MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106941840 · doi:10.1002/csr.2089

Does corporate social responsibility affect consumer boycotts? A cost–benefit approach

2020· article· en· W3106941840 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tian Zeng, Anne‐Françoise Audrain‐Pontevia, Fabien Durif

Bibliographic record

VenueCorporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoycottCorporate social responsibilityAffect (linguistics)BusinessMarketingIdeologySocial responsibilityBusiness ethicsAdvertisingPublic relationsPoliticsPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Relying on the cognitivist cost–benefit approach, this research investigates the antecedents of consumer boycotts. It examines the effects of poor performance on corporate social responsibility (CSR) dimensions (i.e., respect for the environment, ethics statements, philanthropic activities, respect for consumers, and respect for employees) on consumer intentions to boycott a retailer. A total of 602 consumers were surveyed in the province of Quebec, Canada. The findings of a logistical regression show that consumers are more likely to boycott retailers for abstract ideological motives (respect for the environment, philanthropic activities) than for more concrete purposes (respect for consumers, ethics statements, respect for employees), thereby confirming that consumers do not react in a similar fashion to the different CSR dimensions. This article is of interest to retailers as it provides actionable insights to improve CSR practices (social and environmental policy) to reduce the likelihood of consumer boycotts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorporate Social Responsibility and Environmental ManagementSame topicCorporate Social Responsibility ReportingFrench-language works237,207