Accepted Manuscript

Corporate social responsibility and consumer advocacy behaviors: The importance of

emotions and moral virtues

Sandra Castro-González, Belén Bande, Pilar Fernández-Ferrín, Takuma Kimura

PII: S0959-6526(19)31772-X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.238
Reference: JCLP 17003

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 21 May 2018

Revised Date: 20 May 2019
Accepted Date: 21 May 2019

Please cite this article as: Castro-González S, Bande Belé, Fernández-Ferrín P, Kimura T, Corporate
social responsibility and consumer advocacy behaviors: The importance of emotions and moral virtues,
Journal of Cleaner Production (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.238.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Corporate social responsibility and consumer advocacy

behaviors: the importance of emotions and moral

virtues

PT
RI
SC
Sandra Castro-González (Corresponding author)
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela
School of Business Administration

U
Avda. Alfonso X el Sabio, s/n
27002 Lugo, Spain
AN
E-mail: sandra.castro@usc.es

Belén Bande
M

Universidad Internacional de la Rioja/ Universidade de Santiago de Compostela

Business and Communication School
Logroño, 26006, Spain
D

belen.bande@usc.es
TE

Pilar Fernández-Ferrín
EP

University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)

Facultad de Economía y Empresa
Comandante Izarduy, 23
01006 Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain
C

Email: pilar.fernandezf@ehu.eus
AC

Takuma Kimura
Hosei University
2-17-1,
Fujimi, Chiyoda-ku,
Tokyo, Japan
E-mail: ktakuma@hosei.ac.jp
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Funding: This publication has been funded with support from the Galician Plan for
Research, Innovation and Growth (Plan I2C) of the Xunta de Galicia (Consellería de
Cultura, Educación y Ordenación Universitaria).

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Amount of words: 9,543

Corporate social responsibility and consumer advocacy

behaviors: the importance of emotions and moral

virtues

PT
RI
Abstract

SC
Although previous studies revealed the positive perception effect of corporate social

U
responsibility (CSR) on consumer behavior, the influence mechanism and the impact
AN
of individual characteristics on the effect have been underexplored. The purpose of

this study is not only to examine the mediating role of the emotion of admiration in
M

the relationship between consumer perception of CSR and advocacy behaviors but
D

also to explore the moderating role of the consumer moral virtue of integrity in the
TE

relationship between CSR perception and feelings of admiration. Data was collected

from customers of a food company located in Spain, and the results show that the
EP

company’s CSR practices positively influence consumer advocacy behaviors both

directly and indirectly through consumer admiration for the company. Consumer
C

integrity moderates the relationship between consumer perception of CSR and

AC

admiration. Specifically, CSR practices have a stronger admiration effect on

consumers who are high in integrity. The overall importance of consumer perceptions

of CSR suggest that, in the food industry, the perception of appropriate CSR practices

has a positive impact on consumer attitudes and behaviors, which are also conditioned

by individuals’ moral virtues.

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Key words: Admiration, Advocacy Behaviors, Consumer, Corporate Social

Responsibility, Integrity

1. INTRODUCTION

PT
The success of consumer organizations depends on positive consumer responses to their

RI
products, services, and actions. One of the most important aspects for consumers is that

organizations are focused on corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Vitell, 2015), and

SC
many companies are increasingly aware of this fact (Hemingway and Maclagan, 2004).

The CSR topic is a main research theme in the consumer behavior literature (Amatulli et

al., 2018).
U
AN
When effectively communicated, CSR actions strengthen consumer loyalty through the
M

enhancement of trust, satisfaction (Barcelos, 2015), valuation of service (García de los

Salmones et al., 2005), and identification (Pérez et al., 2013). Organizational CSR
D

practices significantly influence overall consumer attitudes (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006),

TE

and loyalty (Mandhachitara and Poolthong, 2011) to a firm. According to Grunert

EP

(2013), current consumers value aspects related to environmentally responsible food

production and seek out this product type.

C

Recent studies have revealed why CSR perception leads to positive consumer attitudes
AC

and behavior (Kim, 2017). These studies focused on cognitive aspects and demonstrated

that consumers who perceive a company’s high level of CSR practice are likely to

identify themselves with that company, based on their cognitive evaluation. For

example, Mostafa & ElSahn (2016) revealed that consumer-company identification (c-c

identification) mediates the relationship between CSR perception and consumer loyalty.

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
In addition to the cognitive aspect, it is vital for scholars and practitioners to consider

the emotional aspect. Prior research demonstrated that perceived CSR practices affected

consumer emotions (Pérez and Rodríguez del Bosque, 2015), and emotions influence

subsequent sustainable consumption behavior (Wang and Wu, 2016). Jiang et al. (2014)

went to great lengths to argue that emotions have greater weight in the purchasing

PT
decision than aspects such as price or consumer taste. The emotional aspect, especially

RI
its mediating role in the relationship between CSR perception and consumer behavior, is

still insufficiently understood (Fatma and Rahman, 2015).

SC
It is unclear which consumer characteristics influence the effect of CSR perception. As

U
an example of an individual difference, previous studies suggested that a series of
AN
consumer moral principles and standards, especially those regarding social

responsibility, guided consumer behavior (Muncy and Vitell, 1992). For example,
M

O’Connor et al. (2017) found that consumer moral norms predict their subsequent fair

trade purchasing behavior.

D
TE

Although the influence of such moral aspects on product selection is a matter of debate,

some critical issues have not yet been explored – for instance, which aspect of a
EP

company (e.g., a company’s CSR practice) conveys to consumers whether a product is

moral is largely unknown (Arbit et al., 2017). There is little understanding of how
C

consumer moral-related characteristics and emotions interrelate with the influence

AC

mechanism of a company’s CSR and consumer behavior.

The purpose of this research is to empirically demonstrate that perceived CSR

initiatives generate positive consumer emotion for a company, especially in consumers

with high moral integrity, which then promotes their advocacy behavior. This study

contributes to filling the research gap in consumer responses to CSR practices

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
(Lichtenstein et al., 2004) by revealing the influence of CSR that is different from

traditional ones – such as identification, commitment, image, reputation, et cetera

(Öberseder et al., 2014) – which is underexplored and might be especially important to

an organization (Stanaland et al., 2011).

The study also explores, by examining how consumer advocacy is promoted, how CSR

PT
drives the specific short-term advocacy behaviors (Romani et al., 2013) that contribute

RI
to improving long-term financial performance (Mittal et al., 2008). The research

findings will help food company managers to learn and understand the effects of their

SC
CSR initiatives on consumer behaviors.

U
This work sheds light on the influence of CSR on consumer behavior by examining the
AN
underlying psychological processes that existing models tend to overlook (Romani et

al., 2016). A moderated mediation model, positioning admiration as a mediator of

M

consumer perception of CSR on consumer advocacy behaviors and integrity as a

D

moderator of such effects, is proposed. Figure 1 provides a conceptual model of this

TE

study.

The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 addresses the theoretical lenses through
EP

which the research, development, and presentation of the hypotheses are viewed and

conducted; Section 3 describes the methodology; Section 4 presents the empirical

C

findings and discusses the theoretical contributions and the managerial implications.
AC

[Insert Figure 1 here]

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

From the time when CSR was first mentioned in Oliver Sheldon’s work (1923), through

its period of significant expansion with the appearance of Carroll’s model (1979) to the

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
present day, the literature on CSR has continued to grow (Öberseder et al., 2013). This

fact adds to the lack of consensus on what CSR means (Parmar et al., 2010; Peloza and

Shang, 2011) and highlights the broad scope and complexity of the CSR concept. In

consumer research, CSR has been documented since the work of Brown and Dacin

(1997), who proposed one of the first theoretical models of the relationship between

PT
CSR and consumer responses. To date, studies have linked CSR to, among others,

RI
consumer satisfaction (Luo and Bhattacharya, 2006), organizational identification and

commitment, and loyalty (Marin et al., 2009) or purchase intention (Öberseder et al.,

SC
2013).

U
Consumers evaluate an organization by its CSR initiatives (Sen and Bhattacharya,
AN
2001), which makes their attitudes and behaviors consistent with the organization. CSR

dimensionality has been a controversial issue in the literature – the multidimensional

M

approach rather than unidimensional approach has become dominant in recent consumer

research because the former provides a more comprehensive view of consumer

D

perception of CSR and has been empirically supported (Alvarado-Herrera et al., 2017;
TE

Pino et al., 2016). Following Alvarado-Herrera et al. (2017), this study relies on the
EP

definition proposed by Du et al. (2011) that CSR is “a firm’s commitment to maximize

long-term economic, societal and environmental well-being through business practices,

C

policies and resources” (p. 1528).

AC

The influence of CSR on consumer responses is more complicated than previously

thought. There are a number of underlying psychological processes that drive consumer

responses that have not yet been studied (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). For example, it is

important to take into account the emotional processes that consumers experience

concerning CSR in organizations. In general, previous studies have not considered this

aspect, and only a few have begun to explore this line of research (Romani et al., 2016).
5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
This study attempts to provide new evidence by focusing on admiration, which is an

under-researched but important positive emotion in the context of consumer CSR

perception.

2.1 Consumer perception of CSR and feelings of admiration

PT
Emotions are a form of affection that involve visceral responses associated with a

specific referent, which give rise to action (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001). The

RI
literature notes that emotions are made up of critical factors that stimulate the way

SC
consumers perceive, feel and behave toward brands as well as toward organizations

(Ivens et al., 2015). Emotions of positive valence, emotions of negative valence and

U
even contradictory emotions have been analyzed (Algoe and Haidt, 2009; Williams,
AN
2014).
M

Prior studies have argued and shown that the positive nature of CSR can cause

consumers to have a positive perception of the company that performs these actions.
D

CSR organizational practices aim to improve social, environmental or economic

TE

situations (Aguilera and Rupp, 2007); consumers make positive assessments of business

activity and products when they regard an organization’s CSR activities as positive
EP

(Brown and Dacin, 1997). Empirical studies have revealed a specific CSR influence on
C

cognitive aspects that influence consumer behavior (Kim, 2017), such as organizational
AC

identification (Mostafa and ElSahn, 2016), purchase intentions, loyalty or satisfaction

(Öberseder et al., 2013), or other attitudes toward cobrands (Singh, 2016). Likewise,

some evidence indicates that CSR practices also influence an individual’s emotions

(i.e., Grappi et al., 2013; Romani et al., 2013).

As a type of positive emotion, this study focuses on admiration. Admiration refers to an

individual’s sense of wonder and approval, which evokes a certain sense of pleasure,

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
respect and esteem for the actions performed or for the character of another person or

entity (Darwin et al., 1998). The moment a person or group engages in a praiseworthy

action, people may experience admiration (Sweetman et al., 2013) and consequently

feel the need to help or cooperate with that person or group (Cuddy et al., 2007). It is a

moral positive valence emotion (Algoe and Haidt, 2009; Schindler et al., 2013) elicited

PT
by virtuous and moral acts (Immordino-Yang and Sylvan, 2010).

RI
In the context of consumer research, consideration of admiration is important because

consumers who feel it toward a company want to tell others how great it is, which leads

SC
to the spread of positive word-of-mouth information about the company. Consumers

U
who admire a firm may become more engaged in socially responsible purchasing from
AN
it since admiration motivates people to emulate the admired subject and to encourage

self-improvement (Algoe and Haidt, 2009). There does not appear to be another study
M

which has empirically examined the influence of perception of an organization’s CSR

initiatives on consumer admiration for an organization.

D
TE

Cuddy et al. (2007) have shown that when people perceive a subject as warm and

competent, they feel admiration for it. They also suggest prosocial or cooperative
EP

company behaviors, which seek the common good and which aim to help stakeholders

who may need assistance, have a positive emotional impact on consumers, such as the
C

feeling of admiration.
AC

By integrating both their argument and the conceptualization of CSR in this study, it can

be expected that an organization’s CSR practices generate a consumer’s feeling of

admiration. A company that operates in a socially responsible way is likely to be

perceived as heartfelt because consumers conclude that it has a purpose beyond profit

and contributes to the environment and society at large. Consumers also tend to

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
consider such a company as competent because they perceive that it continuously tries

to realize a sustainable competitive advantage (Alvarado-Herrera et al., 2017). The

perceived warmth and competence lead to a feeling of admiration (Aaker et al., 2012;

Cuddy et al., 2007). The moral implications of the CSR construct can induce that

feeling in a consumer for an organization that implements CSR. Cegarra-Navarro and

PT
Martínez-Martínez (2009) even suggest that CSR is a prerequisite for admiring a

RI
company.

Recent studies (e.g., Romani et al., 2013) have shown that gratitude, another emotion

SC
related to admiration (Algoe and Haidt, 2009), is influenced by perceptions of CSR.

U
Romani et al. (2013) argue that consumers perceive socially responsible initiatives as
AN
supporting their ethical objectives, generating moral emotions such as gratitude. It is

considered that the perception of socially responsible initiatives could lead consumers to
M

experience moral emotions other than gratitude, namely admiration, for the company

that performs these practices. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

D
TE

H1: CSR is positively related to a consumer’s admiration for a company.

2.2 Admiration on advocacy behaviors

EP

In their relationship with customers, in addition to transactional benefits, companies

C

may obtain other long- and short-term relational advantages, such as customer loyalty
AC

and advocacy behaviors (Du et al., 2007). The benefits stemming from purchases are

highly important to companies and eliciting certain attitudinal and behavioral responses

is also of great interest to them. Advocacy behaviors also include other non-

transactional benefits of great value, such as positive word-of-mouth (Du et al., 2007) or

resistance to negative information (Sen et al., 2016) about an organization.

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
From the consumer’s perspective, empirical evidence shows that affective variables,

particularly emotions, significantly influence consumer behavior (Kervyn et al., 2012).

In a recent paper, Aaker et al. (2012) found that the assessment of certain cognitive

elements, such as the quality or competence of an organization, resulted in the

appearance of positive feelings and positive emotions, such as admiration. Consumers

PT
who experienced such admiration were willing to make more purchases from the

RI
organization (Aaker et al., 2010).

Consequently, the following hypothesis is proposed:

SC
H2: Admiration is positively related to advocacy behaviors.

U
AN
2.3 Effect of CSR on advocacy behaviors via admiration

While many recent studies about the effect of CSR on consumers have focused on
M

consumers’ cognitive aspect (i.e., c-c identification), the influence of consumer emotion
D

has not been sufficiently explored. Both theoretical and empirical research has claimed
TE

and shown the notable effect of emotions in the formation of consumer behavior. For

example, a customer loyalty framework developed by Dick and Basu (1994) suggested
EP

that positive emotion enhances customers loyalty and then promotes their advocative

behavior like positive word-of-mouth. Their model proposed that positive emotion
C

toward a company caused consumers to engage in habitual advocative behavior without

AC

cognitive appraisal of the company. An empirical finding by Martin et al. (2008)

supported this view, showing that consumers’ emotionally based satisfaction is a better

predictor of their future behavioral intention.

A recent study by Joireman et al. (2015) also demonstrated that the CSR–consumer

response relationship is mediated by consumer emotional components. Thus, it is

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
proposed that admiration mediates the positive relationship between consumers’ CSR

perception and advocacy behaviors. When consumers perceive, share and approve of an

organization's socially responsible initiatives, they will experience a range of emotions.

Consumers may perceive that these types of practice have several benefits for

themselves, the environment as well as society at large and therefore experience

PT
appreciation, respect, and esteem for the organization that implements them (i.e., they

RI
will feel admiration for the company).

H3: Admiration mediates the relationship between CSR and advocacy behaviors.

SC
2.4 The moderating role of integrity

U
AN
Researchers have recognized the existence of moderating factors on the relationship

between CSR and consumer behavior. The findings of the weak or non-significant CSR
M

effect on firms bottom-line have motivated researchers to identify the moderators. Many

studies focus on a company’s characteristics (Zasuwa et al., 2017) and strategy (van
D

Doorn et al., 2017) as potential moderators, and some empirical studies have examined
TE

the moderating effects of customer characteristics (Sen et al., 2016 for a review). While

most of them have focused on the part of CSR, like environment-friendly practice (e.g.,
EP

Haws et al., 2014), this study’s focus is CSR in general. As a moderator, this work
C

examines the effect of consumer integrity. Integrity is a virtue that consists of the
AC

following aspects: consistency of words and actions, consistency in adversity, being true

to oneself, and moral/ethical behavior (Palanski and Yammarino, 2007).

A person is virtuous when they can be trusted and can be expected to act with integrity

in all circumstances (Pellegrino, 1995). Virtuous people are guided not only by the duty

to do something but also by the ethical nature of the situations they face. Moral virtues

are traits that make individuals reliably act, think and feel in a way that is morally

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
admirable to others (Armstrong, 2006). Veríssimo and Lacerda (2015) note, in the

complex context in which organizations operate, it becomes enlightening to consider the

role that virtues, especially moral virtues such as integrity, play in an organizational

context, particularly in the field of consumer behavior (Kim and Drumwright, 2016).

PT
Similarity attraction theory proposes that individuals are likely to be attracted to entities

that share similar attitudes (Byrne et al., 1971). This theory suggests that consumer

RI
integrity strengthens the perceived positive CSR effect on their positive emotion like

admiration. So, integrity may affect subsequent consumer behavior; virtues influence

SC
the choice and evaluation of behaviors (Schwartz, 1992). Since ethics and morality are

U
critical components of integrity, consumers with high integrity are expected to be more
AN
receptive to and to more highly value the socially responsible actions of organizations

(Waddock, 2001), which also influence their advocative behavior toward a company.
M

Although there has been no empirical research that directly examines the effect of
D

integrity, prior studies have provided supporting arguments. If companies fulfill their
TE

social, environmental and economic responsibilities and are true to their word, they

could be considered as good organizations, even as organizations with integrity (Park et

EP

al., 2014), and enhance their connection with consumers who have those types of

concerns. Steele (1988) states that the feeling of self-affirmation or connection with a
C

group that shares the same values or virtues will lead individuals to evaluate this type of
AC

action as more positive and desirable. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is

suggested:

H4: Consumer integrity moderates the influence of CSR on admiration, such that the

relationship is stronger for consumers with high integrity and weaker for consumers

with low integrity.

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
3. METHODOLOGY

The proposed model, shown in Figure 1, seeks not only to analyze the influence of

consumer perception of CSR on advocacy behaviors through admiration but also to

consider the moderating influence of integrity.

PT
Below is the sample used to contrast the model, the measures of the variables, and the

method used to contrast the hypotheses.

RI
3.1 Sample

SC
Most of the studies that analyze the influence of CSR practices on consumer behavior

U
examine socially responsible industries. This research focuses on a particular company;
AN
it has obtained information about how consumers perceive the company’s CSR

practices and it has analyzed the influence of this perception on important variables that
M

are related to consumer purchasing behavior. When selecting the company, the
D

following criteria were considered: a) the enterprise had to effectively develop CSR
TE

practices; and b) consumers should have been able to know about these practices, either

because of the dissemination activities carried out by the company or because of the
EP

proximity of the company or the project to the consumer. The company that was chosen

is a cooperative from the food industry which develops commercial activity both locally
C

and internationally.
AC

The data was collected with the help of a market research company, which was selected

because of its knowledge of the geographical area where the study was to be conducted

and its extensive experience in carrying out this type of study. The authors asked the

market research company for an opinion poll based on a personal interview, using a

methodology of random selection to ensure the sample’s representativeness. It was also

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
indicated that the maximum sampling error allowed was 7% for a confidence level of

95.5%.

Data gathering was conducted in consumer households located in a metropolitan area in

the north-west of Spain, from the census data of 280,831 individuals. The data

corresponds to the main city in a province of Galicia (Spain), where the company

PT
selected for the survey is located. The main reasons why this area was selected were the

RI
consumers’ proximity to the company and its commercial and CSR practices. Although

the company carries out CSR actions aimed at all stakeholders, a number are aimed at

SC
the local community. Every effort was made to ensure that respondents were aware of

U
the company´s CSR practices. At the beginning of the questionnaire (see Table A.1),
AN
respondents were asked about their knowledge of the company; and those who did not

know it could not continue with the survey.

M

The market research agency did not use an existing database. Within the area described,
D

households were selected using the random route system with demographic quotas
TE

(gender: male or female, age: 18–34, 35–54, above 55-). The random route system is

widely used for conducting personal household surveys as it facilitates contact with a
EP

population of people for whom a complete record is not available to create equal

selection probabilities (Bauer, 2014). Starting at a street which was randomly selected
C

from this metropolitan area’s street listings, the interviewer initially made alternate right
AC

and left turns then, by following a table of random numbers, selected a building and a

household within it. Data collection was conducted in-home using computer-assisted

personal interviewing (CAPI) (Axinn et al., 2011). Each interview lasted around 10

minutes.

According to previous studies in CSR and consumer behavior, it is assumed that a

sampling error should be between 5% and 8% (e.g., Grappi et al., 2013). Based on these
13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
studies, which are referents in the field of CSR and consumer behavior research, the

final sample was composed of 252 adult consumers with direct purchasing

responsibilities at home, assuming a sampling error of 6.17%. The sampling method

used is in line with recent studies in CSR and consumer behavior – examples of which

are Amatulli et al. (2018), and De Angelis et al. (2017). Some of those studies use

PT
samples which are similar in size to this one. For example, Bolton & Mattila (2015) use

RI
a sample of 130 consumers, and Gao and Mattila (2014) obtained 183 participants in

their first study and 225 in their second study.

SC
Of the respondents, 42.5% were men, and 57.5% were women. In terms of age, 31.3%

U
of respondents were between 18 and 34 years old, 36.5% were between 35 and 54 years
AN
old, and 32.1% were 55 years old or older.

3.2 Measures
M

All indicators of the self-report scales used a seven-point Likert scale (1=totally
D

disagree; 7=totally agree). For the respondents’ convenience, based on previous works
TE

arguments, the same kind of seven-point scale was used. Krosnick & Presser (2010)

suggest that the greater the number of points on a scale, the greater the respondents’
EP

response accuracy – excessively long scales are not recommendable. They propose that
C

the seven-point scales are the most appropriate, which Finstad (2010) also supports in
AC

his work.

CSR was measured using the 18-item scale proposed by Alvarado-Herrera et al. (2017).

Following their recommendation, CSR was considered a second-order factor with three

dimensions of six items each: (1) the social dimension, (2) the economic dimension and

(3) the environmental dimension. The scale’s reliability was assessed in two ways. On

the one hand through the analysis of Cronbach’s alpha (α), calculated as equation (1).

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
This measure, expressed as a number between 0 and 1, was developed by Lee Cronbach

in 1951 and describes “the extent to which all the items in a test measure the same

concept or construct” (Tavakol and Dennick, 2011, p. 53).

 ∑

=  1 −  (1)
 

PT
RI
where k is the number of items on the scale

SC
s is the items variance (from 1,...,k) and s

is the variance of the scale total. This

coefficient measures the reliability of this scale (of the variables indicators) according to

U
two terms: the number of items and the proportion of the total test variance due to
AN
covariance between its parts.
M

This paper’s analysis indicated high levels of internal consistency for the social CSR

dimension (0.95), the economic dimension (0.88), and the environmental dimension
D

(0.96). The composite reliability indices (IFC), calculated as equation (2), were 0.95,
TE

0.85 and 0.94. Composite reliability, another measure of internal consistency, represents

the degree to which these items indicate the latent common construct; and it is
EP

recommended to present values higher than 0.7 (Hair et al., 1998), which are vastly
C

exceeded in this case.

AC

∑   
 = (2)
∑    ∑  ! #  

where L% is the standardized factor loading of each of the j indicators that load on the

factor i

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Var E%  is the variance of the error term that is calculated as Var E%  = 1 − L%

Once the reliability of the CSR dimensions and the other variables of the analysis were

established, the composite variables were then calculated. To create these composite

variables a simple averaging (Song et al., 2013) was used (see examples on Tables S.1,

PT
S.2, S.3 and S.4 in the Supplementary Data file), also called the “concept of summated

scale”, which consists of combining “several variables into a simple composite

RI
measure…[where] all the variables loading highly on a factor are combined, and the

SC
total – or more commonly the average score of the variables – is used as a replacement

variable” (Hair et al., 2014, p. 122). These authors highlight two specific benefits

U
attributed to these scales: (1) they overcome to some extent the measurement error
AN
inherent in all measurement variables; and (2) they provide a way to represent the

multiple aspects of a concept in a single measure.

M

Regarding the CSR dimensions, three new summated scales were obtained as the
D

original indicators’ average score. Then a new composite variable or summated CSR
TE

scale was calculated as the average of the three composites for the CSR dimensions.

This variable was subsequently considered in the hypothesis test through ordinary least
EP

squares (OLS) regression.

C

Integrity was measured using two items (“I conduct myself by the same values that I
AC

talk about” and “When I promise something, you can be certain that it will happen”)

adapted from the work of Palanski et al., (2011) from the scale proposed by Simons et

al., (2007). Cronbach's alpha and the composite reliability index were 0.73 and 0.77.

Admiration was measured with a 5-item scale developed by Sweetman et al. (2013).

Some of the items are “I feel admiration when I think about [Company name]” and “I

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
feel respect when I think about [Company name]”. Cronbach's alpha was 0.93, and the

composite reliability was 0.92.

Four items of the scale proposed by Romani et al. (2013) – which includes items such as

“To try new products introduced by [Company name]” and “To blog in favor of

[Company name]” – were used to measure advocacy behaviors. The Cronbach's alpha

PT
obtained for this scale was 0.86, and the composite reliability was 0.87. Table A.2 in the

RI
Appendix summarizes the validity and reliability indices of the scales used.

SC
The analyses included two control variables. One of which provided the respondents’

gender information, and the other referred to the level of education; both are categorical

U
variables. Gender was measured in two categories (male and female) and level of
AN
education in six categories (without studies, primary studies, secondary studies, tertiary-

type A, tertiary-type B, and master’s degree).

M

Measurement scales of the constructs constituting the model were originally written in
D

English, so they underwent a translation process following the methodology proposed

TE

by Brislin (1986). A pre-test was also performed using a sample of 10 consumers and

no problems were detected.

EP

3.3 Scale validity and reliability

C
AC

A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using AMOS 24 to assess the

latent variables’ properties (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). The bootstrapping technique

was used to avoid problems that result from the possible non-fulfillment of conditions

of multivariate normality. The parameters of the latent construct CFA model were

estimated using the maximum likelihood method. Given the size of the model and the

sample, the results indicate an acceptable fit for the data: X2=903.38 d.f.=357; p<0.001;

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
RMSEA=0.07, CFI=0.92; IFI=0.92; TLI=0.91 (see equations S.1, S.2, S.3, S.4 and S.5

in the Supplementary Data file).

With respect to the convergent validity of the scales, all factor loadings were substantial

and statistically significant (p<0.05) and provided convincing evidence in favor of the

PT
items used to represent the constructs. Both Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability

were above 0.7, which provides evidence of adequate reliability (Gerbing and

RI
Anderson, 1988).

SC
To assess discriminant validity, Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) approach was used. The

confidence intervals for the correlations between pairs of variables were calculated.

U
None of the intervals included the value one; therefore, discriminant validity between
AN
the constructs was confirmed. The average variance extracted (AVE), calculated as

equation (3), was compared for each construct with the shared variance between the
M

latent variables. The AVE for each construct was greater than its shared variance with
D

any other construct.

TE

∑./0 -
*+, = (3)
∑./0 - ∑./0  !(2 )
EP

where k is the number of items, γ is the factor loading of item i and Var(e ) is the error
C

variance of item i.
AC

Table 1 shows the bivariate correlations of all constructs used in the conceptual model.

[Insert Table 1 about here]

The control variables are not correlated with other focal variables. Similar studies (i.e.,

Deng and Xu, 2017; Tian et al., 2011) have not found a significant relationship between

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
gender, age, education and perceived CSR. These studies conclude that the relationship

between consumers’ demographics and their CSR responses is probably not linear.

To control for any potential common method variance bias (CMV), a combination of

approaches has been employed. Remedies involving the application of procedural

PT
methods were used (Podsakoff et al., 2003), and then a CFA approach to Harman’s one-

factor test to assess whether a single latent factor accounted for all manifest variables

RI
was used (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The results show that the fit is considerably worse for

the unidimensional model than for the measurement model, suggesting that CMV is not

SC
a serious threat in this study.

U
To evaluate multicollinearity among variables, the variance inflation factor (VIF) was
AN
used. The VIFs ranged from 1.05 to 1.33, providing evidence that there was no problem

related to multicollinearity.
M

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

D
TE

A conditional process analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses, since some of

them involve mediating and moderating effects. The analytical method is “used when
EP

one’s research goal is to describe the conditional nature of the mechanism or

mechanisms by which a variable transmits its effects on another and testing hypotheses
C

about such contingent effects... mediation analysis is used to quantify and examine the
AC

direct and indirect pathways through which an antecedent variable X transmits its

effects on a consequent variable Y through one or more intermediary or mediator

variables. Moderation analysis is used to examine how the effect of antecedent variable

X on a consequent Y depends on a third variable or set of variables. Conditional process

analysis is both of these in combination and focuses on the estimation and interpretation

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
of the conditional nature (the moderation component) of the indirect and/or direct

effects (the mediation component) of X on Y in a causal system” (Hayes, 2017, pp. 10–

11).

Hayes' (2013) model 7 and the PROCESS Procedure for SPSS Release 2.16 were

PT
specifically used in this study, with X as the CSR variable, M as admiration, Y as

advocacy behaviors and W as integrity. To avoid interpretation problems with some of

RI
the coefficients, the CSR and integrity variables, which are those involved in the

interaction terms, were mean centered. The results of the analysis using OLS show that

SC
CSR has a positive and significant effect on admiration (a1=0.600, p<.001), and this

U
variable, in turn, has a positive and significant effect on advocacy behaviors (b =0.455,
AN
p<.001), which supports hypotheses 1 and 2. The results reveal a direct effect of CSR

on advocacy behaviors (c'=0.341, p<.001), indicating that part of the CSR effect occurs
M

independently of admiration. The results also support hypothesis 4, showing that the

positive relationship between CSR and admiration is contingent on integrity, as

D

evidenced by the statistically significant interaction between CSR and integrity in the
TE

model of admiration (a3=0.232, p=.006) (see Table 2); Figure 2 supports this as well
EP

and shows a stronger effect of CSR on admiration when integrity is high. To test the

interaction, the pick-a-point method combined with bootstrapping was used. In Table 3,
C

the indirect conditional CSR effects on advocacy behaviors for various values of
AC

integrity and the bootstrap confidence intervals for these effects were included.

It was observed that the indirect effect is always positive (which supports hypothesis 3)

but not constant since it depends on integrity (it is conditional), as hypothesis 4

proposed. The higher the integrity, the stronger the CSR effect on advocacy behaviors.

Further support for the mediating and moderating effects (and therefore for hypotheses

3 and 4) is derived from calculating the index of moderated mediation (Table 3), which
20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
can be considered positive as the null value is excluded from the confidence interval.

The results indicate that CSR has unconditional direct effects on advocacy behaviors

and indirect effects (in this case they are conditional on integrity) through admiration.

The better consumers perceive CSR activities, the greater their admiration and advocacy

behaviors. This chain of effects is stronger for consumers with greater integrity.

PT
No significant effects at the 0.05 level of the control variables (i.e., gender and level of

RI
education) on the dependent variables were found.

SC
[Insert Table 2 about here]

U
[Insert Table 3 about here]
AN
[Insert Figure 2 about here]

This research contributes theoretically and empirically to expand the limited knowledge
M

about the emotional links between CSR and consumer behaviors (Joireman et al., 2015).
D

The paper responds to recent calls to consider both this type of affective variable in the
TE

consumer behavior field and, more specifically, the effectiveness of the social

responsibility role in the marketing environment (Grappi et al., 2013; Hao et al., 2015).
EP

The results highlight the effects of a positive CSR perception, which motivates
C

consumers to engage more fully with a company. Scholars have long recognized the
AC

positive effects of consumer perception of a company's CSR on consumer consumption

behavior, and recent studies that have investigated mediation models have provided

evidence as to why these effects occur (Deng and Xu, 2017; Mostafa and ElSahn, 2016;

Singh, 2016). However, while these studies revealed the cognitive mechanisms of this

process by showing the mediating effect of c-c identification, the role of consumer

emotion has been underexplored.

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
This study has revealed the significant role of admiration for a socially responsible

company. These results are in line with previous research confirming that emotions

significantly influence consumer behavior (Kervyn et al., 2012) and extend existing

research (Pérez and Rodríguez del Bosque, 2015; Romani et al., 2013), suggesting that

consumers can feel emotion types other than gratitude, delightedness, or happiness.

PT
There does not appear to be another study which has investigated admiration in CSR

RI
consumption behavior research. The focus on admiration is important because previous

studies have argued that individuals who experience admiration are likely to act in a

SC
way that benefits the object of the admiration (Immordino-Yang and Sylvan, 2010;

Sweetman et al., 2013). In the context of customer relationship management, admired

U
companies are likely to acquire consumer advocative behavior. Supporting this
AN
argument, the current analysis demonstrated that the consumer emotion of admiration,
M

generated by CSR perception, promotes advocative behavior.

Another contribution of this research is that it revealed the moderating effect of the
D

consumer virtue of integrity. While researchers have recognized the existence of

TE

moderators on the relationship between CSR perception and consumer behavior, many

of them have focused on a company’s characteristics (Zasuwa et al., 2017) and strategy
EP

(van Doorn et al., 2017) as potential moderators. This result highlights that consumers
C

who are virtuous react more favorably to CSR actions; it also suggests that virtuous
AC

individuals may feel more of a connection to a responsible company and exhibit more

positive attitudes and behaviors. Specifically, this study reveals the high influence level

of consumer integrity on the feeling of admiration for companies that are socially

responsible; in other words, the higher a consumer’s integrity, the stronger the CSR

effect on advocacy behaviors. The findings invite new research to consider other moral

virtues and other emotions as potential moderating variables.

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
The CSR measure used in this study consists of multiple dimensions (i.e., society,

environment, and economy). The results propose that consumers, especially those with

a high integrity level, value purchases from companies that care about the environment,

provide an economic boost, and contribute to society at large. It seems that this is the

first study to investigate the CSR influence on food consumer behavior through

PT
emotional aspects that are conditioned by moral aspects. Based on the studies on social

RI
responsibility as well as on food choice, this study is the first to not only link both

aspects but also to consider the intervention of consumer emotions and virtues. Previous

SC
studies have considered other aspects, such as consumer confidence, to explain the CSR

influence on the willingness to pay more for food (Mueller Loose and Remaud, 2013);

U
but, their influence on aspects of greater relevance to companies, such as customer
AN
retention and considering the intervention of deeper psychological aspects, has not been
M

analyzed.

Another contribution of this study is its methodology. Unlike previous studies that have
D

used an experimental and manipulated methodology (e.g., Romani et al., 2013; Xie et
TE

al., 2015), the hypotheses of this model were tested under real conditions (i.e., the

situation was not manipulated); previous information about the organization’s CSR was
EP

not presented to consumers; and the consumers were not challenged by the experience
C

of moral emotions beyond their usual experience.

AC

This study provides evidence based on a sample of Spanish consumers in Spain. Despite

this limitation, the results offer implications for future studies in countries and regions

with similar social, economic and environmental conditions. Future studies should

explore this model in other countries.

5. CONCLUSIONS

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
The analysis delves into the mechanisms that explain the relationship between CSR and

consumer advocacy behaviors. The consideration of admiration as a mediating variable

in this relationship as well as the identification of moral virtue, integrity, as a

moderating variable provide insight into how and under what circumstances CSR

practices influence consumer behavior. Organizations often classify their customers

PT
based on certain criteria, such as the number of purchases made or the value of their

RI
transactions – other aspects of a more personal nature have thus far been neglected. The

current study’s results can provide new insight into these classification criteria,

SC
directing the focus of attention to aspects such as consumer values or virtues.

U
Although some researchers have cast doubt on the economic benefits of CSR to
AN
organizations (Saeidi et al., 2015), particularly in food companies, this research shows

that the presence of CSR initiatives in a food company can influence consumer
M

behaviors that are critical to its survival in the market. Showing the benefit of CSR

practices, this research justifies the need for companies to incorporate this type of action
D

into their consumer business strategy. It is necessary for a company to properly

TE

communicate actual CSR practices to obtain positive returns from them. CSR

communication has become increasingly important, which implies a new direction for
EP

future research (White et al., 2017).

C
AC

6. REFERENCES

Aaker, J., Garbinsky, E.N., Vohs, K., 2012. Cultivating Admiration in Brands: Warmth,

Competence, and Landing in the “Golden Quadrant.” J. Consum. Psychol. 22,

191–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.11.012

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Aaker, J., Vohs, K.D., Mogilner, C., 2010. Nonprofits Are Seen as Warm and For-

Profits as Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter. J. Consum. Res. 37, 224–237.

https://doi.org/10.1086/651566

Aguilera, R., Rupp, D., 2007. Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A

PT
multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32, 836–

863. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.25275678

RI
Algoe, S.B., Haidt, J., 2009. Witnessing excellence in action: the “other-praising”

SC
emotions of elevation, gratitude, and admiration. J. Posit. Psychol. 4, 105–127.

https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760802650519

U
AN
Alvarado-Herrera, A., Bigne, E., Aldas-Manzano, J., Curras-Perez, R., 2017. A Scale

for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility

M

Following the Sustainable Development Paradigm. J. Bus. Ethics 140, 243–262.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2654-9
D
TE

Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Korschun, D., Romani, S., 2018. Consumers’ perceptions

of luxury brands’ CSR initiatives: An investigation of the role of status and

EP

conspicuous consumption. J. Clean. Prod. 194, 277–287.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.05.111
C
AC

Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A

review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 103, 411–423.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411

Arbit, N., Ruby, M.B., Sproesser, G., Renner, B., Schupp, H., Rozin, P., 2017. Spheres

of moral concern, moral engagement, and food choice in the USA and Germany.

Food Qual. Prefer. 62, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2017.06.018

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Armstrong, A.E., 2006. Towards a strong virtue ethics for nursing practice. Nurs.

Philos. 7, 110–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-769X.2006.00268.x

Axinn, W.G., Link, C.F., Groves, R.M., 2011. Responsive Survey Design,

Demographic Data Collection, and Models of Demographic Behavior.

PT
Demography 48, 1127–1149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-011-0044-1

Barcelos, E., 2015. Relationship Between an Organization Evaluated as Being Socially

RI
Responsible and the Satisfaction, Trust and Loyalty of its Clients. Aust. J. Basic

SC
Appl. Sci. 9, 429–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.11.012

U
Bauer, J.J., 2014. Selection Errors of Random Route Samples. Sociol. Methods Res. 43,
AN
519–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114521150

Becker-Olsen, K.L., Cudmore, B.A., Hill, R.P., 2006. The impact of perceived
M

corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. J. Bus. Res. 59, 46–53.

D

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.01.001
TE

Bhattacharya, C.B., Korschun, D., Sen, S., 2009. Strengthening Stakeholder–Company

Relationships Through Mutually Beneficial Corporate Social Responsibility

EP

Initiatives. J. Bus. Ethics 85, 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9730-3

C

Bolton, L.E., Mattila, A.S., 2015. How Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect
AC

Consumer Response to Service Failure in Buyer–Seller Relationships? J. Retail.

91, 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETAI.2014.10.001

Brislin, R.W., 1986. The wording and translation of research instruments, in: W.J.

Lonner, J.W.B. (Ed.), Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Sage, Beverly

Hills, pp. 137–164.

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Brown, T.J., Dacin, P.A., 1997. The company and the product: Corporate associations

and consumer product responses. J. Mark. 68–84.

Byrne, D., Gouaux, C., Griffitt, W., Lamberth, J., Murakawa, N., Prasad, M., Prasad,

A., Ramirez, M., 1971. The Ubiquitous Relationship: Attitude Similarity and

PT
Attraction. Hum. Relations 24, 201–207.

https://doi.org/10.1177/001872677102400302

RI
Carroll, A.B., 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance.

SC
Acad. Manag. Rev. 4, 497–505.

U
Cegarra-Navarro, J., Martínez-Martínez,
AN A., 2009. Linking corporate social

responsibility with admiration through organizational outcomes. Soc. Responsib. J.

5, 499–511. https://doi.org/10.1108/17471110910995357
M

Chaudhuri, A., Holbrook, M.B., 2001. The Chain of Effects from Brand Trust and
D

Brand Affect to Brand Performance: The Role of Brand Loyalty. J. Mark. 65, 81–
TE

93. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.65.2.81.18255

Cronbach, L.J., 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.
EP

Psychometrika 16, 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555

C

Cuddy, A.J.C., Fiske, S.T., Glick, P., 2007. The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup
AC

affect and stereotypes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 92, 631–648.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.631

Darwin, C., Ekman, P., Prodger, P., 1998. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and

Animals.

De Angelis, M., Adıgüzel, F., Amatulli, C., 2017. The role of design similarity in

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
consumers’ evaluation of new green products: An investigation of luxury fashion

brands. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 1515–1527.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2016.09.230

Deng, X., Xu, Y., 2017. Consumers’ Responses to Corporate Social Responsibility

PT
Initiatives: The Mediating Role of Consumer–Company Identification. J. Bus.

Ethics 142, 515–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2742-x

RI
Dick, A.S., Basu, K., 1994. Customer Loyalty: Toward an Integrated Conceptual

SC
Framework. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 22, 99–113.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070394222001

U
AN
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., Sen, S., 2011. Corporate Social Responsibility and

Competitive Advantage: Overcoming the Trust Barrier. Manage. Sci. 57, 1528–
M

1545. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1403
D

Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., Sen, S., 2007. Reaping relational rewards from corporate
TE

social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. Int. J. Res. Mark. 24,

224–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.01.001
EP

Fatma, M., Rahman, Z., 2015. Consumer perspective on CSR literature review and
C

future research agenda. Manag. Res. Rev. 38, 195–216.

AC

https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0223

Finstad, K., 2010. Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: Evidence against 5-point

scales. J. Usability Stud. 5, 104–110.

Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with

Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 18, 39–50.

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312

Gao, Y. (Lisa), Mattila, A.S., 2014. Improving consumer satisfaction in green hotels:

The roles of perceived warmth, perceived competence, and CSR motive. Int. J.

Hosp. Manag. 42, 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJHM.2014.06.003

PT
García de los Salmones, M. del M., Crespo, A.H., Bosque, I.R. del, 2005. Influence of

Corporate Social Responsibility on Loyalty and Valuation of Services. J. Bus.

RI
Ethics 61, 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-5841-2

SC
Gerbing, D.W., Anderson, J.C., 1988. An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development

U
Incorporating Unidimensionality and Its Assessment. J. Mark. Res. 25, 186–192.
AN
https://doi.org/10.2307/3172650

Grappi, S., Romani, S., Bagozzi, R.P., 2013. Consumer response to corporate
M

irresponsible behavior: Moral emotions and virtues. J. Bus. Res. 66, 1814–1821.
D

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.002
TE

Grunert, K.G., 2013. Trends in food choice and nutrition, in: Consumer Attitudes to

Food Quality Products. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp. 23–

EP

30. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-762-2_2
C

Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., William, C., 1998. Multivariate data analysis.
AC

Prentice-Hall.

Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2014. Multivariate data analysis:

Pearson new international edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

Hao, S., Hong, W., Xu, H., Zhou, L., Xie, Z., 2015. Relationship between resilience,

stress and burnout among civil servants in Beijing, China: Mediating and

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
moderating effect analysis. Pers. Individ. Dif. 83, 65–71.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.048

Haws, K.L., Winterich, K.P., Naylor, R.W., 2014. Seeing the world through GREEN-

tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to environmentally

PT
friendly products. J. Consum. Psychol. 24, 336–354.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.11.002

RI
Hayes, A.F., 2017. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process

SC
analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.

U
Hayes, A.F., 2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process
AN
Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. Guilford Publications, New York.

Hemingway, C.A., Maclagan, P.W., 2004. Managers’ Personal Values as Drivers of

M

Corporate Social Responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics 50, 33–44.

D

https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000020964.80208.c9
TE

Immordino-Yang, M.H., Sylvan, L., 2010. Admiration for virtue: Neuroscientific

perspectives on a motivating emotion. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 35, 110–115.

EP

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.003
C

Ivens, B.S., Leischnig, A., Muller, B., Valta, K., 2015. On the Role of Brand
AC

Stereotypes in Shaping Consumer Response toward Brands: An Empirical

Examination of Direct and Mediating Effects of Warmth and Competence.

Psychol. Mark. 32, 808–820. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20820

Jiang, Y., King, J.M., Prinyawiwatkul, W., 2014. A review of measurement and

relationships between food, eating behavior and emotion. Trends Food Sci.

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Technol. 36, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TIFS.2013.12.005

Joireman, J., Smith, D., Liu, R.L., Arthurs, J., 2015. It’s All Good: Corporate Social

Responsibility Reduces Negative and Promotes Positive Responses to Service

Failures Among Value-Aligned Customers. J. Public Policy Mark. 34, 32–49.

PT
https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.13.065

Kervyn, N., Fiske, S.T., Malone, C., 2012. Brands as Intentional Agents Framework:

RI
How Perceived Intentions and Ability Can Map Brand Perception. J. Consum.

SC
Psychol. 22, 166–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.09.006

U
Kim, E., Drumwright, M., 2016. Engaging consumers and building relationships in
AN
social media: How social relatedness influences intrinsic vs. extrinsic consumer

motivation. Comput. Human Behav. 63, 970–979.

M

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.025
D

Kim, Y., 2017. Consumer Responses to the Food Industry’s Proactive and Passive
TE

Environmental CSR, Factoring in Price as CSR Tradeoff. J. Bus. Ethics 140, 307–

321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2671-8
EP

Krosnick, J.A. Presser, S., 2010. Question and Questionnaire Design, in: Emerald (Ed.),
C

Handbook of Survey Research. pp. 263–313.

AC

Lichtenstein, D.R., Drumwright, M.E., Braig, B.M., 2004. The effect of corporate social

responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. J. Mark.

68, 16–32. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.4.16.42726

Luo, X., Bhattacharya, C.B., 2006. Corporate social responsibility, customer

satisfaction, and market value. J. Mark. 70, 1–18.

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.4.1

Mandhachitara, R., Poolthong, Y., 2011. A model of customer loyalty and corporate

social responsibility. J. Serv. Mark. 25, 122–133.

https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041111119840

PT
Marin, L., Ruiz, S., Rubio, A., 2009. The Role of Identity Salience in the Effects of

Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 84, 65–78.

RI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9673-8

SC
Martin, D., O’Neill, M., Hubbard, S., Palmer, A., 2008. The role of emotion in

U
explaining consumer satisfaction and future behavioural intention. J. Serv. Mark.
AN
22, 224–236. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876040810871183

Mittal, R.K., Sinha, N., Singh, A., 2008. An analysis of linkage between economic
M

value added and corporate social responsibility. Manag. Decis. 46, 1437–1443.
D

https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810912037
TE

Mostafa, R.B., ElSahn, F., 2016. Exploring the mechanism of consumer responses to

CSR activities of Islamic banks. Int. J. Bank Mark. 34, 940–962.

EP

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-11-2015-0179
C

Mueller Loose, S., Remaud, H., 2013. Impact of corporate social responsibility claims
AC

on consumer food choice. Br. Food J. 115, 142–166.

https://doi.org/10.1108/00070701311289920

Muncy, J.A., Vitell, S.J., 1992. Consumer ethics: An investigation of the ethical beliefs

of the final consumer. J. Bus. Res. 24, 297–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-

2963(92)90036-B

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
O’Connor, E.L., Sims, L., White, K.M., 2017. Ethical food choices: Examining people’s

Fair Trade purchasing decisions. Food Qual. Prefer. 60, 105–112.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2017.04.001

Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B.B., Murphy, P.E., 2013. CSR practices and consumer

PT
perceptions. J. Bus. Res. 66, 1839–1851.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.005

RI
Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B.B., Murphy, P.E., Gruber, V., 2014. Consumers’

SC
Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility: Scale Development and

Validation. J. Bus. Ethics 124, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1787-

y
U
AN
Palanski, M.E., Kahai, S.S., Yammarino, F.J., 2011. Team Virtues and Performance: An
M

Examination of Transparency, Behavioral Integrity, and Trust. J. Bus. Ethics 99,

201–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0650-7
D
TE

Palanski, M.E., Yammarino, F.J., 2007. Integrity and Leadership: clearing the

conceptual confusion. Eur. Manag. J. 25, 171–184.

EP

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2007.04.006
C

Park, J., Lee, H., Kim, C., 2014. Corporate social responsibilities, consumer trust and
AC

corporate reputation: South Korean consumers’ perspectives. J. Bus. Res. 67, 295–

302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.05.016

Parmar, B.L., Freeman, R.E., Harrison, J.S., Wicks, A.C., Purnell, L., de Colle, S.,

2010. Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Acad. Manag. Ann. 4, 403–445.

https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2010.495581

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Pellegrino, E.D., 1995. Toward a Virtue-Based Normative Ethics for the Health

Professions. Kennedy Inst. Ethics J. 5, 253–277.

https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.0.0044

Peloza, J., Shang, J., 2011. How can corporate social responsibility activities create

PT
value for stakeholders? A systematic review. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 39, 117–135.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0213-6

RI
Pérez, A., García de los Salmones, M., Rodríguez del Bosque, I., 2013. The effect of

SC
corporate associations on consumer behaviour. Eur. J. Mark. 47, 218–238.

https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561311285529

U
AN
Pérez, A., Rodríguez del Bosque, I., 2015. An Integrative Framework to Understand

How CSR Affects Customer Loyalty through Identification, Emotions and

M

Satisfaction. J. Bus. Ethics 129, 571–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-

2177-9
D
TE

Pino, G., Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Peluso, A.M., 2016. The influence of corporate

social responsibility on consumers’ attitudes and intentions toward genetically

EP

modified foods: evidence from Italy. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 2861–2869.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2015.10.008
C
AC

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method

biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended

remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-

9010.88.5.879

Romani, S., Grappi, S., Bagozzi, R.P., 2016. Corporate Socially Responsible Initiatives

and Their Effects on Consumption of Green Products. J. Bus. Ethics 135, 253–264.

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2485-0

Romani, S., Grappi, S., Bagozzi, R.P., 2013. Explaining Consumer Reactions to

Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of Gratitude and Altruistic Values. J.

Bus. Ethics 114, 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1337-z

PT
Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P., Saaeidi, S.A., 2015. How does corporate

social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role

RI
of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. J. Bus. Res. 68,

SC
341–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.06.024

U
Schindler, I., Zink, V., Windrich, J., Menninghaus, W., 2013. Admiration and
AN
adoration: Their different ways of showing and shaping who we are. Cogn. Emot.

27, 85–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.698253

M

Schwartz, S.H., 1992. Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical
D

Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 25, 1–65.
TE

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6

Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., 2001. Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better?
EP

Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility. J. Mark. Res. 38, 225–

C

243. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838
AC

Sen, S., Du, S., Bhattacharya, C., 2016. Corporate social responsibility: a consumer

psychology perspective. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 10, 70–75.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.12.014

Sheldon, O., 1923. The Philosophy of Management. Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, Bath,

England.

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Simons, T., Friedman, R., Liu, L., 2007. Racial differences in sensitivity to behavioral

integrity: Attitudinal consequences, in-group effects, and “trickle down” among

Black and non-Black employees. J. Appl. Psychol. 92, 650–665.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.650

PT
Singh, J., 2016. The Influence of CSR and Ethical Self-Identity in Consumer Evaluation

of Cobrands. J. Bus. Ethics 138, 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-

RI
2594-4

SC
Song, M.-K., Lin, F.-C., Ward, S.E., Fine, J.P., 2013. Composite variables: when and

how. Nurs. Res. 62, 45–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNR.0b013e3182741948

U
AN
Stanaland, A.J.S., Lwin, M.O., Murphy, P.E., 2011. Consumer Perceptions of the

Antecedents and Consequences of Corporate Social Responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics

M

102, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0904-z

D

Steele, C.M., 1988. The Psychology of Self-Affirmation: Sustaining the Integrity of the
TE

Self. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 21, 261–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-

2601(08)60229-4
EP

Sweetman, J., Spears, R., Livingstone, A.G., Manstead, A.S.R., 2013. Admiration
C

regulates social hierarchy: Antecedents, dispositions, and effects on intergroup

AC

behavior. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49, 534–542.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.10.007

Tavakol, M., Dennick, R., 2011. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int. J. Med. Educ.

2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd

Tian, Z., Wang, R., Yang, W., 2011. Consumer Responses to Corporate Social

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Responsibility (CSR) in China. J. Bus. Ethics 101, 197–212.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0716-6

van Doorn, J., Onrust, M., Verhoef, P.C., Bügel, M.S., 2017. The impact of corporate

social responsibility on customer attitudes and retention—the moderating role of

PT
brand success indicators. Mark. Lett. 28, 607–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-

017-9433-6

RI
Veríssimo, J.M.C., Lacerda, T.M.C., 2015. Does integrity matter for CSR practice in

SC
organizations? The mediating role of transformational leadership. Bus. Ethics A

Eur. Rev. 24, 34–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12065

U
AN
Vitell, S.J., 2015. A Case for Consumer Social Responsibility (CnSR): Including a

Selected Review of Consumer Ethics/Social Responsibility Research. J. Bus.

M

Ethics 130, 767–774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2110-2

D

Waddock, S., 2001. Integrity and mindfulness: Foundations of corporate citizenship. J.

TE

Corp. Citizsh. 1, 25–37.

Wang, J., Wu, L., 2016. The impact of emotions on the intention of sustainable
EP

consumption choices: evidence from a big city in an emerging country. J. Clean.

C

Prod. 126, 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2016.03.119

AC

White, C.L., Nielsen, A.E., Valentini, C., 2017. CSR research in the apparel industry: A

quantitative and qualitative review of existing literature. Corp. Soc. Responsib.

Environ. Manag. 24, 382–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1413

Williams, P., 2014. Emotions and Consumer Behavior. J. Consum. Res. 40, viii–xi.

https://doi.org/10.1086/674429

37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
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, 333–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0394-5

Zasuwa, G., Zasuwa, Grzegorz, 2017. The Role of Company-Cause Fit and Company

PT
Involvement in Consumer Responses to CSR Initiatives: A Meta-Analytic Review.

Sustainability 9, 1016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9061016

RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Figure 1. Proposed model

Integrity

H4

PT
CSR Admiration Advocacy
behaviors
H1 H2

RI
H3 Mediation hypotheses

SC
Control Variables
Age
Level of education

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

39
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 2. Conditional effects of CSR on admiration: Two-way interaction effects

for unstandardized variables

PT
6
Admiration

RI
4 Low Integrity

SC
3 High Integrity

U
AN
1
Low CSR High CSR
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

40
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations among variables
Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Integrity 6.56 0.68
2. CSR 4.89 1.24 0.21**
3. Advocacy 5.12 1.62 0.26** 0.48**
behaviors
4. Admiration 3.74 1.67 0.20** 0.49* 0.58**

PT
5. Gender 1.58 0.50 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.01
6. Level of education 3.96 1.63 -0.07 -0.18** -0.04 -0.17** 0.08

RI
** p < .01

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

41
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2. Model coefficients for the conditional process analysis

Consequent
M (Admiration) Y (Advocacy behaviors)
Antecedents Coeff. SE p Coeff. SE p
Constant 4.188 0.362 < .001 2.927 0.394 < .001
CSR 0.600 0.076 < .001 0.341 0.074 < .001
Integrity 0.445 0.156 0.005 --- --- ---
Admiration --- --- --- 0.455 0.055 < .001

PT
CSR x 0.232 0.084 0.006 --- --- ---
Integrity
Gender -0.057 0.185 0.757 0.118 0.163 0.470
Level of -0.101 0.057 0.077 0.078 0.051 0.124

RI
education
R2=0.274, F (2.069)=18.592, p<.001 R2=0.396, F (1.618)=40.562, p<.001

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

42
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 3. Direct and indirect effects of CSR on advocacy behaviors

Conditional indirect effects of CSR on advocacy behaviors through admiration for

various levels of integrity
Mediator Indirect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
(Integrity)* effect
-1.057 0.162 0.074 0.008 0.285
-0.556 0.214 0.055 0.113 0.324

PT
0.443 0.320 0.051 0.221 0.425
0.443 0.320 0.051 0.221 0.425
0.443 0.320 0.051 0.221 0.425

RI
Unconditional direct effect of CSR on advocacy behaviors
Direct effect SE p LLCI ULCI
0.341 0.074 < .001 0.194 0.487

SC
Index of moderated mediation
Effect SE LLCI ULCI
0.106 0.057 0.033 0.241
*Values are for the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

43
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Appendix

Table A.1 Survey used in the study.

Do you know company [Company name]?

PT
*CSR Social dimension

RI
In my opinion, regarding society, [Company name] is really…

… Trying to sponsor educational programmes

SC
… Trying to sponsor public health programmes

U
… Trying to be highly committed to well-defined ethical principles
AN
… Trying to sponsor cultural programmes

… Trying to make financial donations to social causes

M

… Trying to help to improve quality of life in the local community

D

*CSR Economic dimension

TE

In my opinion, regarding the environment, [Company name] is really…

… Trying to sponsor pro-environmental programmes

EP

… Trying to allocate resources to offer services compatible with the environment

C

… Trying to carry out programmes to reduce pollution

AC

… Trying to protect the environment

… Trying to recycle its waste materials properly

… Trying to use only the necessary natural resources

*CSR Environmental dimension

In my opinion, regarding the economy, [Company name] is really…

44
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

… Trying to maximise profits in order to guarantee its continuity

… Trying to build solid relations with its customers to assure its long-term economic
success

… Trying to continuously improve the quality of the services that they offer

… Trying to have a competitive pricing policy

PT
… Trying to always improve its financial performance

RI
… Trying to do its best to be more productive

SC
*Admiration

I feel admiration when I think about [Company name]

U
I feel respect when I think about [Company name]
AN
I feel inspired when I think about [Company name]

[Company name] amazes me

M

[Company name] inspires me

D

*Advocacy Behaviors
TE

To try new products introduced by [Company name]

To blog in favor of [Company name]

EP

To give another chance to [Company name], if it does something that you don’t like
C

To provide helpful feedback to [Company name]

AC

*Integrity

I conduct myself by the same values that I talk about

When I promise something, you can be certain that it will happen

Age

Gender

45
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Educational Level

Without studies

Primary studies

Secondary studies

PT
Tertiary type A

Tertiary type B

RI
Master’s degree

SC
* Likert scales (1=totally disagree; 7=totally agree)

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

46
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table A.2. Scales reliability and validity

Cronbach’s Composite Average variance

alpha reliability extracted (AVE)

CSR Social dimension 0.95 0.95 0.76

PT
CSR Economic
0.88 0.85 0.50
dimension

RI
CSR Environmental
0.96 0.94 0.72
dimension

SC
CSR Global
(Alvarado-Herrera et al., 0.79 0.85 0.65
2017)

Admiration
0.93
U 0.92 0.71
AN
(Sweetman et al., 2013)

Advocacy Behaviors
0.86 0.87 0.63
(Romani et al., 2013)
M

Integrity
0.73 0.77 0.63
(Palanski et al., 2011)
D
TE
C EP
AC

47