ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH
Labovitz School of Business & Economics, University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802
The Csr Surprise Effect: When Unexpected Csr Activity Enhances Brand Evaluations
Ali Tezer, Concordia University, Canada
Bianca Grohmann, Concordia University, Canada
H. Onur Bodur, Concordia University, Canada
This research shows that unexpected CSR activities that deviate from consumers’ schema regarding brands’ CSR activities improve
brand evaluations when the CSR fit is high. The positive effect of unexpected CSR activities is cognition-based, and increases brand
evaluations of consumers who are not involved with brands’ CSR activities.
[to cite]:
Ali Tezer, Bianca Grohmann, and H. Onur Bodur (2014) ,"The Csr Surprise Effect: When Unexpected Csr Activity Enhances
Brand Evaluations", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 42, eds. June Cotte and Stacy Wood, Duluth, MN :
Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 704-705.
[url]:
http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/1017566/volumes/v42/NA-42
[copyright notice]:
This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in
part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/.
The CSR Surprise Effect: When Unexpected CSR Activity Enhances Brand Evaluations
Ali Tezer, Concordia University, USA
H. Onur Bodur, Concordia University, USA
Bianca Grohmann, Concordia University, USA
EXTENDED ABSTRACT
Introduction
This research examines the influence of CSR expectancy on
brand evaluations. Expectancy of a CSR activity is the extent to
which a CSR activity deviates from consumers’ mental schema
regarding brands’ CSR activities (Heckler and Childers 1992). We
show that unexpected CSR activities have a positive influence on
brand evaluations when CSR fit is high, and that the effect is mediated by cognitive processes.
Theoretical Framework
According to dual process models of persuasion (Petty and
Cacioppo 1986), consumers’ motivation to process information influences whether they scrutinize information (i.e. central route) or
use simple heuristics (i.e., peripheral route; Petty, Cacioppo, and
Schuman 1983). Expectancy is one of the antecedents to motivation
to process information (Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). We therefore posit that when the CSR fit is high, an unexpected CSR activity
(but not an expected CSR activity) initiates elaboration. As elaboration increases, sincere CSR motivations of the brand become more
salient (Ellen, Webb, and Mohr 2006). When the CSR activity is expected, consumers do not invest cognitive effort in evaluating the
brand and use simple heuristic that CSR is a good deed (Simmons
and Becker-Olsen 2006). Given that central route processing has a
stronger positive impact on persuasion compared to the peripheral
route (Petty and Cacioppo 1986), we predict a positive effect of the
unexpected CSR activity when CSR fit is high. We further predict the
indirect effect of expectancy (conditional on CSR fit) on brand evaluations is mediated by (a) elaboration and (b) perceived sincerity of
the brand’s CSR motivations. When CSR fit is low, we do not predict
an effect of expectancy of the CSR activity on brand evaluations.
Study 1
Using a fashion brand, expectancy was manipulated by changing the implementation strategy (high [low] expectancy: donation
per sale [tweet]) and fit was manipulated by changing the nature of
a product donation (high [low] fit: clothes [toiletries]), as validated
in pretests.
The study (n = 158) employed a 2 (CSR fit) × 2 (expectancy)
between-participants design. Participants provided brand evaluations
and reported their perceptions about sincerity of the brand’s CSR
motivation (Ellen, Webb, and Mohr 2006). An ANOVA with fit and
expectancy as independent variables revealed a significant interaction of fit and expectancy (F(1, 174) = 4.59, p < .05) on brand evaluation. When fit was high, unexpected CSR activity led to more favourable brand evaluations compared to expected CSR activity (5.87
vs. 5.36; F(1, 174) = 5.39, p < .05). When fit was low, expectancy
did not affect brand evaluations (p > .3). Process analysis confirmed
mediating role of sincerity of brand’s CSR motivation (ab = -.09,
90% CI = {-.18, -.01}).
Study 2
Using a coffee brand, expectancy was manipulated by varying
the cause (high [low] expectancy: financial support [Hepatitis B vaccination]) and fit was manipulated by varying the target of the CSR
activity (high [low] fit: coffee farmers [underprivileged children]).
Manipulations were successful without any crossover effects.
In addition to brand evaluation and perceived sincerity measures, this study included thought protocols to measure elaboration,
pre and post-treatment affect, and a measure of perceived uniqueness of the CSR activity. An ANOVA with fit and expectancy as the
independent variables revealed a significant interaction effect of fit
and expectancy on brand evaluation (F (1, 154) = 5.30, p < .05).
When fit was high, the unexpected CSR activity resulted in more
favorable brand evaluations than the expected CSR activity (5.67 vs.
5.06; F(1, 154) = 7.29, p < .01). When fit was low, expectancy did not
affect consumers’ brand evaluations (p >.10). Process analysis with
elaboration as the mediator, expectancy as the independent variable,
fit as the moderator, and brand evaluations as the dependent variable
revealed a significant conditional indirect effect of expectancy (estimate = -.09, 95% CI = {-.17, -.04}). A serial mediation model (model
6) with fit × expectancy interaction as the independent variable, elaboration as the proximal mediator, perceived sincerity of brand’s CSR
motivations as the distal revealed a significant conditional indirect
effect of fit × expectancy through elaboration and sincere CSR motivations (a1a3b2 = -.04, 95% CI = {-.08, -.01}). Affect and uniqueness
explanations were not supported.
Study 3
Given that involvement influences consumers’ motivation
to process information positively (Petty, Cacioppo, and Schuman
1983), CSR expectancy should have no effect on consumers who
are already highly involved in brands’ CSR activities. However, consumers who are not highly involved in brands’ CSR activities should
be influenced by the expectancy of the CSR activity when CSR fit
is high. Study 3 (n = 117) tested this boundary condition, using a 2
(expectancy: low, high) × 2 (CSR involvement: low, high) betweenparticipants design. Given that expectancy influences involvement
when it is measured as a state variable (Karmarkar and Tormala
2010), we used a proxy measure (NEP scale; Dunlap et al. 2000).
Manipulations and measures were similar to Study 2. In a regression
of brand evaluations on expectancy and CSR involvement, the interaction between expectancy and CSR involvement was significant
(β = .22, p < .05). When consumers’ CSR involvement was low, the
unexpected CSR activity, compared to the expected CSR activity,
lead to more favorable brand evaluations (5.97 vs. 5.35; β = -.31, p <
.05). The positive effect of the unexpected CSR activity disappeared
for consumers with high CSR involvement (p > .10).
General Discussion
This research extends the literature in three ways: It conceptualizes CSR expectancy and shows positive effect of unexpected
CSR activities when CSR fit is high. Second, it clarifies the role of
elaborations in the CSR literature. Earlier research showed negative
effects of elaboration in response to low CSR fit (Menon and Kahn
2003; Simmons and Becker-Olsen 2006). However, when low expectancy motivates consumers to elaborate on high fit CSR information, scrutinizing CSR information enhances brand evaluations.
Finally, we demonstrate a boundary condition for the positive effect
of the unexpected CSR.
704
Advances in Consumer Research
Volume 42, ©2014
Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 42) / 705
REFERENCES
Dunlap, Riley E., Kent D. Van Liere, Angela G. Mertig, and Robert
E. Jones (2000), “New Trends in Measuring Environmental
Attitudes: Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological
Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale,” Journal of Social Issues, 56
(3), 425-42.
Ellen, Pam S., Deborah J. Webb, and Lois A. Mohr (2006),
“Building Corporate Associations: Consumer Attributions for
Corporate Socially Responsible Programs,” Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 34 (2), 147-57.
Heckler, Susan E. and Terry L. Childers (1992), “The Role of
Expectancy and Relevancy in Memory for Verbal and Visual
Information: What Is Incongruency?” Journal of Consumer
Research, 18 (4), 475-92.
Karmarkar, Uma R. and Zakary L. Tormala (2010), “Believe Me, I
Have No Idea What I’m Talking About: The Effects of Source
Certainty on Consumer Involvement and Persuasion,” Journal
of Consumer Research, 36 (6), 1033-49.
Menon, Satya and Barbara E. Kahn (2003), “Corporate
Sponsorships of Philanthropic Activities: When Do They
Impact Perception of Sponsor Brand?” Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 13 (3), 316-27.
Meyers-Levy, Joan and Alice M. Tybout (1989), “Schema
Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation,” Journal of
Consumer Research, 16 (4), 39-54.
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1986), Communication
and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude
Change, New York: Springer.
Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo, and David Schumann (1983),
“Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness:
The Moderating Role of Involvement,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 10 (2), 135-46.
Simmons, Carolyn J. and Karen L. Becker-Olsen (2006),
“Achieving Marketing Objectives through Social
Sponsorships,” Journal of Marketing, 70 (4), 154-69.