Avoiding the greenwashing effect:
Inhibiting scepticism using diagnostic advertising claims
Yannick Eshuijs
5959748
Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication Master’s Programme Communication Science
Irina Lock 02.02.2018
Abstract
Accusations of greenwashing threaten the image of companies that have good
intentions regarding environmental activities. Although existing literature has described what greenwashing entails and several attempts have been done to investigate how accusations of greenwashing can be diverted, there has been no literature that investigates in how
diagnostic advertising claims can be effective tools to achieve this. Since greenwashing is explained as being a co-construct in the eye of the beholder and consumers are becoming increasingly sceptical towards environmental-oriented advertising, this paper aims to find out if diagnostic advertising claims have the ability to enhance perceived corporate image by inhibiting scepticism. The results indicate that diagnostic advertising claims do enhance the perceived corporate image by inhibiting scepticism. Furthermore, this study also found a significant indirect effect between diagnostic advertising claims and purchase intention. This indicates that diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising can also be useful to positively influence purchase intention by inhibiting scepticism and enhance the perceived corporate image. Consequently, this study provides a possible answer on how companies can avoid accusations of greenwashing when practicing environmental-oriented advertising.
Key words: greenwashing, scepticism, diagnostic advertising claims, environmental marketing, perceived corporate image, purchase intention
Introduction
“Even though we have a longstanding focus on sustainability, people still tested us when we initially stepped up our circular-economy work. They wanted to make sure this wasn’t “just words” (Fleming & Zils, 2014). The fact that ‘people are still testing’ comes from the notion that consumers are becoming more sceptical regarding sustainable business practices (De Vries, Terwel, Ellemers & Daamen, 2015), especially when companies
advertise about it (Pomering & Johnson, 2009). This should come as no surprise, since there have been many incidents where companies used environmental-oriented adverting merely as a mean to enhance its corporate image (Seele & Gatti, 2017). To illustrate, in 2007, Shell (an oil company) came up with a new slogan that stated “Don’t throw anything away. There is no away” (Seele & Gatti, 2017, p. 239). The text came with an image where flowers came from chimneys of oil refineries (Tryhorn, 2007). This is not very subtle, considering Shell’s core business. A corollary is that this had negative consequences regarding the image of the company.
On the other hand, it is understandable that companies want to convince their
consumers that their way of doing business has become more environmentally-friendly than before. This is fuelled by the increase of environmental-aware consumers (Du, Bhattacharya & Sen, 2010). Additionally, Sheth, Sethia and Srinivas (2011) noticed that sustainability or “mindful consumption” is even becoming an emerging trend. As a result, companies increasingly strive to be environmentally responsible in order to maximise their business returns (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). Also, most executives already noticed that “how they respond to the challenge of sustainability will profoundly affect the competitiveness – and perhaps even the survival – of their organizations” (Lubin & Esty, 2010, p. 2). Therefore, supplying more environmental-friendly products and services does not only seems to be an
effective way to increase profits, it can also be effective to maintain a competitive edge (Du, Bhattacharya & Sen, 2007).
Due to an increase in the demand for environmental-friendly products, it has become imperative for companies to convince consumers that they are the ones meeting that demand. A fruitful way to convince consumers can be done through environmental-oriented
advertising (Lii & Lee, 2011). This is not an easy task, since consumers have become increasingly sceptical towards environmental-oriented advertising (Pomering & Johnson, 2009; De Vries et al., 2015). This is mainly caused by incidents such as Shell where companies used environmental-oriented advertising merely as a marketing tool to enhance their perceived corporate image while not benefiting the environment at all (Chen & Chang, 2013). In academic literature, this is seen and termed as greenwashing (De Vries et al., 2015). In their extensive research, Seele and Gatti (2017) highlight that the greenwashing effect is seen as problematic. They explain this by stating that greenwashing is not only an act of misconduct, but the concept also implies that companies are being accused of greenwashing (i.e., the greenwashing effect). Because accusations of greenwashing can negatively influence the corporate image, it could prevent companies from actively participating in
environmentally friendly activities. It is therefore also beneficial for the environment that accusations of greenwashing can be avoided.
Since accusations of greenwashing is seen as problematic, this study wants to
investigate what can be done to prevent this. Greenwashing is co-constructed in the eye of the beholder (Seeli & Gatti, 2017), so a successful environmental communication strategy should focus on inhibiting consumer scepticism to prevent such accusations. One way to inhibit consumers scepticism can be achieved by using diagnostic advertising claims. Diagnostic advertising claims are seen as tools to enhance the perceived corporate image by simplifying information-processing tasks (Pomering & Johnson, 2009). Although suggested by Pomering
and Johnson (2009), limited research has been conducted into the effectiveness of these claims. Stronger still, no study has looked into the effectiveness of these claims regarding environmental-oriented advertising.
The underlying character of this study focuses on avoiding the greenwashing effect. This will be done by investigating whether the use of diagnostic advertising claims in
environmental-oriented advertising have the ability to improve the perceived corporate image by inhibiting scepticism among consumers. To determine whether this also has positive consequences with regard to business opportunities such as maximizing profits, this study will also examine whether diagnostic advertising claims positively influence purchase intention. Therefore, this study aims to find an answer on the following question:
Do diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising effectively enhance perceived corporate image by inhibiting scepticism, and, consequently positively influences the purchase intention of consumers?
In order to answer this question, this study will make use of an experiment in which the brand Philips will be used as an example company. The reason for this is that Philips has a rich history with regard to sustainability practices (Philips, 2017; Philips, n. d.). This is recognized by their overall performance on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, a type of benchmark that provides the reputational effects of companies regarding sustainability practices (Robinson, Kleffner & Bertels, 2011). This will not only benefit the credibility of the research, it also avoids possible negative bias towards other example companies that not have been necessarily environmental aware.
First, there will be examined whether diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising have the ability to inhibit scepticism. Secondly, this study will
enhance perceived corporate image. Lastly, there will be looked into if diagnostic advertising claims can also have indirect positive effects on purchase intention. Apart from that, this study also focuses on the underlying mechanism of diagnostic advertising claims: the ability to avoid accusations of greenwashing when companies advertising about doing good for the environment.
Theoretical framework
The main purpose of this study is to investigate whether scepticism can be inhibited among consumers to enhance perceived corporate image when exposed to environmental-oriented advertisements. The aim is to provide a possible answer on how companies can avoid accusations of greenwashing when advertising about doing good for the environment. To understand why this is important, it is necessary to find out where the phenomenon greenwashing is coming from and what it entails. The emergence of the term ‘greenwashing’ goes back to 1986, when environmentalist Jay Westervelt accused the hotel industry of misleading consumers by letting them to believe the reuse of towels would supposedly save the environment (Rahman, Park & Chi, 2015) while having a generally limited environmental policy (Seele & Gatti, 2017). This refers to the convention of misleading consumers
regarding a company's environmental practices or the environmental benefits of a product or service (Parguel, Benoît-Moreau & Larceneux, 2011). Generally, greenwashing is expressed as “the practice of making an unsubstantiated or misleading claim about the environmental benefits of a product, service, technology or company practice” (Quoquab, Thurasamy & Mohammad, 2017, p. 36).
In search of a revised definition, Seele and Gatti (2017) argued that this definition is limited. According to them, greenwashing is rather a co-construction (i.e., ‘in the eye of the beholder’). They explain this by focusing on an important difference. According to the
researchers, the greenwashing effect primarily occurs when there have been accusations at play. In the general definition, there is no question of inference, but only a description of the act itself. To put it differently, Seele and Gatti’s (2017) definition explains us there is no question of greenwashing without justified accusation in the eye of the beholder. This new definition is definable for this research, because accusations of greenwashing can be due to a generally growing scepticism towards environmental-oriented advertisements (Pomering & Johnson, 2009; Chen & Chang, 2013; De Vries et al., 2015).
The link between scepticism and environmental-oriented advertising
Since there is a strong emphasis on scepticism, it is important to understand what is meant by it. In general terms, scepticism is defined as “a tendency towards disbelief” (Gupta & Pirsch, 2006, p. 319). According to Obermiller and Spangenberg (1998), scepticism can also be generated by consumers and is often focused on advertising. They argued that consumer scepticism is mainly caused by exaggerations companies use in their advertisements. These exaggerations can be different in nature: providing seemingly unprovable claims, leaving out important information or overstating the features of their products (Chen & Chang, 2013). This is especially toxic for environmental-oriented
advertising. When consumers assume “a company is acting out of self-interest rather than for the benefit of the society” (Elving, 2013, p. 278-279), scepticism and accusations of
greenwashing can emerge (De Vries et al., 2015). The reason there is a growing mistrust towards environmental-oriented advertising (Chen & Chang, 2013) has mainly to do with previously misconduct of companies as a means to enhance its perceived corporate image without intending to help the environment (Seele & Gatti, 2017). The previously discussed case of Shell exemplifies that (Tryhorn, 2007). Although mentioned as a historical incident to show how misleading advertising can backfire (Newell, Goldsmit & Banzhaf, 1991), it is the accumulation of such incidents that have made consumers sceptical (Skarmeas & Leonidou,
2013). It has therefore become worthwhile to pay more attention to this phenomenon. Especially if the inhibition of scepticism is not only useful to prevent accusations of greenwashing, but can also be seen as an opportunity to enhance the perceived corporate image (Pomering & Johnson, 2009). Before examining the relationship between consumer scepticism and perceived corporate image, the next paragraph there will be discussed how scepticism can be inhibited.
Inhibiting scepticism using diagnostic advertising claims
Pomering and Johnson (2009) also made notice of a widespread and growing distrust towards companies’ advertising efforts, especially on advertisements aimed at corporate social responsibility (CSR). Moreover, they realised that consumer scepticism towards CSR-oriented advertising has potential to shape the destiny of companies (Hansen & Schrader, 1997). This triggered them to develop a set of propositions that are referred to as diagnostic advertising claims.
Diagnostic advertising claims are generally seen as corporate image advertising tools to inhibit consumer scepticism (Pomering & Johnson, 2009; Pomering, 2009). These claims aim to simplify information-processing tasks in order to provide consumers with an increased ability to process information. Diagnostic, here, is derived from the term diagnosticity, which is explained as "the extent to which a given piece of information discriminates between alternative hypotheses, interpretations, or categorizations" (Herr, Kardes & Kim, 1991, p. 457). The diagnosticity in these advertising claims outline the ability to align communication efforts with what consumers understand of it. This is an important aspect, since “extant research supports an increase in scepticism toward marketing communications where there are discrepancies between advertising claims, or when claims are difficult to verify” (Pomering, 2009, p. 42). In other words, due to the ability to reduce discrepancies between
advertising claims, consumer scepticism can be inhibited (Pomering, Johnson & Noble, 2013).
In order to inhibit consumer scepticism, Pomering and Johnson (2009) proposed three claims: social topic information, CSR commitment and CSR impact specificity. Due to the nature of this study, the effects of the social topic information claim will not be examined here. Admittedly, Pomering and Johnson (2009) explain that environmental problems can be part of the social topic information claim, but there is still too much focus on the social aspect of things instead of solely focusing on the environment. Therefore, this study will only
examine the effects of CSR commitment and CSR impact specificity. Although the labels of these claims contain 'CSR' and this study focuses solely on environmental-oriented
advertising, the underlying mechanisms of these claims are still valuable, as will be explained below.
CSR commitment is explained as a message that involves the long-term commitment of a company in environmental activities. According to Pirsch, Gupta and Grau (2007), long-term commitment as opposed to more short-long-term commitment provokes less scepticism. This has to do with the fact that short-term involvement is often related to companies that only want to make a profit (Du et al., 2010; Arendt & Brettel, 2010; De Vries et al., 2015). This means that the reason why a company commits itself in the short term is seen as something that only benefits the company and does not benefit the environment (Du et al., 2010; Schultz & Castelló, 2013). Therefore, the first expectation is formulated as follows:
H1a: Environmental-oriented advertising containing CSR commitment provokes less scepticism than environmental-oriented advertising containing no diagnostic advertising claims.
CSR impact specificity, here, is explained as the provision of measures what the company is doing to prevent from worsening or helping to alleviate environmental problems (Pomering & Johnson, 2009). The strength of this claim is that a company shows that it is actively engaged in environmental problems. The company is not afraid to identify problems and to come up with possible solutions at the same time. It inhibits scepticism, because it shows that the company is not only interested in promoting its products and services, but is genuinely concerned about environmental issues (Lii & Lee, 2012). Hence, it is expected that:
H1b: Environmental-oriented advertising containing CSR impact specificity provokes less scepticism than environmental-oriented advertising containing no diagnostic advertising claims.
The relationship between scepticism and perceived corporate image
In their research, Pomering and Johnson (2009) already emphasized on the negative relationship between consumer scepticism and perceived corporate image as a result of companies’ misuse of environmental-orientated advertising. Many scholars already pointed out that misleading environmental claims can easily backfire (Newell et al., 1991; Arendt & Brettel, 2010; Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013) risking an increase of consumer scepticism (Pomering & Johnson, 2009) and accusations of greenwashing (De Vries et al., 2015).
A leading example is the case of Beyond Petrol (BP). In 2000, BP introduced a new green logo to show its concern for the environment and to tout its environmental credentials with advertising and marketing (Muralidharan, Dillistone & Shin, 2011). Considering the company’s core business, people perceived these communicational efforts as misleading (Seele & Gatti, 2007). Since this made consumers suspicious, BP’s ‘concern for the environment’-campaign backfired and led to accusations of using environmental claims as
the sole purpose of enhancing their image (i.e., greenwashing). In other words, when companies provide vague and unprovable claims that does not fit within the corporate’s image (Newell et al., 1991; Leonidou & Skarmeas, 2017), the chances are that consumers will become sceptical and perceive the corporate image negatively. It is therefore expected that:
H2: Scepticism has a negative influence on perceived corporate image.
The aim of diagnostic advertising claims is not only to inhibit consumer scepticism, but also to improve the perceived company image (Pomering & Johnson, 2009). In their paper, they justified their propositions by wanting “to test how the alignment between desired CSR-based corporate identity messages and perceived corporate image might be enhanced through the inhibition of scepticism” (Pomering & Johnson, 2009, p. 421). Since diagnostic adverting claims have the ability to simplify information-processing tasks in order to provide consumers with an increased ability to process information, scepticism can be inhibited and perceived corporate image can be enhanced. To find out if this also works for environmental-oriented advertising, the following is expected:
H3: Environmental-oriented advertising containing diagnostic advertising claims have a more positive influence on perceived corporate image than environmental-oriented advertising containing no diagnostic advertising claims when mediated by scepticism.
Note that, here, the effect of both claims, in contrast with the singular effects of CSR commitment and CSR impact specificity, will be investigated. The reason behind this can be substantiated by a previous study carried out by Pomering et al. (2009), where they
investigated the effect of combining two diagnostic advertising claims. In the next paragraph, the relation between diagnostic advertising claims and perceived corporate image will be examined.
Environmental marketing as a means to improve the company's image
Since consumers are increasingly more environmental aware (Du et al., 2010), it should be in a company’s interest to be environmental aware too. Within this logic, a company should position itself as being environmental cognisant in order to give answer to the ever-increasing demand for environmental friendly products (Sheth et al., 2011). A prominent way for companies to be successful in that is to enhance its image with regard to environmental-aware practices (Lubin & Esty, 2010). In other words, if a company wants to maintain a competitive edge to survive, it should be clear the company stands for a more environmental friendly way of doing business.
A successful way of enhancing the perceived corporate image, can be achieved through environmental marketing (Lii & Lee, 2011). Many scholars agree that marketing is a successful tool to communicate what a company stands for in order to support the sales of the company’s products and services (Polonsky, 1995; Ottman, Stafford & Hartman, 2006). This is no different for environmental marketing (Lii & Lee, 2012). Polonsky (1995) already explained that environmental marketing is designed to facilitate consumers’ wants and needs in relation to environmental friendly products, since environmental marketing, as the
definition explains, has the ability to align the objectives of companies, consumers and the environment. This can be substantiated by the theory of cause-related marketing. In a review of Brønn and Vrioni (2001), they defined cause-related marketing in relation to CSR as “the practice of advocating corporate social responsibility in marketing communications
activities” (2001, p. 214). In their research on cause-related marketing, Gupta and Pirsch (2006) even found a strong positive relationship between the company-cause fit and overall attitude towards the company. It is therefore interesting to examine if diagnostic advertising claims CSR commitment and CSR impact specificity have the ability to align communication
efforts in environmental-oriented advertising in order to enhance the perceived corporate image. Thus, the expectations are that:
H4a: Environmental-oriented advertising containing CSR commitment has a more positive influence on perceived corporate image than environmental-oriented advertising containing no diagnostic advertising claims.
H4b: Environmental-oriented advertising containing CSR impact specificity has a more positive influence on perceived corporate image than environmental-oriented advertising containing no diagnostic advertising claims.
In the next paragraph there will be looked into what other role consumers can play (i.e., next to scepticism) with regard to the practice of environmentally-oriented advertising of companies.
Purchase intention as a performance measurement
This paper already shed light on the fact that it is important for companies to position themselves as environmental aware in order to give answer to an ever-increasing demand for environmentally products (Sheth et al., 2011). Why this is important and how this works, can be explained through stakeholder theory. The basic idea behind stakeholder theory is that companies should proactively pay attention to its stakeholders (Freeman, 1984; Harrison & Wicks, 2013). Particularly when zooming in on consumers, since consumers are an “audience with the ability to shape the destiny of individual firms and economies” (Pomering &
Johnson, 2009, p. 421). Consumers do this by choosing what to buy and what not (i.e., purchase intention), acting as punishing and rewarding authorities (Hansen & Schrader, 1997). The premise of stakeholder theory can therefore be seen as a performance
power of consumers. Thus, assuming that companies proactively pay attention to its consumers and consumers have the ability to shape a company’s destiny trough their purchase intent, the following is expected:
H5: Perceived corporate image positively correlates with purchasing intention.
As explained earlier, environmental marketing has the ability to enhance perceived corporate image (Gupta & Pirsch, 2006) and purchase intention among consumers (Spears & Singh, 2004). Differently put, the advantage of environmental marketing is twofold:
enhancing the perceived corporate image (Lii & Lee, 2011) and generating profits (Du et al., 2010). The fact that the practice of environmental marketing can have a positively effect perceived corporate image and purchase intention (Patel, Gadhavi & Sukha, 2017), and the use of diagnostic adverting claims in environmental-oriented advertising lead to a better understanding between companies and consumers (Pomering & Johnson, 2009), it is expected that:
H6: Environmental-oriented advertising containing diagnostic advertising claims have a more positive influence on purchase intention than environmental-oriented advertising containing no diagnostic advertising claims when mediated by perceived corporate image.
Many scholars have pointed out that an ever-increasing demand for environmental friendly products has to do with the increase of environmental awareness among consumers (i.e., positive attitude towards CSR) (Du et al., 2010; Sheth et al., 2011). Since purchase intention, here, is seen as a performance measurement, it is interesting to examine if an increasing positive attitude towards CSR-activities (including environmental-oriented activities) of companies already strongly influences purchase intent among consumers. This expectation has been included to verify the direct and indirect effects of diagnostic
advertising claims and perceived corporate image and purchase intention. Therefore, is expected that:
H7: Attitude towards CSR positively correlates with purchase intention.
To summarise, the aim of this study is to find out if scepticism can be inhibited among consumers using the diagnostic advertising claims CSR commitment and CSR impact specificity in environmental-oriented advertisements. Expectations are that inhibition of consumer scepticism leads to an enhanced perceived corporate image. Also, purchase intention is being examined as a performance measurement for perceived corporate image. Here, it is expected that there will be a positive correlation between perceived corporate image and purchasing intention. Moreover, there will be looked into the indirect effect between diagnostic advertising claims and perceived corporate image and into the indirect effect of diagnostic advertising claims and purchase intention. Since purchase intent can be strongly influenced by an already positive attitude towards CSR, a positive correlation is expected here. To give a better overview, a conceptual model is presented in figure 1. In the next section, the sample and dimensions of the design will be reported.
Figure 1. Conceptual model
Methodology
An online experiment was carried out to test the hypotheses formulated in this study. This study contains one independent variable (i.e., type of advertisement) consisting of three levels (CSR commitment, CSR impact specificity and a control group) and one dependent variable (purchase intention). The variables ‘scepticism’ and ‘perceived corporate image’ act as mediators. This research also includes one control variable (attitude towards CSR).
Stimuli development
For this specific study, the brand Philips was used to ensure recognisability and credibility. Philips has long been a well-known global company and had an already rich history with respect to environmental issues (Philips, 2017; Philips, n. d.). Therefore, Philips was used as an example company in order to make the advertisements more realistic. During the development of the stimuli, an assessment has been made based on a comparable study done by Pomering, Johnson and Noble (2013). A similar design has been used, since they managed to manipulate the advertisements successfully and found fruitful results.
To hold the respondents’ attention, the advertisements did not contain far more than 200 words, as suggested by Rossiter and Bellman (2005). To give the advertisements a more convincing appearance and a clearer sense from which company the message was, the
Philips’ logo and slogan were placed above the text. Furthermore, the first sentence, first two columns and last column where similar in syntax. At the end, all advertisements closed with the words “Choose Philips”. These were elements that contained similar design and
appearance to check for internal validity. The manipulation of the advertisements took place in the third and fourth column, but in the first sentence, first two columns and last column, parts of the text was slightly modified to strengthen the manipulation. The main topic in all
advertisements had a strong focus on environmentalism, albeit differently written as will be clarified in a short explanation on how the advertisement were manipulated.
CSR commitment. The text in the advertisement containing diagnostic advertising
claim CSR commitment contained information on showing Philips’ long-term commitment regarding environmental issues. In order to put emphasis on (long-term) commitment, it also contained information on Philips already having a rich history on the matter.
CSR impact specificity. The text in the advertisement containing diagnostic
advertising claim CSR impact specificity contained information about Philips identifying an environmental problem and to come up with a possible solution at the same time. Words like commitment or words that resemble and are associated with commitment (e.g., engagement, responsibility, long-term, continually) were avoided as much as possible.
Control group. To check if the advertisements containing diagnostic advertising
claims had effect, a control group was added. Here, the advertisement was manipulated as being both low in CSR commitment and CSR impact specificity and had more emphasis on seeing environmental marketing as a business opportunity.
Pilot studies
In a timeframe of two weeks (December 13th, 2017 till December 27th, 2017), three pilot studies (N = 15; N = 21; N = 24) were conducted to check for reliability, validity and successful manipulation of the advertisements before starting with the main research. This was done with the help of Qualtrics (http://www.qualtrics.com). During the pilot studies, respondents were asked three questions. Each individual question was specifically related to one of the manipulated conditions. For example, to test if the advertisement containing CSR commitment was read as such, respondents had to answer the question “To what extent does
the information in the advertisement enables you to evaluate the company’s historic and long-term commitment towards environmental problems?” with a 5-point scale from 1 (none at all) to 5 (a great deal).
In the third pre-test (N = 24), and after constant revaluation of the advertisements’ content, favourable conditions were met. Meaning, all three advertisements were successfully manipulated by comparing the means of the three questions. For manipulation checks, One-Way ANOVA was being used to see if the means were higher of the questions that were specifically related to that condition. The convenience sample of the third pre-test consisted of 24 respondents, which were randomly and equally distributed over three conditions. The seven respondents exposed to the advertisement high on CSR commitment scored higher (M = 3.86, SD = 1.07) on the question that was related to the condition than the questions that were not related to the condition. The same results were found for the questions that were related to the advertisement containing CSR impact specificity (N = 8; M = 4.13, SD = .64) and the advertisement containing no diagnostic advertising claims (N = 9; M = 3.44, SD = 1.01). Results that were not significant can be explained because of a small sample size (Field, 2013).
Data collection
A convenience sample was used to gather sufficient amount of data that was needed to get viable answers on the hypotheses. The survey, containing 27 items – with an aim of measuring four variables – and four demographic questions (gender, age, education level and employment) was distributed through e-mail and social media platform Facebook (N = 255). Approximately two weeks (between December 28th, 2017 and January 10th, 2018) were used to collect data. Although a total response of 255 respondents was met, only 193 responses were useful for analysis due to incomplete surveys and underaged participants. When
checking on demographic enquiries, 46.1% (N = 89) was male and 53.9% (N = 104) was female. Most of the respondents were between 25 to 34 years old with 52.8% (N = 102), followed by respondents that were between 18 to 24 (N = 50, 25.9%), between 55 to 64 (N = 17, 8.8%), between 35 to 44 (N = 14, 7.3%) and between 45 to 54 years old (N = 8, 4.1%). Respondents 65 years or older (N = 2, 1.0%) were significantly less present. A bigger share of the respondents (N = 145) had a bachelor or master’s diploma (75.1%), followed up by respondents having an associate degree in college or lower (N = 41, 21.1%) and respondents having a doctoral or professional degree (N = 7, 3.6%). In terms of employment, most of the respondents (N = 93) worked fulltime (48.2%) or were students (N = 61, 31.6%). To lesser extent, the respondents worked part-time (N = 18, 9.3%), were self-employed (N = 10, 5.2%), unemployed (N = 8, 4.1%) or retired (N = 3, 1.6%).
Procedure
To get a viable answer on the research question, an experimental study was done with respondents who, in theory, could be potential consumers. This was tested by including questions measuring purchase intention (Spears & Singh, 2004), which scored highly (M = 4.94, SD = 1.09). During the experiment, the respondents (N = 193) were randomly distributed to one of the three simulated advertisements using Qualtrics
(http://www.qualtrics.com). Before starting the survey, respondents were asked to accept the informed consent. Thereafter, the respondents were informed about what the survey would be about. After accepting the informed consent, respondents were first asked to answer 12 items measuring attitude towards CSR. This was deliberately done to prime respondents before starting with the manipulation. Thereafter, before the manipulation started, respondents were asked to take their time and read to advertisement carefully. After the manipulation, another 15 items were asked measuring scepticism, perceived corporate image and purchase
intention. All questions were provided with a 7-point Likert scale. The survey ended with several demographic enquiries.
Independent variable and control variable
Type of advertisement. The manipulation of the independent variable type of
advertisement was done by implementing diagnostic advertising claims ‘CSR commitment’ and ‘CSR impact specificity’ (Pomering, 2009; Pomering & Johnson, 2009; Pomering, Johnson & Noble, 2013) in two of the three simulated advertisements – one advertising containing ‘CSR commitment’ and one advertisement containing ‘CSR impact specificity’. A third advertisement did not contain diagnostic advertising claims and was used as a control group.
Attitude towards CSR. Used as a control variable, twelve items were used from
research done by Maignan (2001) that mostly reflected attitude towards CSR defined in this study. For each item, the respondents had to rate the statements (e.g., I believe that businesses must be committed to well-defined ethics principles”) from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7
(strongly agree). The measurement was reliable (Cronbach’s α = 0.80), therefore all items were combined into one variable (M = 5.63, SD = .66, skewness = -1.08).
Mediators
Scepticism. Scepticism was measured by using the study of Chen and Chang (2013)
both as a dependent variable and a mediator. Here, a total of five dimensions were presented to the respondents. To give an example, the respondents had to answer on the statement: “Most companies overstate or exaggerate the environmental features of their products” on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). When tested on reliability, a
satisfactory outcome was met (Cronbach’s α = .90). Therefore, all items were combined into one variable (M = 5.36, SD = 1.09, skewness = -.77).
Perceived corporate image. Perceived corporate image, being used as both dependent
variable and mediator, was measured using similar items used in a study done by Arendt and Brettel (2010). Only here, the word ‘company’ was exchanged with ‘Philips’ for clarification purposes. For each item, the respondents had to rate the dimensions (e.g., I like what Philips stands for, it has an attractive identity”) from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Again, when doing a reliability test, a satisfactory outcome was met (Cronbach’s α = .87). Therefore, all items were combined into one variable (M = 4.98, SD = 1.02, skewness = -.67).
Dependent variable
Purchase intention. To measure purchase intention, four items were used from
research done by Spears and Singh (2004) that mostly reflected this study. Each item was measured using a bipolar response scale from 1 to 7 (e.g. 1. I would never buy/I would definitely buy). For purchase intention, the measurement was reliable (Cronbach’s α = .87), therefore all items were combined into one variable (M = 4.94, SD = 1.09, skewness = -.11). Randomization checks
To check for randomization, a Kruskal Wallis test was performed for ordinal variables age and education level, and a chi-square test was performed for nominal variables gender and employment. There was no significant difference of age between experimental conditions (H(3) = 1.62, p = .44). The same counted for education level (H(5) = 1.48 p = .48), gender (X2 (2, N = 194) = 1.28, p = .53) and employment (X2 (12, N = 194) = 7.81, p = .80).
Plan of analysis
In order to test the hypotheses, multiple linear regression analyses and PROCESS macro (Model 4) were used. A multiple linear regression analysis, as opposed to an independent T-test, allows to control for other variables. Also, a multiple linear regression has the ability to look for significant means between groups and can provide insight into whether there has been an interaction between two variables while controlling for other variables. The PROCESS macro (Model 4) has the ability to look into possible mediation effects. This test, made possible by Hayes (2012), provides direct and indirect effects using a regression-bases path. Indirect effects are tested using a bootstrap estimation approach with 5000 samples. In order to successfully execute both tests, dummy variables were made of the categorical independent variable type of advertisement.
Results
Testing Hypotheses
Hypotheses 1a-b. Hypothesis 1a and 1b were tested using a multiple linear regression
analysis which had type of advertisement as independent variable, scepticism as dependent variable and attitude towards CSR as control variable. Hypothesis 1a stated that
environmental advertising messages containing CSR commitment provokes less scepticism than environmental advertising messages containing no diagnostic advertising claims. Hypothesis 1b stated that environmental messages containing CSR impact specificity provokes less scepticism than environmental advertising messages containing no diagnostic advertising claims. A non-significant regression equation was found (F(3,189) = 1.962, p = .12), with an R2 of .03. Also, no significant effect in scepticism for environmental messages containing CSR commitment (t(189) = -1.28, p = .20; M = 5.27, SE = .13; b = -.11) and environmental messages containing CSR impact specificity (t(189) = -1.82, p = .07; M =
5.21, SE = .16; b = -.15) in comparison with environmental messages containing no
diagnostic advertising claims (M = 5.56, SE = .11) were found. Therefore, Hypothesis 1a and Hypotheses 1b are rejected.
Hypothesis 2. Hypothesis 2 was tested using a multiple linear regression analysis.
Here, scepticism was seen as independent variable, perceived corporate image as dependent variable and type of advertisement and attitude towards CSR as control variables. Hypothesis 2 stated that scepticism has a negative influence on perceived corporate image. Here, a
significant regression equation was found (F(4,188) = 9.972, p < .01), with an R2 of .18. Also, scepticism seem significantly predict perceived corporate image (t(188) = 4.97, p < .01; b = -.33). Participants’ perceived corporate image decreased .33 for each increase of 1 in
scepticism when controlling on type of advertisement and attitude towards CSR, making scepticism a significant predictor of perceived corporate image. In other words, when scepticism is high, perceived corporate image tend to be lower. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is supported.
Hypothesis 3. Here, it was stated that a mediation would take place, as the influence
of type of advertisement on perceived corporate image would be positively mediated by scepticism. Diagnostic advertising claims, here, should have a more positive influence on perceived corporate image than the control group when mediated by scepticism. Hypothesis 3 was tested using PROCESS macro (Model 4) (Hayes, 2012). The results indicated that type of advertisement (diagnostic advertising claims versus control group) was not a significant predictor of both scepticism (t(190) = 1.81, p = .07; b = -.30) and perceived corporate image (t(189) = .01, p = .99; b = .01). However, scepticism was a significant predictor of perceived corporate image (t(189) = -5.00, p < .01; 95% CI [-.44, -.19]). Looking at the results, type of advertisement does predict perceived corporate image after controlling for the mediator variable scepticism. The indirect effect was b = .09 and the confidence intervals were
(.01)(.22). The fact that the confidence intervals did not contain zero supported the presence of a, albeit small, significant indirect effect. In other words, scepticism significantly mediated the effect of type of advertisement on perceived corporate image. Therefore, hypothesis 3 is confirmed. Meaning, diagnostic advertising claims had a significant positive effect on perceived corporate image by inhibiting scepticism compared to the control group.
Hypothesis 4a-b. Hypotheses 4a and 4b were also tested using a multiple linear
regression analysis which had type of advertisement as independent variable, perceived corporate image as dependent variable and attitude towards CSR and scepticism as control variables. Hypothesis 4a stated that environmental advertising messages containing CSR commitment leads to a higher perceived corporate image than environmental advertising messages containing no diagnostic advertising claims. Hypothesis 4b stated that
environmental advertising messages containing CSR impact specificity leads to a higher perceived corporate image than environmental advertising messages containing no diagnostic advertising claims. A significant regression equation was found (F(4,188) = 9.972, p < .01), with an R2 of .18. However, no significant results found for perceived corporate regarding environmental messages containing CSR commitment (t(188) = -.28, p = .78; M = 4.89, SE = .12; b = -.02) and environmental messages containing CSR impact specificity (t(188) = .28, p = .77; M = 5.09, SE = .14; b = .02) in comparison with environmental messages containing no diagnostic advertising claims (M = 4.95, SE = .12). Thus, hypothesis 4a and hypotheses 4b are rejected.
Hypothesis 5. Hypothesis 5 was tested using a multiple linear regression analysis.
Hypothesis 5 predicted that there would be a positive correlation between perceived corporate image and purchase intention. Here, perceived corporate image was seen as
independent variable, purchase intention as dependent variable and type of advertisement and as control variable. A significant regression equation was found (F(3,189) = 36.262, p < .01)
with an R2 of .37. Also, perceived corporate image seemed to be a significant predictor for purchase intention (t(189) = 10.46, p < .01; b = .61). Participants’ purchase intentions
increased .61 for each increase of 1 in perceived corporate image when controlling on type of advertisement. To put it differently, when perceived corporate image is high, purchase
intention tends to increase. Therefore, hypothesis 5 is supported.
Hypothesis 6. Here, it was stated that a mediation would take place, as the influence
of type of advertisement (diagnostic advertising claims versus control group) on purchase intention would be positively mediated by perceived corporate image. Diagnostic advertising claims, here, should have a more positive influence on purchase intention than the control group when mediated by scepticism. Hypothesis 6 was tested using PROCESS macro (Model 4) (Hayes, 2012). The results indicated that type of advertisement was not a
significant predictor of both perceived corporate image (t(190) = .63, p = .53) and purchase intention (t(189) = -.31, p = .75). However, perceived corporate image was a significant predictor of purchase intention (t(189) = 10.04, p < .01). Despite that, no significant
mediation effect was found. Therefore, hypothesis 6 is rejected. Type of advertisement does not predict purchase intention after controlling for the mediator variable perceived corporate image, since the confidence intervals did contain zero (-.31)(.22) = -.04.
Hypothesis 7. Hypothesis 7 was tested using the same multiple linear regression
analysis used for testing hypothesis 5. Hypothesis 7 predicted there would be a positive correlation between attitude towards CSR and purchase intention. Here, attitude towards CSR was seen as independent variable, purchase intention as dependent variable and type of advertisement and perceived corporate image as control variables. Although a significant regression equation was found (F(4,188) = 27.663, p < .01), with an R2 = .37, attitude towards CSR not seemed to predict purchase intention (t(188) = .54, p = .59; b = .03). Therefore, hypothesis 7 is rejected.
Discussion and conclusion
The purpose of this study was to determine whether diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising can be effective tools to inhibit consumer scepticism to enhance the perceived company image. Within the boundaries of this study, as with all the results that will be discussed here, it can be confirmed that these claims do enhance the perceived company image while inhibiting scepticism. This corresponds with what Pomering and Johnson (2009) had proposed in their study. Therefore, it is possible to assume that the underlying mechanism of diagnosticity in advertising claims does align communication efforts with consumers understand of it (Herr et al., 1991). An interesting finding, as diagnosticity allows to alleviate discrepancies between advertising claims to inhibit scepticism towards marketing communications (Pomering, 2009). Additionally, this study confirms that diagnostic advertising claims can also be effective regarding environmental-oriented advertising, which was not examined before. One explanation could be that environmental marketing is a successful tool to communicate what a company stands for (Polinsky, 1995; Lii & Lee, 2012) substantiated by the mechanism of cause-related marketing that strengthens the relation between company-cause fit and attitude towards the company (Gupta & Pirsch, 2006).
Another interesting finding relates to the principle behind the stakeholder theory (Freeman, 1984). The outcome of this study shows that a positive perceived corporate image can enhance purchase intention, which indicates it is important that companies should proactively pay attention to its consumers (Harrison & Wicks, 2013). Although not considered beforehand, diagnostic advertising claims seemed to have an indirect positive effect on purchase intention. To put it differently, the outcome of this study confirmed that the use of diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising successfully enhanced perceived corporate image by inhibiting scepticism, which consequently positively
influenced the purchase intention of consumers. Although a significant finding regarding the purpose of this study, it is yet hard to verify this discovery. This has mainly to do with the fact no study has been conducted to examine the indirect relation between diagnostic advertising claims and purchase intention.
A novel feature of this study concerned the singular effects of both CSR commitment and CSR impact specificity on scepticism and perceived corporate image. Unfortunately, no significant effects were found here. This may indicate that the use of single diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising offers little help in improving the perceived company and may also fail to inhibit scepticism among consumers. This clarifies why Pomering et al. (2009) did not consider the singular effects of diagnostic advertising claims. As a matter of fact, they did find significant effects when mixing two diagnostic advertising claims in one advertisement in relation to enhancing the organizations’ image and inhibiting scepticism. This is in contrast with what was found in this study. This can be explained by the nature of this study and the differences in methodology, was will be revised in the limitation section.
To conclude, since it is desirable for companies not to be accused of greenwashing (Seeli & Gatti, 2017), the use of diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising could be considered as useful. This can be reinforced by arguing that diagnostic advertising claims have the power to enhance the perceived corporate image while inhibiting scepticism, an important criterion regarding avoiding the greenwashing effect (De Vries et al., 2015). Still, some parts of the study need revision which could have influenced the outcome of this study. It is therefore important to recognize significant limitations and provide explanations. Therefore, the most important limitations are mentioned below.
Limitations and future research
First, the size of the sample is limited in this study. This could be explained due to the timeframe that was taken to gather respondents. Moreover, since respondents were collected by means of the social media platform Facebook and through e-mail (i.e., convenience sampling), this could have affected the generalisability of this study. It is therefore suggested to iterate this study with a more reliable sample.
Secondly, this study made use of the brand Philips to ensure recognisability and credibility. Although the outcome of the study could be useful for Philips, it is not to say whether the results can be generalised towards other companies. Moreover, it could be that the Philips brand may have played a significant factor, since the participants in the study already had a biased view of the company. Therefore, a proposal for future research would be to make use of a fictitious company to increase internal and external validity.
Thirdly, this research used similarly designed advertisements as in those of Pomering et al. (2009), since they managed to manipulate the advertisements successfully and found fruitful results. However, the manipulation in their study was slightly different. Instead of using a singular claim per advertisement, they manipulated their advertisement by blending two claims. This probably explains why no results were found using singular claims
regarding perceived corporate image and scepticism. It probably also explains why the outcome of combining both advertisements that included a singular claim (note that this is different, since it is not a blend of two claims in one advertisement) was a stronger predictor for scepticism, albeit not being significant. Therefore, a recommendation for future research would be to consider the effect of blending two or more claims versus no claim.
Lastly, it is important to highlight that the effects of all three manipulated
This could be explained by how the advertisements were manipulated. To ensure internal validity, the advertisements contained similar features. Therefore, it could be that little
distinction has been made, although here was checked for by conducting several pilot studies. Another explanation may lie specifically in how the advertisement of the control group was manipulated. Here, the advertisement had more emphasis on seeing environmental marketing as a business opportunity. This can be observed as being honest and transparent and therefore rewarded by consumers (De Vries et al., 2015). This could be an argument to plead for a fourth diagnostic advertising claim in addition to the three claims proposed by Pomering and Johnson (2009). Transparency as an additional diagnostic advertising claim has not yet been studied. It could therefore be interesting to find out whether transparency can be successful in enhancing perceived corporate image by inhibiting consumer scepticism.
To conclude, as diagnostic advertising claims seem to positively influence consumer purchase intent and limited research has been done to examine this relationship, it would be interesting for future research to take a closer look at this. Admittedly, one of the most important incentives for businesses is to use environmental-oriented advertising will always to persuade consumers to buy their environmental-friendly products as a mean to increase their profits (Young, Hwang, McDonald & Oates, 2010).
Practical implications
In closing, a last note within the spirit of this study. Earlier accusations of
greenwashing have clearly put companies on edge (Tryhorn, 2007; Seele & Gatti, 2017). Although it is important that people remain critical of the practice of environmental
marketing, it should not discourage companies to communicate about their well-intentioned environmental activities. Since the industrial revolution, a lot of pressure has been put on the natural environment due to unsustainable growth and dependence on limited resources
(Jackson & Senker, 2011). Hence, it is important that bigger companies such as Philips make a transition towards a more circular economy. It is therefore necessary that consumers adopt a more positive attitude (i.e., less sceptical) to companies’ environmental advertising efforts. Since consumers can act as rewarding authorities (Hansen & Schrader, 1997), by choosing what to buy, they can be part of the solution. The use of diagnostic advertising claims in environmental-oriented advertising can play a significant role here, since these claims can simplify information-tasks to provide consumers with an increased ability to process information (Herr et al., 1991; Pomering & Johnson, 2009) and better understand well-intentioned efforts. This increased ability of processing information, as found in this study, indirectly enhances perceived corporate image by reducing scepticism and can stimulate companies to do better.
Since as accusations of greenwashing lurk around the corner, it is understandable companies are cautious. However, communicating about environmental issues can have significant positive effects for both companies and the environment. Companies should therefore not feel discouraged to be more active in environmental marketing, as in line with the words of Philips CEO Frans van Houten: “When you make a courageous statement, people start to follow you and that’s nice. […] I think we need more courageous leaders who say, ‘Come with us!’ because there’s so much more needed.” (“Philips CEO Eyes an Even Bigger Sustainability Goal”, 2018).
References
Arendt, S., & Brettel, M. (2010). Understanding the influence of corporate social
responsibility on corporate identity, image, and firm performance. Management Decision, 48(10), 1469-1492. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741011090289
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California management review, 47(1), 9-24. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166284
Brønn, P. S., & Vrioni, A. B. (2001). Corporate social responsibility and cause-related marketing: an overview. International journal of Advertising, 20(2), 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2001.11104887
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1360-0
De Vries, G., Terwel, B. W., Ellemers, N., & Daamen, D. D. L. (2015). Sustainability or profitability? How communicated motives for environmental policy affect public perceptions of corporate greenwashing. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22(3), 142-154. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1327
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International journal of research in marketing, 24(3), 224-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.01.001
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x
Elving, W. (2013). Skepticism and corporate social responsibility communications: The influence of fit and reputation. Journal of Marketing Communications, 19(4), 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2011.631569
Fleming, T., & Zils, M. (2014, February). Toward a circular economy: Philips CEO Frans van Houten. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability- and-resource-productivity/our-insights/toward-a-circular-economy-philips-ceo-frans-van-houten
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman. Gupta, S., & Pirsch, J. (2006). The company-cause-customer fit decision in cause-related
marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(6), 314-326. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610701850
Hansen, U., & Schrader, U. (1997). A modern model of consumption for a sustainable society. Journal of Consumer Policy, 20(4), 443-468.
https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006842517219
Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2013). Stakeholder theory, value, and firm performance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1), 97-124. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq20132314
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., & Kim, J. (1991). Effects of word-of- mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of
consumer research, 17(4), 454-462. https://doi.org/10.1086/208570
Jackson, T., & Senker, P. (2011). Prosperity without growth: Economics for a finite planet. Energy & Environment, 22(7), 1013-1016. https://doi.org/10.1260/0958-305x.22.7.1013
Koninklijke Philips N.V. (2017). Annual Report 2016. Retrieved from
https://www.results.philips.com/publications/ar16/downloads/pdf/en/PhilipsFullAnnualRe port2016-English.pdf?v=20171012154855
Koninklijke Philips N.V. (n. d.). Awards and recognition. Retrieved October 16, 2017, from https://www.philips.com/a-w/about/news/archive/standard/news/press/2016/20160908-philips-named-industry-group-leader-in-the-2016-dow-jones-sustainability-index.html Lii, Y. S., & Lee, M. (2012). Doing right leads to doing well: When the type of CSR and
reputation interact to affect consumer evaluations of the firm. Journal of business ethics, 105(1), 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0948-0
Lubin, D. A., & Esty, D. C. (2010). The sustainability imperative. Harvard business review, 88(5), 42-50. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com
Maignan, I. (2001). Consumers' perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of business ethics, 30(1), 57-72.
https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006433928640
Muralidharan, S., Dillistone, K., & Shin, J. H. (2011). The Gulf Coast oil spill: Extending the theory of image restoration discourse to the realm of social media and beyond petroleum. Public Relations Review, 37(3), 226-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.04.006
Newell, S. J., Goldsmith, R. E., & Banzhaf, E. J. (1998). The effect of misleading
environmental claims on consumer perceptions of advertisements. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 6(2), 48-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.1998.11501795
Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. R. (1998). Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. Journal of consumer psychology, 7(2), 159-186.
Ottman, J. A., Stafford, E. R., & Hartman, C. L. (2006). Avoiding green marketing myopia: Ways to improve consumer appeal for environmentally preferable products. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 48(5), 22-36.
https://doi.org/10.3200/envt.48.5.22-36
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0901-2
Patel, J. D., Gadhavi, D. D., & Shukla, Y. S. (2017). Consumers’ responses to cause related marketing: moderating influence of cause involvement and skepticism on attitude and purchase intention. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 14(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-016-0151-1
Robinson, M., Kleffner, A., & Bertels, S. (2011). Signaling sustainability leadership:
Empirical evidence of the value of DJSI membership. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(3), 493-505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0735-y
Philips CEO eyes an even bigger sustainability goal (2018, January 25). Fortune. Retrieved from http://www.fortune.com
Pirsch, J., Gupta, S., & Grau, S. L. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility programs as a continuum: An exploratory study. Journal of business ethics, 70(2), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9100-y
Polonsky, M. J. (1995). A stakeholder theory approach to designing environmental marketing strategy. Journal of business & industrial marketing, 10(3), 29-46.
Pomering, A. (2009). The impact of claim diagnosticity on consumer scepticism to corporate social responsibility advertising claims. Wollongong: University of Wollongong.
Pomering, A., & Johnson, L. W. (2009). Advertising corporate social responsibility initiatives to communicate corporate image: Inhibiting scepticism to enhance persuasion. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 14(4), 420-439.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13563280910998763
Pomering, A., Johnson, L. W., & Noble, G. (2013). Advertising corporate social
responsibility: Results from an experimental manipulation of key message variables. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18(2), 249-263.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13563281311319517
Quoquab, F., Thurasamy, R., & Mohammad, J. (2017). Driving Green Consumerism Through Strategic Sustainability Marketing. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Rossiter, J. R., & Bellman, S. (2005). Marketing communications: Theory and applications. Prentice-Hall.
Rahman, I., Park, J., & Chi, C. G. (2015). Consequences of “greenwashing”: Consumers’ reactions to hotels’ green initiatives. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(6), 1054-1081. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-04-2014-0202
Schultz, F., Castelló, I., & Morsing, M. (2013). The Construction of Corporate Social
Responsibility in Network Societies: A Communication View. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4), 681-692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1826-8
Seele, P., & Gatti, L. (2017). Greenwashing Revisited: In Search of a Typology and
Accusation-Based Definition Incorporating Legitimacy Strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(2), 239-252. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1912
Sheth, J. N., Sethia, N. K., & Srinivas, S. (2011). Mindful consumption: a customer-centric approach to sustainability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 21-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0216-3
Skarmeas, D., & Leonidou, C. N. (2013). When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1831-1838.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.004
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2004.10505164
Tryhorn, C. (2007, November 7). No bouquets for Shell press ad. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com
Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., & Oates, C. J. (2010). Sustainable consumption: green consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sustainable development, 18(1), 20-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.394
Appendix A - Questionnaire Text block 1: Introduction
Dear respondent,
This survey is part of a study in corporate communications at the University of Amsterdam. Participation will take approximately 10 minutes of your time.
The survey has a focus on advertising. During the survey, you will be exposed to an
advertisement of Koninklijke Philips N.V. Before and after exposure, numerous questions will be asked and the survey ends with several demographic enquiries.
I like to inform you that it is not mandatory to fill in the demographic enquiries, although it will be appreciated since completed surveys are most useful for analysis. You can stop participating the survey any moment that pleases you.
For more information about this research, you can contact me at yannickeshuijs@gmail.com. Thanks for your time and I hope it will be somewhat fun.
Marc Yannick Eshuijs
Text block 2: Informed consent
When participating this study, you will agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. With this, you retain the right to withdraw your consent, without having to give a reason for doing so.
If my research results are used in scientific publications or are made public in another way, this will be done such a way that anonymity is completely safeguarded. Personal data will not be passed on to third parties without permission.
If there are any complaints about this research, you 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.
I do not wish to participate in this study.
Measurement 1: Attitude towards CSR (Maignan, 2001)
Please rate the following statements (from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). I believe that businesses must…
1. …ensure that their employees act within the standards defined by the law. 2. …not put aside their contractual obligations.
3. …not bend the law even if this helps improve performance. 4. …always acknowledge the rules defined by the regulatory system.
5. …accept ethical regulations that may negatively affect economic performance.
6. …ensure that the respect of ethical principles has priority over economic performance. 7. …be committed to well-defined ethics principles.
8. …avoid compromising ethical standards to achieve corporate goals. 9. …help solve social problems.
10. …participate in the management of public affairs. 11. …use some of their resources to philanthropic activities. 12. …play a role in our society that goes beyond making a profit.
Note: Twelve items were used from research done by Maignan (2001) that mostly reflects attitude towards CSR defined in this study.
Text block 3: Instructions
On the following page, you will be exposed to an advertisement. Please read the advertisement carefully. After a moment, you will be able to go to the next page.
[Respondent will be exposed to one of the four experimental conditions. See Appendix C]
Based on the advertisement, on a seven-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree), please give answer on the following statements:
1. I like what Philips stands for, it has an attractive identity.
2. I recognize myself in Philips, my sense of who I am matches my sense of Philips. 3. Philips has a distinctive identity, it stands out from its competitors
4. Philips is a first-class, high-quality company.
5. I feel like I know very well what this company stands for.
6. It’s easy to get a clear sense of what this company stands for from its actions.
Measurement 3: Purchase intention (Spears & Singh, 2004)
On a seven-point scale, please rate the following dimensions. Based on the advertisement: How likely is it that you would buy a product from this company?
1. I would never buy/I would definitely buy
Is there an intention to buy a product from this company? 2. I definitely not intend to buy/ I definitely intend to buy What is your purchase interest in a product from this company?
3. I have a very low purchase interest/I have a very high purchase interest What is the probability you will buy a product from this company?
4. I would probably not buy /I would probably buy
Note: Four items were used from research done by Spears and Singh (2004) that mostly reflects purchase intention defined in this study.
Measurement 4: Scepticism towards CSR activities (Chen & Chang, 2013)
Based on the advertisement, on a seven-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree), please give answer on the following statements:
