CSR Fraud and Consumer Opinions: What Simulated “tweets” Can Explain about Consumer Beliefs in CSR

Abstract

This research examines what companies can learn from consumer statements made about them over social media, specifically, how the valence (positive or negative statements) and tweet character (emotional or rational statements) of consumer statements coupled with the type of CSR/CSR related fraud impacts consumers’ beliefs about firm CSR use as well as firm confidence. This was conducted via an experimental design manipulating the type of CSR used and related fraud, and then participants responded to the events via simulated tweets and responded to questions about their beliefs in firms engaging in CSR as well as their overall confidence in a firm. Through applying how individuals assess moral judgments via ethical philosophies (idealism vs. relativism) and how those apply to the types of “tweets” made (emotional vs. rational), it was found that the valence and character of a tweet coupled with the CSR type and the related CSR fraud can be used to understand CSR beliefs and confidence in the firm. Additionally, it was found that tweet valence (positive or negative) mod-erated by the tweet character (emotional vs. rational) impacts the beliefs that firms should engage in CSR. In certain instances, some consumers will not like that a firm engages in CSR, therefore, after a fraud and related negative buzz, it is recommended that firms withhold broadcasting their CSR activities.