer brand engagement behavior in online brand communities.
Qiu, S.C., Jiang, J., Liu, X., Chen, M.H., Yuan, X., 2021. Can corporate social
J. Serv. Mark. 32 (3), 286–299.
responsibility protect firm value during the COVID-19 pandemic? Int. J. Hosp.
Groth, M., 2005. Customers as good soldiers: examining citizenship behaviors in internet
Manag. 93, 102759.
service deliveries. J. Manag. 31 (1), 7–27.
Romani, S., Grappi, S., Bagozzi, R.P., 2013. Explaining consumer reactions to corporate
Hair, J.F., Barth, K., Neubert, D., Sarstedt, M., 2016. Examining the role of psychological
social responsibility: the role of gratitude and altruistic values. J. Bus. Ethics 114 (2),
ownership and feedback in customer empowerment strategies. J. Creat. Value 2 (2),
193–206.
194–210.
Rouse, S.V., 2015. A reliability analysis of Mechanical Turk data. Comput. Hum. Behav.
Hao, F., Xiao, Q., Chon, K., 2020. COVID-19 and China’s hotel industry: impacts, a
43, 304–307.
disaster management framework, and post-pandemic agenda. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.
Schaefer, S.D., Terlutter, R., Diehl, S., 2020. Talking about CSR matters: employees’
90, 102636.
perception of and reaction to their company’s CSR communication in four different
Hayes, A.F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process
CSR domains. Int. J. Advert. 39 (2), 191–212.
Analysis: A Regression Approach. The Guilford Press. 〈https://books.google.com.

10
Y.A. Kang and M.A. Baker
Schoofs, L., Claeys, A.S., 2021. Communicating sadness: the impact of emotional crisis
communication on the organizational post-crisis reputation. J. Bus. Res. 130,
271–282.
Schwartz, S.H., 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical
advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 25 (C), 1–65.
Schwartz, S.H., 1994. Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human
values? J. Soc. Issues 50 (4), 19–45.
Shin, H., Sharma, A., Nicolau, J.L., Kang, J., 2021. The impact of hotel CSR for strategic
philanthropy on booking behavior and hotel performance during the COVID-19
pandemic. Tour. Manag. 85, 104322.
Spears, N., Yazdanparast, A., 2014. Revealing obstacles to the consumer imagination.
J. Consum. Psychol. 24 (3), 363–372.
Spiller, S.A., Fitzsimons, G.J., Lynch Jr., J.G., McClelland, G.H., 2013. Spotlights,
floodlights, and the magic number zero: Simple effects tests in moderated regression.
J. Mark. Res. 50 (2), 277–288.
Stoner, J.L., Loken, B., Blank, A.S., 2018. The name game: How naming products
increases psychological ownership and subsequent consumer evaluations.
J. Consum. Psychol. 28 (1), 130–137.
Su, L., Tang, B., Nawijn, J., 2021. How destination social responsibility shapes resident
emotional solidarity and quality of life: Moderating roles of disclosure tone and
visual messaging. J. Travel Res. 00472875211056683.
Tong, Z., Xie, Y., Xiao, H., 2021. Effect of CSR contribution timing during COVID-19
pandemic on consumers’ prepayment purchase intentions: Evidence from hospitality
industry in China. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 97, 102997.
Vlachos, P.A., Tsamakos, A., Vrechopoulos, A.P., Avramidis, P.K., 2009. Corporate social
responsibility: attributions, loyalty, and the mediating role of trust. J. Acad. Mark.
Sci. 37 (2), 170–180.
11
International Journal of Hospitality Management 106 (2022) 103287
Wang, Y., Hong, A., Li, X., Gao, J., 2020. Marketing innovations during a global crisis: a
study of China firms’ response to COVID-19. J. Bus. Res. 116, 214–220.
Wood, D.J., 1991. Social issues in management: theory and research in corporate social
performance. J. Manag. 17 (2), 383–406.
Woodroof, P.J., Deitz, G.D., Howie, K.M., Evans, R.D., 2019. The effect of cause-related
marketing on firm value: a look at Fortune’s most admired all-stars. J. Acad. Mark.
Sci. 47 (5), 899–918.
Wu, W.Y., Lu, H.Y., Wu, Y.Y., Fu, C.S., 2012. The effects of product scarcity and
consumers’ need for uniqueness on purchase intention. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 36 (3),
263–274.
Xie, C., Bagozzi, R.P., Grønhaug, K., 2015. The role of moral emotions and individual
differences in consumer responses to corporate green and non-green actions. J. Acad.
Mark. Sci. 43 (3), 333–356.
Xie, C., Bagozzi, R.P., Grønhaug, K., 2019. The impact of corporate social responsibility
on consumer brand advocacy: the role of moral emotions, attitudes, and individual
differences. J. Bus. Res. 95, 514–530.
Yi, Y., Gong, T., 2013. Customer value co-creation behavior: scale development and
validation. J. Bus. Res. 66 (9), 1279–1284.
Yuan, D., Lin, Z., Filieri, R., Liu, R., Zheng, M., 2020. Managing the product-harm crisis
in the digital era: the role of consumer online brand community engagement. J. Bus.
Res. 115, 38–47.
Zasuwa, G., 2016. Do the ends justify the means? How altruistic values moderate
consumer responses to corporate social initiatives. J. Bus. Res. 69 (9), 3714–3719.
Zasuwa, G., 2017. The role of company-cause fit and company involvement in consumer
responses to CSR initiatives: a meta-analytic review. Sustainability 9 (6), 1016.