The Effects of Message Specificity on Outcomes of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Communication: Testing Perceived Social Distance as a Mediator

Abstract

Despite growing scholarly attention to what determines effective corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication, consumers’ limited awareness of and attention to CSR messages remain critical challenges for organizations. This study aims to examine the effects of message specificity on an organization’s intended outcomes of CSR communication and to explore the mediating role of perceived social distance in these relationships by applying construal level theory (CLT). We conducted an online experiment (n = 293), and the results revealed that message specificity had a positive impact on consumer-company identification, word-of-mouth intention, and CSR participation intention. Moreover, perceived social distance significantly mediated the relationships between message specificity and the outcomes of CSR communication. Applying CLT, this study offers theoretical implications for the psychological mechanism of how message specificity generates desired outcomes in CSR communication. In addition, we tested these mediation effects in the context of the geographic proximity (close vs. remote) of the CSR communication to participants; the practical implication is that reducing perceived social distance through message specificity is even more effective for geographically distant CSR campaigns.

Influencing Factors and Mechanisms of Corporate Social Responsibility Reputation under Green and Low-Carbon Transition: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies

“…The literature review shows that many internal and external factors influence the extent to which corporations fulfill their CSR. These factors include supply chain pressure from foreign investment enterprises [4], media attention [5], geographical distance, and regulatory environments [6]. From an internal perspective, the research has primarily focused on executive characteristics, such as the education level, executive compensation [7], the level of internal digital transformation [8], and team stability [9].…”