Theoretical Lenses for Understanding the CSR–Consumer Paradox

Consumer surveys repeatedly suggest that corporate social responsibility (CSR) and products’ social, environmental, or ethical attributes enhance consumers’ purchase intentions. The realization that CSR still has only a minor impact on consumers’ actual purchase decisions thus represents a puzzling...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Janssen, Catherine (Autor) ; Vanhamme, Joëlle (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Publicado: 2015
En: Journal of business ethics
Año: 2015, Volumen: 130, Número: 4, Páginas: 775-787
Otras palabras clave:B Economics
B CSR
B Clinic and Social Psychology
B Evolutionary
B Behavior
Acceso en línea: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descripción
Sumario:Consumer surveys repeatedly suggest that corporate social responsibility (CSR) and products’ social, environmental, or ethical attributes enhance consumers’ purchase intentions. The realization that CSR still has only a minor impact on consumers’ actual purchase decisions thus represents a puzzling paradox. Whereas prior literature on consumer decision making provides valuable insights into the factors that impede or facilitate consumers’ socially responsible consumption decisions, such elements may be only the tip of the iceberg. To gain a fuller understanding of the CSR–consumer paradox, this study proposes investigating the phenomenon through additional theoretical lenses, namely, a clinical psychology, an evolutionary psychology/biology, a social psychology, and an economic and economic psychology lens. From these four unique theoretical lenses, the authors derive an integrative framework and draw several propositions for further research.
ISSN:1573-0697
Obras secundarias:Enthalten in: Journal of business ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1007/s10551-014-2111-1