Applicants' and Employees' Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility: The Moderating Effects of First‐Party Justice Perceptions and Moral Identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explored individuals’ reactions to perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) using a multimotive framework. In 2 studies, the authors explored the boundary conditions of CSR effects among job applicants and internal employees. A scenario‐based experiment (N = 81) showed that the effect of CSR perceptions on job applicants’ job pursuit intentions was mitigated by applicants’ first‐party justice experiences, whereas it was amplified by their moral identity (Study 1). Survey data from 245 full‐time employees (Study 2) further supported the interactive effects revealed in Study 1. Specifically, first‐party justice perceptions attenuated the positive relationship between employees’ CSR perceptions and their organizational citizenship behavior (OCB); and the relationship between CSR perceptions and OCB was more pronounced among employees high (versus low) in moral identity. Our findings bridge the CSR and organizational justice literatures, and reveal that the effects of individuals’ CSR perceptions are more complicated than previously thought. The findings shed light on micro (employee)‐level CSR phenomena and offer implications for both research and practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".