50%(2)1 out of 2 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 8 - 9 out of 20 pages.
were explicitly debriefed about the study (in partfictitious negative CSR scenario) after all of thempleted the study.ResultsIn the analyses of variance (ANOVAs) used tosubjects' reactions to a company's CSR and newquality information, each subject constituted a unitsis. Nineteen subjects were dropped because of theplete responses, to yield a total of 258 observationManipulation checks. We analyzed subjects' evof the company on the specific CA and CSR diusing ANOVAs with CSR Record, New ProducCSR Support, and their interactions as factorsmanipulation was successful (F(2,257) = 221.1,Compared with those in the control condition (3.jects' CSR perceptions were more favorable in thCSR condition (5.80; F(1,169) = 178.3, p < .05) favorable in the negative one (2.30; F(1,170) = .05). The success of the New Product Quality manwas reflected in its significant effect on subjectsceptions (low quality = 4.73, high quality = 5.46; F34.5, p < .01). More important, these CA perceptinot affected by the CSR Record manipulation .07, n.s.), which indicated that, as intended, subjecmake inferences about the company's CA on the bdiversity CSR record.Controls. Consistent with our intentions, subjectappear to be aware of the company's diversity-reactivities (1.56).8 Moreover, they were relatively (5.03) by the CSR information, because they did this company to engage in such activities (2.73). Nthese ratings did not differ significantly in the Record conditions, which disqualified these fabased variables as confounds in our CSR Record mtion. Perhaps more important, subjects foundRecord information to be somewhat credible (5). given the company's reputation, it is not surprising found the positive CSR Record scenario to be sigmore credible (average of believability and credibing = 5.32) than the negative one (4.64; F(1,170.05). Our concern about the potentially confoundof credibility on our CSR Record manipulation prto include it as a covariate in our analyses of theand product-related responses of subjects in the pnegative CSR Record conditions. Notably, the credibility of the CSR information was not a sigcovariate in the analyses of C-C congruence, comuation, or product purchase intention.Attributions about CSR. Subjects' importance ratthe different factors driving the company's CSRshowed that they attribrecord more to its desire tance rating = 5.60) than ttance rating = 4.62), inclucern for women and minF(1,169) = 11.44, p < .05record, however, was atdesire to make a profit (iany other factor (averagegenerally, subjects attribfactors that were relativto the company (2.76). AlCSR record to factors thCSR = 3.84, positive CSRcontrollable (negative CF(1,170) = 8.1, p < .05), anative CSR = 2.31, positiv.05) than were factors uMost important, however,butional measures when trelevant analyses revealtional differences did nCSR Support-based chanperceptions, company eintentions.