Purpose The purpose of this study is to answer the call for additional detailed research on factors that influence corporate social responsibility (CSR) authenticity by examining how the former is affected by the commonly reported CSR spending allocations expressed as percentages of annual profits. It integrates equity and attribution theories to propose a new construct of inequity perceptions to explain how CSR spending allocations influence CSR authenticity. Inequity perceptions form from smaller allocations that are perceived disproportionate compared to the potential reputational gains from the executed CSR communication, which, in turn, prompts lower authenticity inferences. Design/methodology/approach Three experiments were performed. Study 1 examines how different CSR spending allocations influence inequity perceptions and how the latter relate to CSR authenticity. Study 2 examines how inequity perceptions are affected by firm size. Study 3 examines whether psychological distance (being a customer or non-customer) affects information processing by predisposing customers to forming higher inequity perceptions. Findings Study 1 shows that lesser allocations produce higher inequity perceptions. Study 2 demonstrates that inequity perceptions are enhanced when numerically small allocations are reported by a large as opposed to a small firm. Study 3 shows that both customers and non-customers form similar inequity perceptions from smaller percentage allocations without support for the psychological distance effect. Research limitations/implications This study shows that the percentage of profits allocated to CSR, as well as firm size, can affect authenticity inferences via inequity perceptions. These findings point to different implications of CSR communication that features percentage allocations that multiple firms may not be aware of. Practical implications Marketers can benefit from the reported findings by understanding when and how CSR communication that features percentage allocations may be counter-productive by generating lesser CSR authenticity. Originality/value This study provides a novel perspective on how consumers evaluate CSR authenticity in a marketplace where awareness of firms’ vested interests is increasing.

Although substantial research has been dedicated to children's understanding of advertising, the role of more diverse marketing purposes (attention capturing, product liking, and informative intentions) still has not been examined in relation to the activation of persuasion attribution among young consumers. Previous research has focused on one perceived advertising intention at a time, disregarding the complex nature of advertisements' purposes and how these different perceived intentions relate to persuasion attribution. It is still unclear whether viewing advertising as a source of information reduces persuasion attribution and mitigates the attention capturing and product liking evaluations when children are exposed to commercial messages. This study shows that children's comprehension of attention capturing and product liking intentions relate to higher persuasion attribution. However, perceiving advertisements as a source of information attenuates the effects of product liking and attention capturing intentions on persuasion attribution in older children (10-11 and 12-13 years) who were expected to be more critical of advertising. No such effects were observed among younger children (8-9 years). The study highlights that advertisements are evaluated in a more complex manner by children than has been previously thought. K E Y W O R D Sadvertising, attention capturing intention, children, informative intention, persuasion attribution, product liking intention

Purpose While past studies have shown that corporate social responsibility (CSR) influences brand equity, loyalty and brand attitudes, research about CSR effects on the responsible and active dimensions of brand personality remains limited. This study aims to address this gap and examine how brands with different personality strength benefit from CSR communication, providing novel insights about CSR’s branding payoffs to firms. Design/methodology/approach Three experiments were conducted. Study 1 tested if CSR communication influenced responsible and active brand personality dimensions compared to non-CSR communication. Study 2 examined how varying CSR spending allocations affect personality perceptions of weak and strong brands. Studies 1 and 2 measured responsible and active brand personalities before and after exposure to experimental manipulations, assessing immediate changes in brand personality. Study 3 replicated the results of Study 2 using fictitious brands whose initial brand personalities were manipulated as either weak or strong. Findings CSR communication has the potential to influence brands’ responsible and active personalities compared to non-CSR communication. However, changes in brand personalities were contingent on CSR manipulations (smaller vs larger CSR spending) and initial brand strength. Brands that lacked strongly responsible and strong active personalities experienced an improvement in these perceptions after exposure to any CSR spending message. However, brands with strong responsible or strong active personalities experienced brand erosion after exposure to smaller CSR spending message or no improvement when the CSR message was aligned with the responsible and active conduct (e.g. mentioned larger CSR spending). Originality/value This study is the first to examine how CSR affects brand personality. By combining signalling and attitude change/congruity principle theories, it provides novel theoretical contributions to explain when CSR can improve, erode or exert no effect on the responsible and active brand personalities, providing insights for effective brand management.

Purpose This study aims to investigate how judgments of firms’ underlying motives are affected by corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication which features percentages of profit allocations to CSR causes. It also examines how firm size interacts with CSR spending allocations affecting motive attributions for firms of different sizes. Design/methodology/approach Two experiments were carried out manipulating CSR spending allocations (smaller vs larger percentage of profit) and firm size (small vs large firm). Findings A larger percentage of profits allocated to CSR enhanced value-driven motives and inhibited inferences of manipulative intent, which produced lower egoistic-driven motives. Large firms allocating smaller percentages to CSR were judged as less value-driven and were more prone to elicit manipulative intent. Originality/value Two routes of motive attributions were identified – a direct route, contingent on CSR spending allocations and firm size; and an indirect route via inferences of manipulative intent, which inhibited favorable motives and prompted unfavorable ones. Both routes resulted from numerical cognition associated with the processing of numbers. Managerial implications include suggestions for firms wishing to overcome negative consumer bias arising from communication featuring CSR spending allocations and firm size.