Green advertising: are we colour blind?
The effects of green washing on corporate social responsibility (CSR)
image and brand attitude
Graduate School of Communication Track Persuasive Communication
Master Thesis
Willemijn Sterk 10175504
Supervisor: Dr. Ester de Waal 24-06-2016
Abstract
The non-coherence of green claims and actions can lead to greenwashing, which makes consumers skeptical. The research at hand studies the consumer perceptions of greenwashing when a mismatch between advertising (claims) and corporate environmental performance (actions) occurs. Hence, it will investigate to what extent green advertising, in combination with corporate environmental performance, has an effect on corporate social responsibility (CSR) image and brand attitude. Furthermore, it also investigates the
moderating relationship of environmental involvement. Data was collected using an online experiment. The results of a 2 (type of advertisement: green or non-green) x 3 (type of corporate environmental performance: negative, positive or none) between-subjects factorial design with N = 334 participants indicated that green advertising has an effect on CSR image. Moreover there is also a significant effect between the interaction effect of advertising and corporate environmental performance on CSR image. There were no significant results found for brand attitude, neither was there found a significant moderating effect of consumers’ environmental involvement. Future research should take into account pre-existing attitudes and knowledge of CSR to further investigate the underlying attitudes towards green
Introduction
‘To encourage companies to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle’ is one of the sustainable development goals of the United Nations (UN) that should stimulate sustainable initiatives (“Sustainable Development Goals UN,” n.d.). The environment and climate change remain an important issue in our society today, as is encouraged by the UN goals. In a study carried out by the EU, 95% of Europeans found protection of the environment an important issue to them personally (European Union, 2014). Along with this, more responsibility and pressure has been placed on companies in Western society to make a contribution to a sustainable environment by engaging in corporate social responsibility (CSR). ‘What customers demand, companies will do their best to provide’: the amount of greener products increased with 73% between 2009 and 2010 (Terrachoice, 2010, p.9). Under the guise of CSR, companies engage in
environmental initiatives to take their share in improving the environment. For example, a company can lower the amount of chemicals in its products, or use a sustainable way of producing to contribute to a sustainable society.
Brands often communicate these environmental efforts in so called ‘green’ advertisements to attract consumers to their services and products. The successes of CSR activities and green advertising are shown by the positive increase on brand attitudes and brand image (Benoît-Moreau & Parguel, 2011; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001; Hartmann, Ibañez & Sainz, 2005). However, there is also a negative downside to green advertising when companies use it as a marketing tool to increase their sales and do not actually make an effort to improve the environment. What happens when companies are not as green as they look?
Along with the rise of environmental initiatives and green advertising, greenwashing occurs. Greenwashing can be understood as the mismatch between a company’s
environmental actions (‘deeds’) and claims (‘talks’), and therefore the green marketing techniques that are used are misleading the consumers about the company’s actual environmental performance (Nyilasy, Gangadharbatla & Paladino, 2014).
Recently, car manufacturer Volkswagen was found to install special software in their cars, which influences the results when tested on CO2 emission and nitrogen
(“Sjoemelsoftware VW,” 2015). Not only was Volkswagen involved in green washing, but they were also violating the law. The illegal greenwashing of Volkswagen gained a lot of attention in the media. There are even a greater number of companies that partake in legal green washing and not all consumers are aware of these greenwashing practices. For example, the Dutch airline KLM marketed that the airline was flying on biofuel. What the respective advertisement did not mention is that 80% of the flights used normal fuel: kerosene, thus misleading the consumers who thought that KLM was solely using biofuel (“Stichting Reclame Code,” 2013). When greenwashing actions shed light to consumers they become skeptical towards green initiatives and they start to disbelieve green advertising in general (Furlow, 2010). Companies actual environmental efforts, referred to as the environmental performance, is not always known to the consumer and, therefore gives rise to questions about the sustainability of a company and the true CSR efforts. Where green advertising is able to increase the positive attitude towards a brand, misleading claims cause a reverse negative effect on the brand. Companies that engage in green washing are also referred to as ‘brown firms’ (Delmas & Burbano, 2011). Are we colour blind if we cannot distinguish between green and greenwashing companies? Advertising is an important tool for companies to improve their image (Balmer & Grey, 1999). However, when people know the corporate environmental performance of the brand it can change their attitude towards the advertised brand. It is therefore important to know what the effects of green advertising in combination
with corporate environmental performance are and what the effects of perceived greenwashing are on consumer perceptions.
A small number of studies have looked into greenwashing in the past years and these studies have focused on distinctive aspects, such as the reasons and impact of engaging in greenwashing (Vos, 2009), the drivers of greenwashing (Delmas & Burbano, 2011), the harmfulness on health of greenwashing (Dahl, 2010), the effects on trust in corporate
environmental responsibility when green washing occurs (Chen & Chang, 2013). Even fewer studies looked at the effects of greenwashing and the direct effects on consumers’ perceptions towards the brands, by means of the use of nature imagery (Parguel, Benoit-Moreau &
Russel, 2015), sustainability ratings (Parguel, Benoit-Moreau & Larceneux, 2011) or corporate environmental performance (Nyilasy et al., 2014). More studies are needed in the field of greenwashing, since the current field shows a shortage of literature about the effects of greenwashing on consumer responses.
Greenwashing occurs when there is non-coherence between claims made and actions done by a company. It can be the result of the use of green marketing techniques and a company’s environmental performance. The combination of non-coherence between claims and actions can affect the consumer, because consumers are misled by persuasive marketing techniques and are therefore skeptical. It is thus important to look at the effects on consumer perceptions when consumers believe a company is engaging in greenwashing. Furthermore, previous studies looking at the effects of greenwashing on consumers’ perceptions (Parguel et al., 2011; Parguel et al. 2015; Nyilasy et al. 2014) did not take into account the moderating effects of environmental involvement. However, previous research in green marketing (D’Souza & Taghian, 2005; Tucker, Rifon, Lee and Reece, 2012) has shown that the effectiveness of green advertising can be explained by the level of environmental
involvement, as the Elaboration Likelihood Model explains (Petty & Cacioppo, 1983), since the level of involvement determines the extent to which an individual processes the green advertisement and is persuaded by the green claim. It is therefore important to take the moderating effects of environmental involvement into account when looking at the effects of green advertising. The following research question (RQ) is stated:
RQ: to what extent does green advertising in combination with corporate environmental
performance have an effect on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) image and brand attitude? And to what extent does environmental involvement moderate the relationship between green advertising and CSR image and brand attitude?
Theoretical Framework
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) image and green advertising
CSR can be defined as: ‘management of stakeholder concern for responsible and irresponsible acts related to environmental, ethical and social phenomena in a way that creates corporate benefit’ (Vaaland, 2008, p.931). Furthermore CSR is ‘the various forms of company involvement with charitable causes and the non-profits that represent them’ (Lichtenstein, Drumwright & Braig, 2004, p. 16). In the last two decades the importance of CSR has grown immensely for consumers, companies and stakeholders. This can be seen through the many initiatives that are established nowadays to promote the use of these activities(Singh, de los Salmones Sanchez & del Bosque, 2008). A good example of a Dutch CSR initiative is the chocolate brand Tony Chocolonely, which tries to pay fair wages to its cocoa farmers, thereby creating ‘slave-free’ chocolate (Tony Chocolonely, n.d.). CSR can contribute to the success or failure of major organisations and companies to a large extent. A firm can use CSR activities
to attract stakeholders, it can be seen as a strategic investment to build or maintain a better brand reputation (Hsu, 2012; The Economist, 2008). Companies that spend more money on philanthropic issues are perceived as more socially responsible, and as having a stronger corporate reputation (Brammer & Millington, 2005).
The impressions and evaluations that consumers form of a company are often a result of information that is derived from communication (Wan & Schell, 2007). When a company engages in environmental responsibilities as part of their CSR program they can communicate these activities through green advertisements. But what determines an advertisement as ‘green’? A green advertisement 1) ‘explicitly or implicitly addresses the relationship between a product/service and the biophysical environment’, 2) ‘promotes a green lifestyle with or without highlighting a product/service’ and/or 3) ‘presents a corporate image of
environmental responsibility’ (Banerjee, Gulas & Iyer, 1995, p.22).
Green advertising, a form of CSR communication, can affect brand image as perceived by the consumer (Singh et al. 2008). Green advertising is an effective way to strengthen the corporate image, ‘because it portrays an image of a company as responsive to the needs of the society’ (Ko, Hwang & Kim, 2013, p. 1710). Previous research also showed other positive effects of the company’s image when they engaged in CSR activities and communicated about their efforts. Companies are perceived by consumers as warmer, more compassionate, ethical, trustworthy and less blameworthy when facing a crisis (Aaker, Vohs & Molgilner, 2010; Chernev & Blair, 2015; Hansmann, 1981; Hoeffler & Keller, 2002; Lichtenstein et al., 2004; Klein & Dawar, 2004). When a company is partaking in CSR actions, it can strengthen the consumer evaluations of the brand. This is also known as the ‘halo effect’. It is ‘the tendency of overall evaluations of a person/object to influence evaluations of the specific properties of that person/object in a way that is consistent with the overall evaluation’
(Chernev & Blair, 2015, p. 1414). For example, when a brand communicates green claims on its products it can result in an ‘environmental CSR halo’ that leads consumers to rate the brand higher on other environmental or CSR attributes that are not mentioned in the green claims (Chernev & Blair, 2015). Therefore, one could state that the corporate reputation positively increases when companies communicate their environmental responsibility through green advertising, thus showing their CSR activity, leading to the following hypothesis:
H1: Green advertising leads to a more favourable CSR image than non-green
advertising.
Green advertising and brand attitude
Attitude towards the brand can be perceived as the ‘individual internal evaluation of an object’ (Mitchell & Olsen, 1981, p. 319). Attitudes remain stable over a longer time, and therefore can predict behaviour of consumers towards a product (Mitchell & Olsen, 1981). CSR activity can have a positive effect on consumer’s attitude towards the brand (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001; Wigley, 2008). Several studies have shown the positive effect of green advertising on brand attitude. For example,Mobley, Painter, Untch and Rao Unnava (1995) showed that consumer’s attitudes towards green (recycled) products were more favourable in comparison with non-green products. Also, when introducing new products, green claims also appeared to improve the green brand attitude, while regular claims on new products did not have this effect (Olsen, Slotegraaf & Chandukala, 2014). Furthermore, not only new products, but also fictional products proved these positive effects. Earlier studies (Kong & Zhang, 2013; Tucker et al., 2012) using fictional brands were able to show that green advertising resulted in positive evaluations of the brand. When a green marketing strategy uses both functional and
emotional dimensions by displaying information about the environmental attributes and appealing to good feelings, benefits and satisfaction of contributing to the environment it also influences brand attitude positively (Hartmann, Apaolaza-Ibáñez & Forcada-Sainz, 2005; Matthes, Wonneberger & Schmuck, 2014). Previous research using green visuals (Hartmann & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2010) such as nature scenery also lead to a more favourable brand attitude. Overall, several studies (Hartmann et al., 2005; Hartmann & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2010 Kong & Zhang, 2013; Matthes, Wonneberger & Schmuck, 2013; Mobley et al., 1995; Olsen et al., 2014; Tucker et al., 2012) have shown the positive effects of green advertising
strategies on brand attitude. Thus, this study hypothesizes the following:
H2: Green advertising will lead to a more favourable brand attitude than non-green
advertising.
Environmental involvement
The persuasion of green marketing strategies depends on environmental involvement of the consumer. Predispositions towards the social responsible actions that companies partake in can be influential towards the CSR image and brand image of a company (Singh et al., 2008). A company’s social behaviour is more likely to benefit product performance when it is in line with the ethical values of consumers (Chernev & Blair, 2015). This can be
explained through the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1983). According to the ELM, people process information and form their attitudes through two routes: the central and peripheral route. The route one takes depends on the motivation and ability of an
individual. When one is processing through the central route people have a high motivation and ability and are thus highly involved. Therefore they cognitively elaborate on the
information. On the other hand, when individuals are taking the peripheral route, motivation and ability are low, and they are thus sparsely involved. In order to process the information these individuals use heuristic cues, such as packages, logos and images to form their attitudes. The ELM model would suggest that someone who is highly involved with the environment has a higher motivation and ability to process the green advertisement, in comparison with someone who is less involved. Hence, a higher environmentally involved individual is more receptive and more likely to be persuaded by the green claims made in the advertisement. If individuals find a topic, such as sustainability or the environment,
personally relevant, it can result in a higher degree of involvement. Therefore these
consumers are more aware and affected by marketing communications relevant to this topic (Grimmer & Woolley, 2014; Klein & Dawar, 2004; Schuhwerk & Lefkoff-Hagius, 1995). This in order can influence their attitude toward the brand. Thus, if a consumer is concerned with the environment it may influence their attitude towards and evaluation of the company.
When looking at consumers’ past action it appeared that individuals that care more about the environment were receptive to green advertisements, regardless of the claim and therefore it created positive attitudes (Tucker et al., 2012). Another study of customers with high environmental involvement showed positive effects, indicating that individuals perceived the green advertisement as believable, favourable and good (D’Souza & Taghian, 2005).
Thus this study expects that individuals with a higher degree of environmental
involvement have a higher motivation to process the green advertisement and therefore these people will be more easily persuaded by green advertisement, leading to a more favourable brand attitude and CSR image:
H3: The effect of green advertising on brand attitude and CSR image is more favourable for
individuals with a higher degree of environmental involvement than for individuals with a lower degree of environmental involvement.
Corporate environmental performance and greenwashing
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines greenwashing as: ‘the creation or propagation of an unfounded or misleading environmentalist image’ (Greenwashing, n.d.). Delmas and Burbano (2011) talk about the interaction of two behaviours: ‘poor environmental performance and positive communication about environmental performance (p. 65).’ People perceive greenwashing effects when green advertising, known as the ‘talk’ and actual corporate environmental performance ‘deeds’ interact (Nyilasy et al. 2014). The corporate environmental performance of a company can include the company’s environmental impact, the environmental regulation or the organizational processes. For example, a company can be involved in pollution, by producing toxic substances or the non-compliance of environmental regulation. Moreover the company can also improve or worsen its performance by
environmental management systems such as reporting the actions they take (Delmas & Blass, 2010).
Communicating false environmental claims through green advertising is not just harmful for the companies, but also for the consumers and the environment itself. It makes consumers skeptical (Furlow, 2010), and even results in boycotts (Crane & Matten, 2004). When companies act irresponsibly, by engaging in negative corporate environmental performance, it may result in more detrimental effects and therefore damage the firm even more. It can even go beyond the one false environmental claim made in the green
marketing strategies as false. Therefore they are likely to also avoid products that are truly green and contributing to a better environment (Furlow, 2010; Mayer, Scammon & Zick, 1993). As suggested before, green advertising can enhance the brand image. However, the non-coherence of green claims and corporate environmental performance can have the reverse effect. When a company claims it is green, but is not performing in green initiatives it results in a negative perceptions of the brand. Therefore, the effect of green advertising on brand evaluation depends on the corporate environmental performance (Nyilasy et al., 2014).
Attribution Theory
The Attribution Theory (Heider, 1944) can explain the interaction effect of green advertising and corporate environmental performance. The theory explains the behaviour of yourself and others and can therefore explain the success and failures of consumer reactions towards brands (Heider, 1944; Kelley & Michela, 1980; Parguel et al., 2011). Scholars have shown that attribution theory is useful in explaining consumers’ reactions towards CSR and in specific green advertising (Ellen, Webb & Mohr, 2006; Nyilasy et al., 2014; Parguel et al., 2010; Walker, Heere, Parent & Drane, 2010). ‘People interpret behaviour in terms of its causes and these interpretations play an important role in determining reactions to the behaviour (Kelley & Michela, 1980, p. 458). There are two ways to perceive behaviours: through extrinsic or intrinsic motives (Heider, 1944). Intrinsic motives, also known as
dispositional factors, are dispositions of the actor. Extrinsic motives, or situational factors, are attributions to environmental factors. For example, when a company engages in green
advertisements, consumers may perceive this as the company being environmentally friendly (intrinsic motive) or to participate in an environmental trend (extrinsic motive) (Parguel et al., 2011). The extrinsic motives are often more out of self-interest for the brand, because the goal
here is to increase the brand’s welfare, which results in an increase of profits or sales, or improving the brand’s image. On the other hand, intrinsic motives are often received as selfless, because the goal is to engage in the environmental responsibility, and do something good for society (Du, Bhattacharya & Sen, 2007). Davis (1994) found that the ethical attributions in advertisements, and the perceived ethical attributions by the advertiser
(company) were predictors for the response towards the advertising, and thus the brand. When both the company and the advertisement were perceived positively it resulted in a positive attitude towards the ad and product (Davis, 1994). However, consumers can also respond negatively towards the brand when they attribute extrinsic motives to the environmental behaviour of a company, resulting in a negative brand image (Nyilasy et al., 2014; Walker et al., 2010).
When consumers perceive the brand to engage in green marketing techniques and actually contributing to the environment through green initiatives, they will allocate intrinsic motives towards the company. They perceive the brand as selfless because it is engaging in society’s responsibility towards the environment, which results in a more positive consumer perception of the brand. On the other hand, when consumers perceive the brand to engage in green marketing, but they do not see the brand performing in any environmental initiatives, consumers will allocate extrinsic motives towards the company. A mismatch occurs between the ‘claims’ made by the company and the ‘actions’ they perform. Therefore, consumers perceive the brand to participate in a marketing trend, because the brand is not feeling truly responsible for the environmental well being, resulting in a negative consumer perception of the brand. The latter occurs when the company’s actions are perceived as greenwashing.
H4: Green advertising in comparison with non-green advertising, will lead to a less
favourable CSR image (a) and brand attitude (b) when individuals are exposed to negative corporate environmental performance, than for individuals exposed to positive corporate environmental performance.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model
Method Design
In order to test the hypotheses the study will use a 2 (type of advertisement: green or non-green) x 3 (corporate environmental performance: negative, positive or none) factorial between-subjects design (see Table 1). The dependent variables are brand attitude and CSR image. For both dependent variables an existing scale is used.
Table 1. Experimental 2 (type of advertisement) x 3 (corporate environmental performance)
factorial between-subjects design
Negative Positive None
Green A B C
Sample
The final sample of 334 participants was used for this research. A convenient snowball sample was used. Participants were recruited online through Social Networking websites such as Facebook and through e-mail.
Participants’ ages (N= 332, 2 missing) ranged from 19 to 72 (M = 30.80, SD = 11.62), of which 67.4% were female. Most participants were highly educated (N = 317). In total 49.7% completed or were enrolled in a masters program. The most frequent nationality among the participants was Dutch (75.4%), followed by German (6.3%).
Randomisation check
In order to assess if random assignment to the conditions was successful, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted, with the conditions type of advertisement and type of corporate environmental performance as the independent variable and age as the dependent variable. There was no main effect on type of advertisement F(1, 326) = .48, p = .487, neither on type of corporate environmental performance F(2, 326) = 3.39, p =.063, nor an interaction effect between both F(2, 326) = .79, p = .454.
Secondly, to check random assignment for the demographic variables, education, nationality and gender several chi-square tests were conducted to control for each condition. Based on the results, there were no significant differences between the six conditions and education χ2
(12, N = 334) = 10.87, p = .540, nor for gender χ2 (2, N = 334) = 10.36, p = .123, nor for nationality χ2
(74, N = 334) = 77.56, p = .336. Based on these analyses it was shown that the randomisation was successful.
Stimulus Materials Product Type
Green appeals are more likely to have a stronger impact for products with higher environmental impact (Kong & Zhang, 2014). In every production process materials and energy are wasted. However some products have a lower impact, while others have a higher impact on the environment. In a study by the European Union about the environmental impact of products (Tukker et al., 2008) it appeared that the products with the biggest environmental impact are 1) food and 2) housing. Domestic appliances such as cleaning utilities also belong to the housing category. In addition, previous research (Kong & Zhang, 2014; Xu, 2014) has shown that green appeals on low involvement products elicited more effective consumer responses’ and persuasion compared to high involvement products. Banerjee et al. (1995) found in a content analysis, that the most prominent advertisement products in green marketing are household consumables. Therefore, this study used laundry detergent. A
fictional brand was used to avoid familiarity and existing attitudes with the brand. However, a familiar product (laundry detergent) was used to increase familiarity with the sample.
Previous studies have shown that familiarity with the product is of importance for significant manipulation. In addition, laundry detergent is a product that every consumer needs (Kong & Zhang, 2013).
Green advertisement
Looking at the state of the art in the field for this research, a fictional brand was used to avoid already existing attitudes that could have affected the outcomes of this study. The green advertisement focused on the environmental benefits of the product by using functional and emotional appeals (Hartmann et al., 2005). The advertisement was a printed ad.
Participants were either shown a green or a non-green advertisement of a laundry detergent. The green advertisement included the product and the slogan, plus the environmental
statement and nature imagery, thereby promoting the relationship between the product and the environment and shows the environmental responsibility of the brand (Banerjee et al., 1995). The slogan of the laundry detergent Attack stated: ‘A brilliant clean and a long lasting
freshness’. For the green advertisement the following statement was added: ‘made of safe phosphate-free ingredients. Go Green, Go Attack’ (see Appendix A). The nature imagery consisted of clear water and lush green vegetation. Previous research has shown that this type of nature imagery lead to the most favourable emotional responses and brand attitude
(Hartmann & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, 2010). The non-green advertisement only showed the product and the slogan, portrayed on a plain background with towels to make it appear like a regular detergent advertisement (see Appendix A).
Corporate Environmental Performance
The second stimulus was the corporate environmental performance, with three
conditions: negative, positive and no corporate environmental performance. The last condition is to control for the effect of the advertisement on CSR image and brand attitude, without being exposed to the environmental performance. In order to manipulate participants with the corporate environmental performance, participants were shown a newspaper article. Since the experiment was collected online the article looked like an online newspaper article. There are two types of CSR information sources from a consumer perspective: company controlled information or uncontrolled information. ‘The interaction between third parties’ uncontrolled information and companies’ controlled CSR communication may be strategic for determining consumers’ attitude towards the corporate brand (Parguel et al., 2011, p. 17). Therefore, this
study used company uncontrolled information, in the form of a newspaper article to increase credibility of the environmental performance among the participants. For the content of the article a previous stimuli from Nyilasy et al. (2014) was used and adjusted to this study’s purposes and brand, which is in line with the corporate environmental performance as defined by Delmas and Burbano (2010). Participants in the positive condition were told that the brand
Attack had been awarded by the European Environment Agency as the ‘best environmentally
friendly brand’ in the detergent product category. In the negative condition, the article stated that in a new federal investigation a great amount of phosphates were found in the detergent Attack (see Appendix A). A good fit between the product and the supported cause is
important for corporate social responsibility marketing, e.g. green advertising (Becker-Olsen, Cudmore & Hill, 2006). Therefore, this study focuses on the use of phosphates in laundry detergent (“Environmental Protection Agency,” n.d.). The written text looks similar to a known online newspaper, but the name of the newspaper was left out, to avoid biased opinions towards the newspaper (see Appendix A).
Procedure
All participants were randomly assigned to the conditions. Prior to the experiment, participants were informed that the purpose of this study was to examine their attitudes towards advertisements and they were asked to sign an informed consent (see Appendix B). Furthermore, in order to enhance their participation they were told to join the lottery to win a 15-euro gift card. In the cover-up story nothing was said about green or environmental advertising, to avoid biased opinions. First, participants were exposed to either the green or the non-green advertisement. After that participants were exposed to a newspaper article revealing the corporate environmental performance (negative, positive or none). After
presented with all the stimuli material, participants were asked to answer a questionnaire. The questionnaire included the measurements of the dependent variables and a manipulation check. All participants were also asked about demographics, namely: age, gender, level of education and nationality (see Appendix C). Participants were also asked if they wanted to participate in the lottery. Lastly, all participants were debriefed and told about the actual purpose of the study (see Appendix D).
Measures
Dependent variables
CSR image
The corporate image consists of a person’s beliefs, ideas, feelings and perception of the organisation. In order to measure CSR image, an existing scale is used from Alcañiz, Cáceres and Pérez (2010). Participant’s degree of perceived CSR image was measured with six items on a 7-point Likert scale (‘Strongly disagree’ – ‘Strongly Agree’): ‘Attack is aware of environmental matters’, ‘Attack fulfills its social responsibilities’, ‘Attack puts something back into society’, ‘I think that Attack acts with society’s interest in mind’, ‘Attack acts in a socially responsible way’, ‘Attack integrates philanthropic contributions into its business activities’. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the scale was unidimensional. Only one component had an Eigenvalue above 1 (Eigenvalue of 4.50), explaining 75.06% of the variance in the six original item. The 6-item scale also proved to be reliable as indicated by Cronbach’s Alpha of .93 (M = 3.76, SD = 1.47). Therefore it appears that the scale measures perceived CSR image. Looking at the original variable response options this means that higher scores on the items indicate a more favourable CSR image.
Brand attitude
To measure how participants perceive the brand, five questions were asked to measure the brand attitude, on a 7-point Likert scale, as adopted from Muehling and Laczniak (1988) and Spears and Singh (2004). All participants were asked to rate their own feelings about the brand Attack: ‘Bad-Good’, ‘Unfavourable-Favourable’, ‘Negative-Positive’, ‘Unappealing-Appealing’, and ‘Unsatisfactory-Satisfactory’. A principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted to assess brand attitude on the five items. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the scale was unidimensional. Only one component had an Eigenvalue above 1
(Eigenvalue 4.47), explaining 89.46% of the variance in the five original items. The 5-item also proved to be reliable as indicated by Cronbach’s Alpha of .97 (M= 3.95, SD =1.71). Therefore, it appears that the scale measures brand attitude. Looking at the original variable response options we can see that higher scores on the items indicate a more favourable brand attitude.
Control variable
Brand familiarity
Although the advertisement used in this study is fictional, the brand name is taken from an existing Malaysian detergent. However, it was assumed that the convenience sample would not reach participants from Malaysia or participants familiar with the Malaysian detergent market, the brand name Attack was used for the purposes of this study. As a control variable all participants were asked whether before participating in this study they were familiar with the brand Attack, with the answer options ‘yes’ and ‘no’. An independent t-test was conducted to control if there was a significant difference in means on CSR image and brand attitude for participants that were familiar with the brand Attack. There was no
significant difference on CSR image for participants that were familiar with the brand (n = 8,
M = 3.98, SD = 1.98) and those who were not (n = 325, M = 3.76, SD = 1.45), t(331) = -.41, p
= .681. Neither was there a significant difference on brand attitude for participants that were familiar with Attack (n = 8, M = 4.52, SD = 2.07) and those who were not (n= 325, M = 3.94,
SD = 1.70), t(331) = -.96, p = 3.40. Therefore, familiarity with the brand Attack did not affect
CSR image and brand attitude.
Moderator
Environmental involvement
Inspired by the Roper survey (2002), this study will measure the participants’ degree of environmental involvement on seven items: ‘I try to save electricity at home’, ‘I recycle (news)papers’, ‘I return bottles or cans’, ‘I buy products made from or packaged in recycled materials’, ‘I recycle plastic’, ‘I try to save water at home’ and ‘I recycle glass’. All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from ‘Strongly disagree’ to ‘Strongly agree’. After cleaning this variable on outliers (N = 5) an exploratory factor analysis indicated that there were two components with an Eigenvalue above 1 (Eigenvalue 3.08 and Eigenvalue 1.14), explaining 44.05% of the former and 16.32% of the latter of the variance. Therefore the second component will not be included. The following items were included: ‘I recycle
(news)papers’, ‘I return bottles or cans’, ‘I recycle plastic’ and ‘I recycle glass’. The 4-item scale also proved to be reliable as indicated by Cronbach’s Alpha of .76 (N = 329, M = 5.42,
SD = 1.27). Looking at the original response options of the variables it means that the higher
Manipulation check
In the questionnaire, two questions were included as a manipulation check. All participants were asked about the advertisement they just saw. Respondents were asked to indicate whether what they had seen was ‘a detergent’, ‘a detergent that is good for the
environment’ or whether they ‘don’t know’. A chi-square test of independence was calculated comparing the frequency of how participants perceived the ad (a detergent vs. a detergent good for the environment vs. don’t know) in the conditions green advertisement and non-green advertisement. A significant effect was found (χ2 (334, N = 334) = 68.64, p = .000. Participants exposed to the non-green advertisement (N = 170), were more likely to perceive it as an ad for a detergent (66.5%), and participants exposed to a green advertisement (N = 164) were more likely to perceive it as a detergent that is good for the environment (70.1%).
Secondly, participants were asked how Attack was portrayed in the newspaper article they read with the options ‘negative’, ‘positive’ and ‘don’t know’. Another chi-square test of independence was calculated comparing the frequency of how participants perceived the newspaper article they read (positive vs. negative vs. don’t know) for participants in the positive and negative corporate environmental performance conditions. A significant effect was found (χ2
(2, N = 221) = 186.34, p = .000. Participants exposed to a newspaper portraying positive corporate environmental performance (N = 116) perceived it as positive (94.8%) and participants exposed to a newspaper article portraying negative corporate environmental performance (N = 105) perceived it as negative (91.4%). Overall, manipulations in both the advertisement and corporate environmental performance conditions succeeded.
Results Hypothesis testing
The first hypothesis (H1) stated that participants who were exposed to a green
advertisement would have a more favourable CSR image than participants exposed to a non-green advertisement. An independent samples t-test indicated that the difference in mean of perceived CSR image displayed in the green advertisement condition (M = 4.03, SD = 1.39), was significantly different form participants who were exposed to a non-green advertisement (M = 3.51, SD = 1.50), t (332) = -3.31, p = .001, d = .36, CI [-.84, -21]. These results suggest that the type of advertisement had an effect on perceived CSR-image. Specifically, the results suggest that when participants were exposed to a green advertisement it lead to a more
favourable CSR image than for participants who were exposed to a non-green advertisement. Therefore the first hypothesis was supported.
The second hypothesis (H2) stated a difference in brand attitude for participants
exposed to green advertisement in comparison to the non-green advertisement. More
specifically: a green advertisement would lead to a more favourable brand image than a non-green advertisement. An independent samples t-test indicated the differences in mean of perceived brand attitude displayed in the green advertisement condition (M = 4.05, SD = 1.70) was not significantly different from participants who were exposed to a non-green
advertisement condition (M = 3.85, SD = 1.71), t (332) = -1.08, p = .280, CI [-.57, .17]. These results suggest that there is no effect on type of advertisement on brand attitude. Neither the participants exposed to a green advertisement, nor participants exposed to a non-green
advertisement showed a significant difference in their perceived brand attitude. Therefore, the second hypothesis was not supported.
In order to assess if the effect of green advertising on CSR image (H3a) and brand attitude
(H3b) are more expressed for individuals with a higher degree of environmental involvement
compared to individuals with a lower degree of environmental involvement, moderation analyses were performed using the PROCESS macro tool (Hayes, 2013). The regression model to assess the effect on CSR-image (H3a) was significant F(3, 325) = 4.64, p = .003. The model predicted 20.26% of the variance in perceived CSR image. The moderation analysis with type of advertising as independent variable, CSR image as dependent variable and environmental involvement as moderating variable did not yield a significant effect, b = .10, t = .78, p = .436, CI [-.15, .34].
The second regression model conducted to assess the effect on brand attitude (H3b)
was not significant F (3, 325) = .96, p = .414. The moderation analysis with type of advertisement as the independent, brand attitude on the dependent and environmental involvement as the moderation variable did also not yield a significant effect, b = .03, t = -.20, p = .84, CI [-.32, .26]. Environmental involvement does not moderate the relationship between type of advertisement and brand attitude and perceived CSR-image. Hypothesis 3 was therefore rejected.
The last hypothesis (H4) stated that green advertisement in comparison with non-green
advertisement, would lead to a less favourable CSR image (a) and brand attitude (b) when individuals were exposed to negative corporate environmental performance, than for individuals exposed to positive or none corporate environmental performance. To test this hypothesis two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were carried out.
First, to assess the effects on CSR image (a) an ANOVA indicated that the type of advertisement (green vs. non-green), F(5,328) = 12.56, p = .000, η2= .00, the type of corporate environmental performance (negative, positive or none), F(2,328)= 128.00, p = .000, η2= .05,
and the interaction effect of both these factors F(2,328) = 13.11, p = .000, η2= .05, had a significant interaction effect on the perceived CSR-image of the brand Attack. A post-hoc test indicated that the significant difference was found in all subjects who saw a green or non-green advertisement and a newspaper article about the corporate environmental performance (positive or negative) or not.
Table 2. Perceived CSR image
N M SD
Type of advertisement
Green advertisement 164 3.95 .08
Non-green advertisement 170 3.54 .08
Type of corporate environmental performance
Positive 118 4.96 .10
Negative 106 2.69 .10
None 110 3.59 .10
Table 3. Results of a two-factor analysis of variance, with CSR-image as dependent variable Sum of squares df Mean Square F p η2 Type of Ad 14.43 1 14.43 12.56 .000 0.00 Type of CEP 293.98 2 146.99 128.00 .000 0.05 Type Ad * Type of CEP 30.12 2 15.06 13.12 .000 0.05 Error 376.65 328 1.15 .000 Total 5446.81 334 .000
Participants who were exposed to a green advertisement in combination with a
negative environmental performance, perceived the CSR image as less favourable (M = 2.847,
SD = .15) than participants in the combination with a positive corporate environmental
performance (M = 4.83, SD= .13) or none (M = 4.18, SD = .15).
At the same time, participants who were exposed to a non-green advertisement in combination with a negative corporate environmental performance perceived the CSR image as less favourable (M = 2.54, SD = .14) compared to participants exposed to positive
corporate environmental performance (M = 5.09, SD = .15) or none (M = 2.99, SD = .14). In both advertisement conditions, exposure to corporate environmental performance lead to a less favourable CSR image in the negative corporate environmental performance, in comparison to participants exposed to positivity or nothing. However, participant exposure to a non-green advertisement resulted in a less favourable CSR image, than exposure to a green advertisement. In the positive corporate environmental performance conditions, the non-green advertisement also yielded the strongest effect: participants rated the brand as more
favourable than participants exposed to a green advertisement. Notwithstanding, when participants did not read about any corporate environmental performance they rated the CSR image as more favourable when exposed to a green advertisement. Overall, this indicates that a negative or positive corporate environmental performance yields a stronger effect on the CSR image when people are exposed to a non-green advertisement. When not exposed to any corporate environmental performance, a green advertisement can indeed lead to a more positive CSR image, than a non-green advertisement.
Table 4. Dependent variable CSR-image means.
Confidence Interval Type of
advertisement Type of corporate environmental performance
M SD Lower
Bound Upper Bound
Non-green advertisement Positive 5.09 .15 4.8 5.38 Negative 2.53 .14 2.25 2.81 None 2.99 .14 2.72 3.26 Green advertisement Positive 4.83 .13 4.57 5.10 Negative 2.85 .15 2.55 3.15 None 4.18 .15 3.89 4.49
Second, to examine the effects on brand attitude (b) a two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) indicated that neither the type of advertisement (green vs. non-green), F(1, 328) = .41, p = .520, nor the type of corporate environmental performance (negative vs. positive vs. none) F (2, 328) = 108.91, p = .203 nor the interaction effect between both F (2, 328) = .39, p = .675 had a significant interaction effect on perceived brand attitude of Attack. Therefore it showed that when participants were exposed to either a green advertisement or a non-green advertisement in combination with positive, negative or no corporate environmental
performance, it had no significant effect on the perceived brand attitude.
Therefore H4 is not supported. There is an interaction effect of advertising and
corporate environmental performance on CSR image. However, when specifying this effect it appears that the strongest effects are found when exposed to a non-green advertisement and corporate environmental performance. Both the negative and the positive corporate environmental performance resulted in respectively a more negative and a more positive CSR image, than for individuals exposed to a green advertisement and corporate environmental performance. No significant interaction effect was found between green advertising and corporate environmental performance on brand attitude.
Discussion
The aim of this research was to examine the effect of green advertising, compared with non-green advertising, in combination with corporate environmental performance on CSR image and brand attitude, and to look at the moderating effects of environmental involvement.
The findings of this study partially support the hypotheses. First, the type of advertisement yielded a significant effect on CSR image. Participants perceived the CSR image of the brand as more favourable when exposed to a green advertisement, compared to a non-green advertisement.
Second, the moderating analysis to examine the interaction effect of green advertising and corporate environmental performance also yielded a significant effect on CSR image as expected. The results show that the non-green advertisement had the strongest effect on CSR image when exposed to a negative or positive corporate environmental performance.
Participants perceived the CSR image of the brand more favourable in combination with positive corporate environmental performance, and less favourable in combination with the negative corporate environmental performance in the non-green advertisement condition. Nevertheless, the green advertisement also led to a positive effect when exposed to the positive corporate environmental performance, and to a negative effect when exposed to the negative corporate environmental performance. The effects of the advertisement in
combination with corporate environmental performance were more pronounced for participants exposed to a non-green advertisement. The results did not show the potential greenwashing effects, i.e. a negative boomerang effect on the CSR image when exposed to green advertisement and negative corporate environmental performance.
As for brand attitude, there was no main-effect of green advertising, nor was there an interaction effect of green advertising and corporate environmental performance. Examining the moderating effect of green advertising and participant’s environmental involvement on CSR-image and brand attitude also did not yield significant results.
Building on previous research (Brammer & Millington, 2005; Singh et al. 2008, Sen, & Bhattacharya 2001), this study is able to show that CSR marketing (such as green
advertising) results in a more favourable CSR image of the brand. Moreover, in line with previous research (Nyilasy et al., 2014) corporate environmental performance moderated the relationship between the advertisement and CSR image. However, this research found contradicting results. On the one hand, exposure to green advertisement and negative corporate environmental performance resulted in a negative CSR image. Exposure to a non-green advertisement and negative environmental performance yielded an even more negative CSR image. Hence, the green advertisement appears to have an easing effect on the CSR image when exposed to a negative performance. The green advertisement left participants a good impression and resulted in a less unfavourable CSR image despite the negative
corporate environmental performance. On the other hand, when exposed to a positive environmental performance, the non-green advertisement yielded more favourable results than a green advertisement. This study finds no explanation for this finding.
It is hard to explain the contradicting differences found between the positive and negative environmental performance. When looking at the results found for these effects the differences are minimal. Furthermore, an additional analysis to control for the differences between green and non-green advertisement in combination with negative performance, appears to be insignificant. Another insignificant difference was found for participants
corporate environmental performance. These results stress that green advertisement and corporate environmental performance elicit upheaval in consumer perception of the brand. There could be a difference in attitudes and knowledge of CSR activities and greenwashing practice between participants in both groups that might have affected the results. Further investigation is needed to specify the effects of greenwashing on consumer perception and should include pre-existing attitudes towards CSR activities. Such attitudes can explain how people respond towards green advertising and corporate environmental performance and therefore influence the CSR image (Furlow, 2010).
Also, the research neither showed an effect of green advertising, nor the interaction of green advertising and corporate environmental performance on brand attitude, which indicates that there is no difference in brand attitude for people exposed to a green or non-green
advertisement. A possible explanation for this non-significant finding could be that the scale measuring brand attitude did not portray any ‘green’ attitude of the company, whilst the green advertisement, corporate environmental performance and the CSR image all indicated an environmental picture of the brand. Thus no differences between participants exposed to a green or non-green advertisement nor an interaction effect with corporate environmental performance was found for brand attitude. Previous research (Nyilasy et al. 2014) looking at the effect of advertising and corporate environmental performance did find a significant effect on brand attitude. However, it must be said that Nyilasy et al. (2014) used a fictional chemical company in their study, whereas the present study used a fictional laundry detergent.
Participants might perceive laundry detergent as a product that has a small impact on the environment. In this sense, the type of product choice might have influenced the outcome, because participants might not have perceived laundry detergent to have a severe
environmental impact. Future research could do a pre-test to look at which types of products or type of companies are perceived to have a severe environmental impact.
Lastly, the study showed that the impact of consumers’ environmental involvement was not significant. Therefore it suggests that green advertising on a product is more
favourable for an audience, no matter what their environmental involvement level is. Looking at the results of the current study, the level of environmental involvement was high among participants (M = 5.42, SD = 1.36). Hence, even participants that scored lower on the
environmental involvement scale could still be assigned to a higher involvement level. This is not surprising when looking at the current level of environmental consciousness in society nowadays. Looking at previous research (Kong & Zhang, 2013), similar effects were found, where most participants scored high on the environmental involvement level, and thus there was not a significant distinction made between several levels of involvement. Future research should consider a more distinctive and larger sample, which includes participants with
different levels of environmental involvement.
As in any other research, some limitations are present which might have affected the outcomes of this study and explain the results. First of all, the sampling method chosen for this study was a convenience sample. As the final sample showed almost half of the participants were enrolled in or completed a masters ‘degree. This form of sampling is not completely random and therefore previous knowledge about the topic or about experiments could have biased the results. Taking this into consideration, participants probably expected an experimental manipulation to occur and thus the presented stimuli were less persuasive and their assessment resulted a bit tainted. Also, the sample size (N= 334) is reasonable, but a larger sample could contribute to more reliability of the outcomes. Future research should therefore include a larger sample. Secondly, there are also some limitations to the research
design. An experimental research limits the external validity and therefore makes it difficult to generalise the findings (Bryman, 2015). In addition, an online experiment cannot be controlled, considering the sample of master students it is plausible that participants did not pay enough attention to the stimuli and questions that they were presented with, in turn affecting the outcomes of the study.
Despite the aforementioned limitations and the partially supported hypothesis, the present study contributes to the complex body of research on green advertisements. This study assessed the effects of green advertising in combination with corporate environmental
performance and was able to show that a green advertisement results in the most favourable CSR image when not accompanied by any corporate environmental performance. Moreover, when examining the interaction effect for green advertising and corporate environmental performance, the results indicate that participants reacted in both the positive and negative conditions.
Are we thus colour blind? The question if people are able to distinguish between green and greenwashing companies remains an important question. As most Europeans consider environmental initiatives to be of great relevance (European Union, 2014), companies that engage in greenwashing practices are taking advantage of these ideals for their own benefits. Distinguishing marketing claims and performed environmental actions is hard and therefore green marketing can be misleading. More research on green claims and greenwashing is needed to explain consumer perceptions and attitudes. This can contribute to avoiding consumer skepticism towards green advertising in general and thus prevent its effect from diminishing. This way, the actual green initiatives that contribute to a better environment can still effectively use green marketing. Therefore, this study offers valuable insights for practitioners in advertising, by suggesting that in order to create effective green marketing, it
is worth examining the target groups’ knowledge about environmental initiatives and CSR activities.
References
Aaker, J., Vohs, K. D., & Mogilner, C. (2010). Nonprofits are seen as warm and for-profits as competent: Firm stereotypes matter. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 224-237. Alcañiz, E. B., Cáceres, R. C., & Pérez, R. C. (2010). Alliances between brands and social
causes: The influence of company credibility on social responsibility image. Journal
of business ethics, 96(2), 169-186.
Balmer, J. M., & Gray, E. R. (1999). Corporate identity and corporate communications: creating a competitive advantage. Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, 4(4), 171-177.
Banerjee, S., Gulas, C. S., & Iyer, E. (1995). Shades of green: a multidimensional analysis of environmental advertising. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 21-31.
Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of business research, 59(1), 46 53.
Benoit-Moreau, F., & Parguel, B. (2011). Building brand equity with environmental communication: an empirical investigation in France. EuroMed Journal of
Business, 6(1), 100-116.
Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2005). Corporate reputation and philanthropy: An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(1), 29-44.
Chen, Y. S., & Chang, C. H. (2013). Greenwash and green trust: The mediation effects of green consumer confusion and green perceived risk. Journal of Business
Ethics, 114(3), 489-500.
Chernev, A., & Blair, S. (2015). Doing well by doing good: the benevolent halo of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6), 1412-1425.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2004). Business ethics: A European perspective: managing
corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Davis, J. J. (1994). Good ethics is good for business: Ethical attributions and response to environmental advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(11), 873-885.
Dahl, R. (2010). Green washing: Do you know what you’re buying. Environmental health
perspectives, 118(6), 246-252.
Delmas, M., & Blass, V. D. (2010). Measuring corporate environmental performance: the trade‐offs of sustainability ratings. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(4), 245 260.
Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California
Management Review, 54(1), 64-87.
D'Souza, C., & Taghian, M. (2005). Green advertising effects on attitude and choice of advertising themes. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics,17(3), 51-66. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate
social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International journal of
Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 34(2), 147-157.
“Environmental Protection Agency.” (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions
European Union (2014). The EU explained: environment. Luxembourg: European Commission.
Furlow, N. E. (2010). Greenwashing in the new millennium. The Journal of Applied Business
and Economics, 10(6), 22-25.
Greenwashing. (n.d.). The Oxford English Dictionairy. Retrieved from
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/249122?redirectedFrom=greenwashing#eid Grimmer, M., & Woolley, M. (2014). Green marketing messages and consumers' purchase
intentions: Promoting personal versus environmental benefits. Journal of Marketing
Communications, 20(4), 231-250.
Hansmann, H. B. (1981), Reforming Nonprofit Corporation Law, University of
Pennsylvania Law Review, 129(3), 497–623.
Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, V. (2010). Beyond savanna: An evolutionary and
environmental psychology approach to behavioral effects of nature scenery in green advertising. Journal of Environmental Psychology,30(1), 119-128.
Hartmann, P., Apaolaza Ibáñez, V., & Forcada Sainz, F. J. (2005). Green branding effects on attitude: functional versus emotional positioning strategies. Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, 23(1), 9-29.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological review, 51(6), 358-374.
Hoeffler, S, & Keller, K.L. (2002), Building Brand Equity through Corporate Societal Marketing, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(1), 78–89.
Hsu, K.-T.. (2012). The Advertising Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Corporate Reputation and Brand Equity: Evidence from the Life Insurance Industry in
Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(2), 189–201.
Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual review of
psychology, 31(1), 457-501.
Klein, J., & Dawar, N. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and consumers' attributions and brand evaluations in a product–harm crisis. International Journal of research in
Marketing, 21(3), 203-217.
Ko, E., Hwang, Y. K., & Kim, E. Y. (2013). Green marketing functions in building corporate image in the retail setting. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1709-1715.
Kong, Y., & Zhang, L. (2014). When does green advertising work? The moderating role of product type. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(3), 197-213.
Kong, Y., & Zhang, A. (2013). Consumer response to green advertising: the influence of product involvement. Asian Journal of Communication, 23(4), 428-447.
Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004). The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of
marketing, 68(4), 16-32.
Matthes, J., Wonneberger, A. & Schmuck, D. (2014). Consumers`green involvement and the persuasive effects of emotional versus functional ads. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1885-1893.
Mayer, R., Scammon, D., & Zick, C. (1993). Poisoning the well: Do environmental claims strain consumer credulity? Advances in Consumer Research, 20, 698-703.
Mobley, A. S., Painter, T. S., Untch, E. M., & Rao Unnava, H. (1995). Consumer evaluation of recycled products. Psychology & Marketing, 12(3), 165-176.
Mitchell, A. A. & Olson, J.C. (1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research. 18(August), 318-332.
Muehling, D. D., & Laczniak, R. N. (1988). Advertising's immediate and delayed influence on brand attitudes: Considerations across message-involvement levels. Journal of
advertising, 17(4), 23-34.
Nyilasy, G., Gangadharbatla, H., & Paladino, A. (2014). Perceived greenwashing: The interactive effects of green advertising and corporate environmental performance on consumer reactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 693-707.
Olsen, M. C., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Chandukala, S. R. (2014). Green claims and message frames: how green new products change brand attitude. Journal of Marketing, 78(5), 119-137.
Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of
business ethics, 102(1), 15-28.
Parguel, B., Benoit-Moreau, F., & Russell, C. A. (2015). Can evoking nature in advertising mislead consumers? The power of ‘executional greenwashing'. International Journal
of Advertising, 34(1), 107-134.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: Application to advertising. Advertising and consumer psychology, 3-23.
Roper ASW (2002). Green Gauge Report 2002: Americans perspective on environmental
issues. New York: Roper.
Schuhwerk, M. E., & Lefkoff-Hagius, R. (1995). Green or non-green? Does type of appeal matter when advertising a green product?. Journal of advertising, 24(2), 45-54. Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better?
Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of marketing
Research, 38(2), 225-243.
Singh, J., de los Salmones Sanchez, M. & del Bosque, I. R. (2008). Understanding Corporate Social Responsibility and Product Perceptions in Consumer Markets: A Cross
Cultural Evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 597–611.
Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53-66. Sjoemelsoftware VW weet wanneer auto op rollenbank staat (2015, September 22). NOS.
Retrieved from http://nos.nl/artikel/2059128-sjoemelsoftware-vw-weet-wanneer-auto op-rollenbank-staat.html
“Stichting Reclame Code”. (2013, 10 June). Retrieved from
https://www.reclamecode.nl/webuitspraak.asp?ID=119228&acCode “Sustainable Development Goals UN”. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300
Terrachoice (2010). The sins of greenwashing: home and family edition. Retrieved from http://sinsofgreenwashing.com/index35c6.pdf
The Economist. (2008, January 19). A special report on corporate social responsibility. The Economist, 386 (8563), 1-24.
Tony Chocolonely. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.tonyschocolonely.com/en/our mission/crazy-about-chocolate-serious-about-people/
Tucker, E. M., Rifon, N. J., Lee, E. M., & Reece, B. B. (2012). Consumer receptivity to green ads: A test of green claim types and the role of individual consumer characteristics for green ad response. Journal of Advertising,41(4), 9-23.
Tukker, A., Huppes, G., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., de Koning, A., van Oers, L., Suh, S., Geerken T., van Holderbeke, M., Jansen, B. & Nielsen, P. (2008). Environmental
Impact of Products. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/pdf/eipro_report.pdf
Vaaland, T. I., Heide, M., & Grønhaug, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: investigating theory and research in the marketing context. European Journal of
Marketing, 42(9/10), 927-953.
Vos, J. (2009). Actions speak louder than words: Greenwashing in corporate America. Notre
Dame JL Ethics & Pub. Pol'y, 23, 673-697.
Walker, M., Heere, B., Parent, M. M., & Drane, D. (2010). Social responsibility and the Olympic Games: The mediating role of consumer attributions. Journal of Business
Ethics, 95(4), 659-680.
Wan, H. H., & Schell, R. (2007). Reassessing corporate image—An examination of how image bridges symbolic relationships with behavioral relationships. Journal of public
relations research, 19(1), 25-45.
Wigley, S. (2008). Gauging consumers’ responses to CSR activities: Does increased awareness make cents?. Public Relations Review, 34(3), 306-308.
Xue, F. (2014). It looks green: effects of green visuals in advertising on Chinese consumer’s brand perception. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 26, 75-86.
Appendix A Stimuli materials
Advertisements
Figure 2 and Figure 3. Non-green and green advertisement.
Corporate environmental performance newspaper articles
Figure 4. Positive corporate environmental performance.
Appendix B
Introduction letter and informed consent Dear participant,
With this letter, I would like to invite you to participate in a research study to be conducted under the auspices of the Graduate School of Communication, a part of the University of Amsterdam. The aim is to study attitudes towards advertising. The study will take about 5-7 minutes. For completing the study, you will be able to participate in a lottery in which one randomly selected participant will be able to win a €15 gift card for a web shop of your choice.
Sincerely, Willemijn Sterk
Informed consent
Please read the following instructions. If you agree with the following, please accept the agreements below and the experiment will start.
- I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of
the research.
- I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. With this, I retain the right
to withdraw my consent (within 24 hours after participation), without having to give a reason
for doing so. I am aware that I may halt my participation in the experiment at any time. - If my research results are used in scientific publications or are made public in another way,
this will be done such a way that my anonymity is completely safeguarded. My personal data
If I wish to receive more information about the research, either now or in future, I can contact Willemijn Sterk (willemijn.sterk@student.uva.nl). Should I have any complaints about this research, I can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing the ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020‐ 525 3680; ascor‐secr‐fmg@uva.nl. Confidentiality of my complaint is hereby guaranteed.
Appendix C
Background questionnaire What is your age in years?
What is your gender?
❍ Male ❍ Female
What is your highest completed level of education? If you are currently enrolled, please indicate the level you are currently attending.
❍ Primary education
❍ Lower secondary education ❍ Upper secondary education
❍ Post-secondary non-tertiary education ❍ Bachelor or equivalent
❍ Master or equivalent ❍ Doctoral or equivalent
❍ Other, namely ____________________
