Exploring the Impact of Corporate Philanthropy on Brand Authenticity in the Luxury Industry: Scale Development and Empirical Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the concept of perceived corporate philanthropy (PCP) among consumers of luxury goods and examine the differences these consumers perceive in terms of philanthropic actions, particularly within the luxury sector. To address this question, we adopted the following approach: (1) Defining the concept of PCP through an extensive analysis of 2590 articles using GEPHI methodology. (2) Developing a measurement scale for the PCP construct. (3) Exploring the impact of PCP on perceived brand authenticity by comparing consumers of luxury hotels and standard hotels. The results of our multigroup analysis indicated a significant difference among consumers. Corporate philanthropic strategies had a notably stronger influence on the perception of PCP among luxury hotel consumers. This finding underscores the substantial divergence within the luxury marketing literature. These consumers seek brands that align with their desire to associate themselves with robust and authentic brands that carry symbolic significance, which allows them to identify and connect with these brands. By consuming these brands, they are able to attain their desired status. This study sheds light on a significant variable in contemporary marketing, namely, PCP, which provides new avenues for differentiation and leverage within the luxury goods industry. As a result, this study provides valuable managerial recommendations to companies and NGOs, aiming to assist them in tailoring their philanthropic strategies to effectively resonate with their target audiences and bolster their brand reputation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".