Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Consumer responses tocompany
disclosure ofsocially responsible eorts
Hyun‑Hwa Lee1, Minsun Lee1 and Yoon Jin Ma2*
Introduction
Since the idea that businesses have a responsibility to society beyond making profits
for shareholders emerged around the 1960s, the concept of corporate social responsi-
bility (CSR) has been growing in its importance and significance (Carroll and Shabana
2010). is has resulted in companies experiencing a great deal of pressure from inves-
tors to adopt strong codes of conduct and regular factory inspections (Welford and Frost
2006). Following this trend, the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010
(CTSCA) went into effect in 2012, requiring companies to post a visible CSR statement
on their website regarding their practices concerning the prevention of slavery and/or
trafficking of workers in their supply chains (CLI 2012). Since the CTSCA was formally
introduced, many large apparel retailers, such as Levi’s, Wal-Mart, and Gap Inc., have
enhanced CSR efforts to reduce unethical labor practices by closely monitoring their
supply chains (Pickes and Zhu 2013).
Consumers’ growing interest in supporting responsible business practice also
results in companies implementing CSR into their business (Golodner 2016; Jones
Abstract
Since the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act (CTSCA) was enacted, many
large apparel retailers are required to post a corporate social responsibility statement
on their website regarding their practices. The present study applies the CTSCA to
the shopping context for evaluating consumer responses. A factorial experimental
study using a scenario method was designed to explore the aims of this study. Par‑
ticipants were randomly assigned to one of two scenarios regarding either an apparel
company’s website being compliant with the CTSCA, or an apparel company not
have a disclosure on its website and therefore in violation of the CTSCA. A total of
716 responses were used in data analysis. The results show that there were significant
effects of the presence of CTSCA on retailers’ website on consumer responses, after
controlling consumer characteristics of socially responsible consumption behavior.
That is, respondents in the study perceived that presenting the public statement in
compliance with the CTSCA on a company’s website was more persuasive in decision
making, promoted trust and enhanced usage and purchase intentions. The findings of
the study suggest academic and marketing implications.
Keywords: California Transparency in Supply Chains Act, Socially responsible
consumption, Consumer response, Website, Experiment
Open Access
© The Author(s) 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
(http://creat iveco mmons .org/licen ses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and
indicate if changes were made.
RESEARCH
Leeetal. Fash Text (2018) 5:27
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-018-0142-4
*Correspondence:
yjma@ilstu.edu
2 Dept. of Family
and Consumer Sciences,
Illinois State University,
Normal, IL 61761, USA
Full list of author information
is available at the end of the
article
Page 2 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Text (2018) 5:27
etal. 2017; Landrum 2017; Sweetin etal. 2013). Significant research has confirmed
that consumers’ perceived level of CSR in company practices has a significant posi-
tive effect on their attitudes and purchase intention of products and companies, indi-
cating CSR can enhance financial performance (Bhattacharya and Sen 2004; Sen and
Bhattacharya 2001; Tian etal. 2011). Furthermore, Mohr and Webb (2005) found that
many consumers value CSR more strongly than the prices of the products when mak-
ing purchase decisions.
Consumers are demanding more critical information regarding how companies man-
age social issues, such as forced labor and human trafficking, in supply chains. e
government plays an important role concerning the dissemination of CSR information
(Mohr and Webb 2005) and retailers’ websites can be used as an effective tool for com-
municating with consumers regarding a company’s CSR practices (Esrock and Leichty
2000). Since the CTSCA is the first legal attempt requiring public online statements
regarding how manufacturers and retailers deal with social issues in their supply chains,
the implementation of the CTSCA in the apparel industry is a valuable development.
Considering that 89% of consumers expect companies to use both websites and social
media to communicate CSR practices, and 93% want companies to provide additional
CSR information through a website (Cone Communications & Echo 2012), it is criti-
cal to understand how disclosures on apparel businesses’ websites influence consumer
responses. However, it remains unclear how a company’s CSR efforts, presented in the
form of CTSCA disclosure on its website, are perceived by consumers and affect the
consumers’ evaluation regarding the company and purchase decisions.
Consumers’ consideration of a company’s CSR efforts may be affected by consumer
characteristics and socially responsible consumption behavior. Consumers are not a
homogenous group in terms of their socially responsible consumption behavior (Gon-
zalez etal. 2009) and those consumers with a higher level of awareness and concern
regarding CSR respond more positively to a company’s CSR practices (Tian etal. 2011).
Öberseder etal. (2013) further found that consumers more positively evaluate a firm’s
CSR practices when there is congruency between a consumers and a firm’s identity.
Even though many researchers have confirmed that a firm’s CSR practices can posi-
tively influence consumer responses (Mohr and Webb 2005; Sen and Bhattacharya 2001;
Tian etal. 2011), no study has yet examined the relationship with the consideration of
consumer characteristics of socially responsible consumption behavior. ere is a clear
need to understand the relationship between socially responsible consumption behavior
and consumer responses, and to apply this understanding when evaluating the practi-
cal effects of the presence of CTSCA disclosure on an apparel retailer’s website on con-
sumer responses.
Companies which disclosed their CSR efforts are considered as trustworthy (Castaldo
etal. 2009), and consumers’ trust toward the CSR messages delivered by the companies
influenced consumer positive attitudes and purchase intention (Atkinson and Rosenthal
2014). Moreover, previous studies identified that consumers had positive perceptions of
companies’ CSR efforts (e.g., Chang and Jai 2015; Gupta and Hodges 2012; Ha-Brook-
shire and Norum 2011), while they did not examine actual effects of CTSCA disclosure
as firms’ CSR activities. e present study seeks to investigate consumers’ responses
to the CTSCA implementation which is the first legal attempt requiring public online
Page 3 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Text (2018) 5:27
statements of apparel retailers. erefore, this study aims to answer the following
research questions:
RQ1: How do consumer characteristics of socially responsible consumption behav-
ior affect their responses—(1) persuasiveness to purchase decision, (2) trust
toward retailers, (3) future usage behavior, and (4) purchase intention—to the
apparel retailer’s websites?
RQ2: How does the presence of CTSCA disclosure on an apparel retailer’s website
affect consumer responses in terms of (1) persuasiveness to purchase decision,
(2) trust toward retailers, (3) future usage behavior, and (4) purchase intention,
controlling for socially responsible consumption and product involvement?
Literature review
Corporate social responsibility
Over the past decades, as the importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has
been steadily and significantly emphasized in US and overseas, CSR has received notice-
able attention from companies, scholars, and consumers (Carroll and Shabana 2010;
Tian etal. 2011). CSR is corporate self-regulation embracing the economic, legal, ethi-
cal, and philanthropic expectations that society has of business (Carroll 1991). Sub-
stantial evidence from the extant literature supports that companies can derive positive
results from CSR by being a responsible, sustainable business (Carroll and Shabana
2010; D’Amato etal. 2009; Weber 2008). From the company’s point of view, CSR can
create economic and social value, simultaneously. Weber (2008, p. 248–249) provided an
overview of CSR benefits, including “company image and reputation”, “employee motiva-
tion, retention, and recruitment”, “cost savings”, “revenue increases”, and “CSR-related risk
reduction or management”. Similarly, Carroll and Shabana (2010) described several tan-
gible company benefits from CSR practices. Previous research has confirmed that CSR
management efforts are positively associated with firms’ financial performance (Wang
and Sarkis 2013), brand image and attitudes (Wu and Wang 2014), employee work moti-
vation (Kim and Scullion 2013; Singhapakdi etal. 2015), and reduction of firm risk (Jo
and Na 2012).
Compared to other industries, the apparel sector has experienced considerable criti-
cism due to its higher risk for negative social and environmental outcomes, such as
textile waste, vast amounts of natural resource consumption, chemical pollution, and
labor issues (Emmelhainz and Adams 1999). A growing number of apparel and textiles
companies have tried to integrate CSR into their business strategy with the belief that
it will benefit their overall business performance (Gaskill-Fox etal. 2014). Several lead-
ing global apparel companies including H&M, GAP, Adidas, and Nike, have dedicated
efforts to implement CSR into their business (GRI 2015). Additionally, an increase in
attention to CSR has been witnessed not only in the US, but also globally. For example,
in an exploratory study on the CSR practices in the Chinese textiles and apparel indus-
try, Chi (2011) reported that various CSR-related laws, regulations, and movements
have arisen in China, which represents a dominant participant in global supply chains
(Appendix 1).
Page 4 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Disclosure ofCSR andCalifornia Transparency inSupply Chains Act
Effective January 1, 2012, the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act
(CTSCA) is intended to ensure companies operate with a much greater level of
responsibility when choosing suppliers and making supply decisions. The CTSCA
applies to retailing and manufacturing companies who conduct operations in the
state of California and with annual worldwide gross receipts in excess of one hun-
dred million dollars. According to the CTSCA, qualifying companies are required to
publicly provide detailed disclosures of their efforts to eradicate slavery and/or traf-
ficking of employees, and protect basic human rights in their entire supply chains
(CLI 2012). As a result of this information, the CTSCA expects that consumers will
make more educated purchasing decisions regarding human rights issues.
After the CTSCA was enacted, many apparel companies provided more trans-
parent reports about the required information through an easily accessible link on
their websites. Several well-known large retailers, including H&M and Wal-Mart,
re-organized and improved their website to provide their business practices and
efforts under the requirements of the CTSCA. However, overall progress has been
very slow. Ma etal. (2014) investigated how the apparel companies in the United
States were complying with the requirement of the CTSCA in 2013, a year after the
CTSCA went into effect. By examining the website disclosures of 35 apparel manu-
facturing and retail companies located in California and fell under the scope of the
CTSCA, they found that less than half of the apparel companies (8 out of 19 man-
ufacturers and 7 out of 17 retailers) provided disclosures concerning their efforts
to eradicate slavery and/or human trafficking in their supply chains. Disclosures of
all 15 companies included the required information and most were easily accessible
from their homepage. Utilizing a wider scope, Ma etal. (2014) reported that 92 out
of 204 apparel manufacturing and retailing companies in the US with global gross
annual receipts of over $100 million posted information meeting the requirements
of the CTSCA. More recently, the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre and
KnowTheChain approached the 129 companies who had not yet posted public state-
ments in line with the CTSCA requirements in 2014. Only 44 companies responded
and only 11 published a statement. A total of 85 companies were identified as not
having a statement under the CTSCA (Business & Human Rights Resource Centre
2014).
Consumer perception of CSR is important because it can impact their responses
to a company’s social responsibility practices (Sweetin etal. 2013). To communicate
with stakeholders and foster consumer awareness, many companies have presented
their CSR initiatives through several channels such as annual reports, advertis-
ing, and public relations. Recently, disclosure of CSR on a company’s website has
been frequently used by several companies due to its advantages over the other
channels (Gaskill-Fox etal. 2014; Tang etal. 2015). A company’s website can be a
more practical, faster, and inexpensive platform for companies to convey their CSR
efforts to consumers (Mann etal. 2014). Particularly for global apparel companies,
a company’s website can be a useful channel to communicate with local and global
consumers.
Page 5 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Socially responsible consumption
Socially responsible consumption refers to behavior to minimize any negative/harmful
impacts that can result from the consumption process—including acquisition, usage,
and disposition of products—and maximize its long-term social and environmental ben-
efits (Mohr etal. 2001). With growing public attention and government efforts, people
are more knowledgeable than ever on social responsibility issues and the number of con-
sumers concerned about the social impacts of consumption has increased globally. e
Nielsen global survey of online consumers spanning 60 countries regarding corporate
social responsibility showed that the proportion of consumers who are willing to pay
more for products and services from a socially responsible company increased from 45%
in 2011 to 55% in 2014 (Nielsen 2013, 2014). e results from a recent study from 500
randomly selected respondents also showed that more than half of today’s consumers
are willing to pay more for socially responsible apparel products (Ha-Brookshire and
Norum 2011).
Socially responsible consumption behavior can be one of the consumer characteristics
and is closely related to CSR (Carroll 1991; Mohr etal. 2001). ose consumers show-
ing high levels of socially responsible consumption behavior recognized the obligation
to make socially responsible consumption decisions and expect companies to operate
responsibly to address social and environmental issues. Socially responsible consump-
tion behavior may closely relate to consumers’ motivation to consider CTSCA informa-
tion and also affect their overall responses.
CSR andconsumer responses
Consumer trust refers to the consumer’s expectation that the company will keep their
promises and fulfill obligations (Dwyer etal. 1987; Hagen and Choe 1998). In order to
build trust with a company, consumers need to be sure that companies will be reliable
by doing what they are expected. If consumers do not trust the messages and claims pro-
vided by a company, they are less likely to have a favorable attitude toward, and intention
to purchase products from, the company (Atkinson and Rosenthal 2014). Commonly,
socially responsible companies that provide the disclosures of their CSR efforts are con-
sidered to be more reliable and transparent (Castaldo etal. 2009). A number of studies
have also demonstrated the existence of a strong positive relationship between CSR and
consumer trust and their responses to a company (e.g., Mohr and Webb 2005; Pivato
etal. 2008; Stanaland etal. 2011).
As consumers often put more value on a product sold by companies that show effort
in combating child labor and human right issues in their supply chains, a company’s
socially responsible initiatives can positively influence consumers’ purchase decisions.
A study by Sweetin etal. (2013) examined the differences in consumer responses—will-
ingness-to-reward, willingness-to-punish, attitudes toward the company, and purchase
intention—between socially responsible and socially irresponsible companies. Partici-
pants were exposed to one of four different scenarios of socially irresponsible, socially
responsible, and environmental friendly companies with an additional scenario for the
control group. e consumer group with the scenario of a socially irresponsible com-
pany revealed the highest willingness to punish and considerably lower purchase inten-
tions than the other groups. Similarly, Chang and Jai (2015) reported that the positive
Page 6 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
perceptions on a fashion company’s CSR efforts can enhance brand equity and thereby
increase consumers’ purchase intentions. Diddi and Niehm (2017) investigated causal
relationships of personal values, norms, attitudes, and patronage intentions concerning
consumers’ ethical-decision making. ey revealed that consumer had greater intention
to patronize the apparel retailers who are engaged in CSR activities (Diddi and Niehm
2017). Studies with consumers in developing countries have shown similar results.
Gupta and Hodges (2012) explored Indian consumer’s perceptions on CSR practices in
the apparel industry and its impacts on consumer decision making process through in-
depth interviews. Indian consumers expressed that they were willing to consider a com-
pany’s CSR practices during the purchase decision making process and willing to pay
more for products made by a socially responsible company.
Method
Sample anddata collection procedures
A total of 1442 e-mail invitations were sent to online shoppers who were research panel
for an independent marketing research company, using a random sample approach con-
sistent with Dillman (2000). Respondents agreed with the institutional review board
statement in the first screen and then answered a filtering question whether they had
online browsing and purchasing experiences. After they responded to questions con-
cerning socially responsible consumption behaviors, they were exposed to one of two
scenarios. A factorial experimental study using a scenario method was designed to
explore the aims of this study. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two sce-
narios developed by the authors which included a situation of purchasing an apparel
product. Next, they evaluated the perceived persuasiveness of the companies’ disclosure
on the apparel retailer’s website, followed by trust, purchase intention and future usage
intention with the apparel retailer. Demographic information was also gathered.
Scenario
Participants were exposed to a scenario regarding either (1) having an apparel compa-
ny’s disclosure in compliance with the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act
(CTSCA) on the apparel retailer’s website or (2) not having the disclosure on its website.
e scenarios had the proposition that respondents browsed an apparel retailer’s web-
site; one of which had a public statement in compliance with the CTSCA, and the other
did not. Participants were asked to answer questions pertaining to the persuasiveness of
the disclosure and influence of the retailer’s’ disclosure (either having or not having) on
purchase decisions. e scenarios featuring the CTSCA disclosures included verifica-
tion, internal accountability, certification, auditing, and training on combating slavery
and trafficking issues in their supply chains (CLI 2012).
Measurements anddata analysis
Consumer trust was measured using four items borrowed from Beltramini (1982, 1988).
Persuasiveness of information was measured using four items adapted from Reichert
etal. (2001). To assess future usage intention and purchase intention, each of three items
developed by Ma etal. (2014) were used. To evaluate socially responsible consumption
behavior, twenty items using a 7-point Likert scale developed by Francois-Lecompte and
Page 7 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Roberts (2006) were utilized. Six items developed by Zaichkowsky (1985) were adopted
to measure the level of apparel product involvement as a control variable. All items
excluding socially responsible consumption behavior were measured using a 7-point
semantic differential scale. Items measuring demographics included gender, age, marital
status, ethnicity, education levels, income, and state where they are currently living.
Among 766 responses collected, a total of 716 responses were finally used for the data
analysis, only for those who had browsed for or purchased an apparel product online.
ree hundred and sixty-eight responses were from the scenario 1 which had an apparel
company’s disclosure on the website in compliance with the CTSCA and 348 responses
were from the scenario 2 that did not have the disclosure on the website. Descriptive
analysis, t test, exploratory factor analysis, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) were
conducted to analyze the data using SPSS 23.0.
Results anddiscussion
Sample characteristics
Among the respondents, greater than 60% of respondents were male (62.7%) and the
mean age of the participants was 39.9years, with a range from 18 to 64. In regard to
marital status, approximately 45.5% of the respondents were married and over 40%
expressed that they were single and had never married. About two-third of participants
were White or European American (75.7%), followed by Black or African American
(10.1%), Asian American (8.0%), and Hispanic American (7.4%). About 67% of respond-
ents had at least some college degree (66.6%) and several income ranges were reported:
less than $24,999 (20.6%), $25,000–$44,999 (28.8%), $50,000–$74,999 (22.3%), $75,000–
$99,999 (14.7%), and more than $100,000 (13.6%). Responses were collected from 50 US
states.
Randomization andmanipulation check
e study conducted participant randomization checks. e results of the χ2 test and
t test indicated no significant differences for all demographics between scenarios with
and without CTSCA (p > .2). Finally, a t test was conducted to check the apparel prod-
uct involvement level and resulted in an insignificant mean difference in both scenarios
(p > .6). e randomization of the study was successfully conducted in that respondent
characteristics were demographically homogeneous in both conditions.
Preliminary analysis
Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to verify the construct validity of the scales
(Cronbach and Meehl 1955). In line with Francois-Lecompte and Roberts (2006), the
results revealed five dimensions of socially responsible consumption behaviors, includ-
ing firm’s behavior, cause-related products, small businesses, geographic origin and
consumption volume. e factor loadings ranged from .60 to .85 and two items were
excluded because of the low factor loadings as shown in Table1. Other research con-
structs—apparel product involvement, persuasiveness of information, consumer trust,
purchase intentions and future usage intention—were considered as one dimension.
Multi-items for Cronbach’s alphas assessing internal consistency for all variables ranged
from .77 to .98.
Page 8 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Dierences inconsumer responses
e results of independent t test are shown in Table2. e findings showed signifi-
cant mean differences in consumer responses by scenario. e respondents exposed
to the scenario with CTSCA information perceived the apparel retailer’s website
Table 1 Factor analysis results forsocially consumption behavior
Variables Factor items Loading
Firm’s behavior I try not to buy products from companies that employ children .78
I try not to buy products from companies that don’t respect
their employees .74
I try not to buy products from companies or shops that are
narrowly linked to political parties that I condemn .72
I try not to buy products from companies that strongly harm
the environment .74
I pay attention to not buy products from companies that are
narrowly linked with mafia or sects .66
Percent of variance explained = 16.55 Cronbach’s alpha = .89
Cause‑related products I buy some products of which a part of the price is transferred
to a humanitarian cause .76
I buy some products of which part of the price goes to devel‑
oping countries .75
I buy products of which part of the price is given to a good
cause. .80
I buy fair trade products .67
Percent of variance explained = 17.74 Cronbach’s alpha = .87
Small businesses I avoid doing all shopping in big businesses (large retailers) .75
I buy in small businesses (bakeries, butchers, book shop) as
often as possible (small shopkeepers) .70
I help local small businesses to live through my purchases .60
Percent of variance explained = 12.55 Cronbach’s alpha = .77
Geographic origin When I have the choice between an American products and a
non‑American product, I choose the American product .75
I preferably buy American cars .68
I buy some fruits and vegetables made in the United States .74
I buy products made in my country .78
Percent of variance explained = 13.61 Cronbach’s alpha = .80
Consumption volume I try to reduce my consumption to what I really need .83
In a general manner, I try to reduce my consumption .85
Percent of variance explained = 10.96 Cronbach’s alpha = .89
Percent of total variance explained 71.41
Table 2 Mean values ofresearch constructs byscenario
Treatment group n = 368, control group n = 348; **p < .01, ***p < .001
Persuasiveness Trust Future usage
intention Purchase intention
M (SD) t value M (SD) t value M (SD) t value M (SD) t value
Treatment 4.97 (1.40) 3.14** 5.18 (1.17) 9.51*** 5.05 (1.53) 2.79** 5.31 (1.24) 10.04***
Control 4.64 (1.50) 4.25 (1.46) 4.72 (1.60) 4.27 (1.53)
Total 4.81 (1.45) 4.73 (1.40) 4.89 (1.58) 4.81 (1.49)
Page 9 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
much greater than the one without CTSCA information in terms of the retailers’ per-
suasiveness, their trust for the retailers, future usage intention, and purchase inten-
tion (tpersuasiveness = 3.14, p < .01; ttrust = 9.51, p < .001; tfuture usage intention = 2.79, p < .01;
tpurchase intention = 10.04, p < .001). at is, the participants perceived that the apparel
retailer’s website with CTSCA information provides greater persuasive information
and is more trustworthy compared to company websites without this disclosure. ey
also had greater future intention to use and to purchase products from retailers pro-
viding CTSCA information.
e results of the study indicated that the effectiveness of CTSCA disclosure was
found to enhance the levels of persuasiveness in purchase decisions, trust toward a firm,
future usage intention, and purchase intention. Consistent with previous studies (Chang
and Jai 2015; Grimmer and Bingham 2013; Ha-Brookshire and Norum 2011), this study
found that many consumers consider CTSCA disclosure as a part of company’s CSR per-
formance for purchase decisions and buying intentions. is study also supports Cast-
aldo etal. (2009) in that consumers perceive a company providing CSR disclosure as
more reliable and transparent. Participants exposed to an apparel retailer’s website with
CTSCA disclosure revealed higher levels of trust.
Eects ofsocially responsible consumption behavior onconsumer responses
To examine the influence of socially responsible consumption behavior on consumer
responses (persuasiveness, trust, future usage intention and purchase intention) to
the apparel retailers, multiple regression analyses were conducted, and the results are
exhibited in Table3. All four regression models were statistically significant (p < .001).
Table 3 Eects ofsocially responsible consumption onconsumer responses
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Dependent variables Independent variables Std. β t value Adjusted R2F value
Persuasiveness Firm’s behavior .42 10.35*** .39 91.00***
Cause‑related products .03 .87
Small businesses .03 .84
Geographic origin .‑03 − .67
Consumption volume .25 6.23***
Trust Firm’s behavior .07 1.39 .13 23.04***
Cause‑related products .14 3.54***
Small businesses .07 1.55
Geographic origin .13 2.63**
Consumption volume .08 1.68
Future usage intention Firm’s behavior .36 8.78*** .38 86.81***
Cause‑related products .00 .01
Small businesses .03 .83
Geographic origin .01 − .26
Consumption volume .31 7.55***
Purchase intention Firm’s behavior .02 .38 .09 14.65***
Cause‑related products .06 1.50
Small businesses .09 1.97
Geographic origin .11 2.21*
Consumption volume .11 2.14*
Page 10 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
ere were significant effects of firm’s behavior and consumption volume dimensions
among the socially responsible consumption behavior on persuasiveness (β = .42,
p < .001 for firm’s behavior and β = .25, p < .001 for consumption volume) and future
intention (β = .36, p < .001 for firm’s behavior and β = .31, p < .001 for consumption vol-
ume). Cause-related products and geographic origin dimensions of socially responsible
consumption behavior had significant positive effects on trust (β = .14, p < .001; β = .13,
p < .01, respectively). Geographic origin and consumption volume dimensions had sig-
nificant influence on purchase intention (β = .11, p < .05; β = .11, p < .05 respectively). e
results of multiple regression analyses showed that some of the socially responsible con-
sumption dimensions exhibited significant effects on consumer response variables. is
indicates that consumers’ socially responsible consumption behavior should be con-
trolled to examine the true effects on consumer responses.
Eects ofCTSCA onconsumer responses
To investigate whether the presence of CTSCA disclosure on an apparel retailer’s web-
site affects consumer responses, the ANCOVAs were conducted. Socially responsible
consumption behavior dimensions which were found to have significant effects on con-
sumer responses from the regression analyses and apparel product involvement were
considered as control variables (see Table4).
Socially responsible consumption behavior had significant positive relations with all
dependent variables as covariates. In addition, the results exhibited a significant covari-
ate of apparel involvement in all consumer response variables excluding purchase inten-
tion. ese results confirmed that consumer response variables are indeed sensitive to
socially responsible consumption behavior and apparel product involvement.
e results of ANCOVA revealed significant effects of the presence of CTSCA
information on all dependent variables. e first ANCOVA to examine the treatment
Table 4 Results ofanalysis ofcovariance
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Dependent
variable model Persuasiveness Trust Future usage
intention Purchase intention
Source F(df)
η2
p
F(df)
η2
p
F(df)
η2
p
F(df)
η2
p
Corrected model 128.45 (4710)*** .42 57.51 (4711)*** .25 119.89 (4710)*** .40 45.70 (1711)*** .21
Firm’s behavior
control 108.84 (1710)*** .13 – – 78.11 (1710)*** .10 –
Cause‑related
products
control
– – 18.30 (1711)*** .03 – –
Small businesses
control – – – – –
Geographic
origin control – – 29.54 (1711)*** .04 – 20.84 (1711)*** .03
Consumption
volume control 40.72 (1710)*** .05 – 61.22 (1710)*** .08 7.78 (1711) .01
Product involve‑
ment control 27.29 (1710)*** .04 14.77 (1711)*** .02 21.47 (1710)*** .03 .99 (1711)** .00
CTSCA scenario 9.82 (1710)* .01 106.27 (1711)*** .13 7.04 (1710)** .01 107.20 (1711)*** .13
Page 11 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
effect on persuasiveness found group effects (F1, 710 = 9.82, p < .01, partial eta-
squared = .01), and both the covariates of firm’s behavior (F1, 710 = 108.84, p < .001,
partial eta-squared = .13) and consumption volume (F1, 710 = 40.72, p < .05, p artial
eta-squared = .05) were significant. e strengths of covariate effects were noticeable;
the effect size of firm’s behavior and consumption volume were strong and modest,
accounting for 13 and 5% of the variance in persuasiveness, respectively. e effect
size of CTSCA information was small but significant.
e second ANCOVA to investigate the treatment effect on trust resulted in sig-
nificant treatment and covariate effects as follows: group (F1, 711 = 106.27, p < .001,
partial eta-squared = .13), and covariates of cause-related products (F1, 711 = 18.30,
p < .001, partial eta-squared = .03) and geographic origin controls (F1, 711 = 29.54,
p < .001, partial eta-squared = .04). e strength of the effect of CTSCA information
on consumer trust was strong, accounting for 13% of the variance in trust.
e model to examine the treatment effect on future usage intention found group
effects (F1, 710 = 10.49, p < .01, partial eta-squared = .01), and both the covariates
of firm’s behavior (F1, 710 = 78.11, p < .001, par tial eta-squared = .10) and consump-
tion volume (F1, 710 = 61.22, p < .001, parti al eta-squared = .08) were significant. e
strengths of effect of firm’s behavior and consumption volume were modest, account-
ing for 10 and 8% of the variance in future usage intention, respectively. e effect
size of CTSCA information was small but significant.
Lastly, the model to examine the treatment effect on purchase intention was signifi-
cant: group (F1, 711 = 107.20, p < .001, partial eta-squared = .13), and cause-related
products (F1, 711 = 20.84, p < .01, partial eta-squared = .03) and geographic origin
(F1, 711 = 7.78, p < .001, partial et a-squared = .01) as covariates. e strength of the
effect of CTSCA information on purchase intention was strong, accounting for 13%
of the variance. e results of the partial eta squares from ANCOVAs indicated that
CTSCA disclosure had a strong effect on trust and purchase intention. Apparel retail-
ers are able to effectively communicate their CSR efforts to consumers through the
CTSCA disclosure, especially to enhance the levels of consumer trust toward retailers
and consumers purchase intention. However, the effects of CTSCA disclosure on per-
suasiveness and future usage intention were smaller than the effects of other covari-
ates in each ANCOVA models.
e results of ANCOVAs revealed significant positive effects of the presence of
CTSCA information on all dependent variables of consumer responses, regardless of
consumer characteristics of socially responsible consumption behavior and the levels of
consumer involvement with the apparel product category. at is, respondents in the
study perceived that presenting the public statement in compliance with the CTSCA on
a company’s website was more persuasive in terms of decision making, and was more
trustworthy, and they had greater intention to use and purchase products in the future.
In specific, the present study measured the true effects of the CTSCA on consumer
responses by using socially responsible consumption behaviors as covariates. e find-
ings from both the regression and ANCOVA analysis revealed that the importance of
emphasize socially responsible consumption behavior as consumer characteristics in
CSR research.
Page 12 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Conclusion
e empirical findings of this study make important contributions to CSR research
focusing on CTSCA practices of apparel retailers. As many apparel companies are aware
of the importance of CSR practices and its positive impact on overall business perfor-
mance (Gaskill-Fox etal. 2014), the present study extends aspects of CSR to the CTSCA,
which represents recent legislation regarding supply chains. e present study is the first
to apply the CTSCA to a shopping context in order to evaluate consumer responses.
To examine the effectiveness of CTSCA disclosure, the CTSCA which requires compa-
nies to disclose information about their efforts to eradicate slavery and human traffick-
ing along their entire supply chains (CLI 2012; Lupo etal. 2012; Pickes and Zhu 2013)
was provided with structured and detailed information in this study. e findings of this
study suggest that implementing the CTSCA on an apparel retailer’s website was well
received by consumers and had positive effects on consumer responses concerning the
company and on purchase decision making. It also confirmed the importance of con-
sumer awareness of a firm’s CSR initiatives regarding responses.
is study contributes to the general body of literature on consumer perceptions and
attitudes toward CSR. Consumer awareness of firms’ CSR initiatives is a major ante-
cedent associated with consumer responses to firms’ CSR initiatives. A number of CSR
studies have found that consumers express a greater willingness to purchase products
from companies conducting business in a socially responsible manner (e.g., Grimmer
& Bingham, 2013; Pickett-Baker and Ozaki 2008). e findings of this study allow for
a better understanding of how a company’s public statement required by the CTSCA
affects consumers’ evaluations of, and responses to, the company and ultimately their
purchase intention. Given the significant effects of the CTSCA demonstrated in this
study concerning several consumer responses, the need for complying with the CTSCA
by posting the disclosure of CTSCA is clear for many apparel retailers. Accordingly, the
practical implications of this study for apparel retailers are apparent.
e results of this study are particularly valuable as it examined the effects of the
presence of CTSCA on retailers’ website on consumer responses, after controlling for
consumer characteristics of socially responsible consumption behavior. e significant
findings of socially responsible consumption behavior as the predictor and covariates
variables emphasize that consumer characteristics of socially responsible consumption
behavior should be considered when investing the effects of CSR practices in future
studies. Although addressing CTSCA requirements on the website is not required for
all retailers, the findings of the study revealed that the CTSCA disclosure on the web-
site would provide beneficial outcomes with retailers. us, companies and marketers
including small business owners could consider displaying CTSCA disclosures on their
website to enhance consumers’ positive responses, especially persuasive information,
trust, future intention to use, and purchase intention.
Future studies implementing the causal relationships between trust, persuasiveness,
purchase intention and brand attitudes are warranted. Although this study controlled
the effect of apparel involvement, further studies focusing on other product types in
various industries other than textiles and clothing will enhance our understandings
of the effectiveness of CTSCA disclosure as a form of CSR practice. e involvement
level with a particular product type can play a significant role in consumer behavior (Lu
Page 13 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
et al. 2014). e previous awareness about the CTSCA may also influence consumer
responses. Further studies using more control variables in the experiment are needed.
Authors’ contributions
HHL and YJM planned the study, collected the data, and analyzed the data. ML also worked on data analysis. HHL, YJM,
and ML participated in writing of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Author details
1 Dept. of Fashion Design & Textiles, Inha University, 100 Inharo, Nam‑Gu, Incheon, South Korea. 2 Dept. of Family
and Consumer Sciences, Illinois State University, Normal, IL 61761, USA.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The research was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Illinois State University. The online form of informed
consent was obtained from all participants for the publication of this report. The work was carried out in compliance
with the Helsinki Declaration.
Appendix1
Scenario A:
You have browsed an ABC apparel company’s website. You found a clothing item of your
interest and were about to purchase it. en, you realized that the ABC company did not
provide any statement in compliance with the California Transparency in Supply Chains
Act in their website.
Scenario B:
You have browsed an ABC apparel company’s website. You found a clothing item of your
interest and were about to purchase it. en, you found that the ABC company provided
a public statement in compliance with the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act
on their website as below.
On January 1, 2012, the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010 (“SB
657”) went into effect. SB 657 requires retailers and manufactures like ABC apparel
company that are doing business in California to disclose efforts and measures used
to track possible slavery and human trafficking in their supply chains. is disclosure
is made to provide information to our customers which in turn allow them to make
better, more informed choices about the products they buy and the companies they
support.
ABC apparel company makes the following disclosures in compliance with the Sup-
ply Chain Act:
1. Whether ABC apparel company makes third-party verification(s) to evaluate and
address human trafficking and slavery risks in product supply chains?
Yes, ABC apparel company regularly evaluates and addresses human trafficking and
slavery risks in its product supply chains internally. Our manufacturing, production,
product safety and legal departments are tasked with investigating internal or third-
party reports of this nature.
2. Whether ABC apparel company conducts audits of suppliers to evaluate supplier
compliance with company standards for trafficking and slavery?
Page 14 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Yes, ABC apparel company seeks to audit its suppliers through internal and external
inspections or audits to check for compliance with company standards for traffick-
ing and slavery. Effective 2012, we will conduct both announced and unannounced
audits of our suppliers in compliance with SB 657.
3. Whether ABC apparel company requires direct suppliers to certify that materials
incorporated into the product comply with the laws regarding slavery and human
trafficking of the country or countries in which we are doing business?
Yes, ABC apparel company requires and seeks to obtain such certification from its all
of its direct suppliers on a regular basis.
4. Whether ABC apparel company maintains internal accountability standards and
procedures for employees or contractors failing to meet company standards on slav-
ery and trafficking?
Yes, ABC apparel company seeks to maintain internal accountability standards
and procedures for any employees and/or contractors who fail to meet company
standards in this regard. Our internal accountability standards and procedures are
designed to immediately address employees or contractors failing to meet such
standards.
5. Does ABC apparel company provide its company employees and management, who
have direct responsibility for supply chain management, with training on mitigating
the risks of slavery and trafficking in supply chains?
Yes, ABC apparel company provides internal training and education on the detection
and enforcement procedures against slavery and human trafficking to employees and
management who are directly responsible for supply chain management.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Received: 12 October 2017 Accepted: 9 April 2018
References
Atkinson, L., & Rosenthal, S. (2014). Signaling the green sell: The influence of eco‑label source, argument specificity,
and product involvement on consumer trust. Journal of Advertising, 43(1), 33–45. https ://doi.org/10.1080/00913
367.2013.83480 3.
Beltramini, R. (1982). Advertising perceived believability scale, In D.R. Corrigan, D.R., Kraft, F.B. and R.H. Ross, R.H. (Eds.),
Proceedings of the Southwestern Marketing Association (pp. 1–3). Wichita: Southwest Marketing Association,
Wichita State University.
Beltramini, R. F. (1988). Perceived believability of warning information presented in cigarette advertising. Journal of
Advertising, 17, 26–32.
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: when, why and how consumers respond to corpo‑
rate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–25.
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. (2014). 85 firms still “silent” on California Transparency in Supply Chains
Act. CSRwire, Retrieved May 15, 2017 from http://www.csrwi re.com/press _relea ses/36712 ‑85‑firms ‑still ‑silen
t‑on‑Calif ornia ‑Trans paren cy‑in‑Suppl y‑Chain s‑Act.
California Legislative Information. (2012). SB‑657 Human trafficking. Retrieved May 10, 2017 from http://legin fo.legis
latur e.ca.gov/faces /billT extCl ient.xhtml ?bill_id=20092 0100S B657&searc h_keywo rds=suppl y.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational
stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. https ://doi.org/10.1016/0007‑6813(91)90005 ‑G.
Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts,
research and practice. International Journal of Management review, 12(1), 85–105. https ://doi.org/10.111
1/j.1468‑2370.2009.00275 .x.
Page 15 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Castaldo, S., Perrini, F., Misani, N., & Tencati, A. (2009). The missing link between corporate social responsibility and
consumer trust: The case of fair trade products. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 1–15. https ://doi.org/10.1007/
s1055 1‑008‑9669‑4.
Chang, H. J., & Jai, T. M. (2015). Is fast fashion sustainable? The effect of positioning strategies on consumers’ attitudes
and purchase intentions. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(4), 853–867. https ://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ‑07‑2014‑0095.
Chi, T. (2011). Building a sustainable supply chain: An analysis of corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices
in the Chinese textile and apparel industry. The Journal of The Textile Institute, 102(10), 837–848. https ://doi.
org/10.1080/00405 000.2010.52436 1.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302. https
://doi.org/10.1037/h0040 957.
D’Amato, A., Henderson, S., & Florence, S. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and sustainable business. Greensboro: A
guide to leadership tasks and functions. Center for Creative Leadership.
Diddi, S., & Niehm, L. S. (2017). Exploring the role of values and norms towards consumers’ intentions to patron‑
ize retail apparel brands engaged in corporate social responsibility (CSR). Fashion and Textiles, 4, 5. https ://doi.
org/10.1186/s4069 1‑017‑0086‑0.
Dillman, D. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The total design method (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer‑seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 11–27.
Emmelhainz, M. A., & Adams, R. J. (1999). The apparel industry response to “sweatshop” concerns: A review and analy‑
sis of codes of conduct. The Journal of Supply Chain Management, 35(2), 51–57.
Esrock, S., & Leichty, G. B. (2000). Organization of corporate web pages: Publics and functions. Public Relations Review,
25(3), 327–344. https ://doi.org/10.1016/S0363 ‑8111(00)00051 ‑5.
Francois‑Lecompte, A., & Roberts, J. A. (2006). Developing a measure of socially responsible consumption in France.
Marketing Management Journal, 16(2), 50–66.
Gaskill‑Fox, J., Hyllegard, K. H., & Ogle, J. P. (2014). CSR reporting on apparel companies’ websites: framing good deeds
and clarifying missteps. Fashion and Textiles, 1(1), 1–22. https ://doi.org/10.1186/s4069 1‑014‑0011‑8.
Golodner, L. (2016). Consuming with a conscience. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 50(3), 492–504. https ://doi.
org/10.1111/joca.12130 .
Gonzalez, C., Korchia, M., Menuet, L., & Urbain, C. (2009). How do socially responsible consumers consider consump‑
tion? An approach with the free associations method. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 24(3), 25–41. https
://doi.org/10.1177/20515 70709 02400 301.
GRI (2015). Sustainability Disclosure Database. Retrieved April 10, 2017 from http://datab ase.globa lrepo rting .org/.
Grimmer, M., & Bingham, T. (2013). Company environmental performance and consumer purchase intentions. Journal
of Business Research, 66(10), 1945–1953. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusr es.2013.02.017.
Gupta, M., & Hodges, N. (2012). Corporate social responsibility in the apparel industry: An exploration of Indian
consumers’ perceptions and expectations. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 16(2), 216–233. https
://doi.org/10.1108/13612 02121 12228 33.
Ha‑Brookshire, J. E., & Norum, P. S. (2011). Willingness to pay for socially responsible products: Case of cotton apparel.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28(5), 344–353. https ://doi.org/10.1108/07363 76111 11499 92.
Hagen, J. M., & Choe, S. (1998). Trust in Japanese interfirm relations: Institutional sanctions matter. Academy of Man-
agement Review, 23(3), 589–600.
Jo, H., & Na, H. (2012). Does CSR reduce firm risk? Evidence from controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business
Ethics, 110(4), 441–456. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1055 1‑012‑1492‑2.
Jones, R. J., III, Reilly, T. M., Cox, M. Z., & Cole, B. M. (2017). Gender makes a difference: investigating consumer purchas‑
ing behavior and attitudes toward corporate social responsibility policies. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 24(1), 133–144. https ://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1401.
Kim, C. H., & Scullion, H. (2013). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on employee motivation: A cross‑
national study. The Poznan University of Economics Review, 13(2), 5–30.
Landrum, S. (2017). Millennials driving brands to practice socially responsible marketing. Fobes, Retrieved July 7,
2017 from https ://www.forbe s.com/sites /sarah landr um/2017/03/17/mille nnial s‑drivi ng‑brand s‑to‑pract ice‑
socia lly‑respo nsibl e‑marke ting/#49634 56749 90.
Lu, L. C., Chang, W. P., & Chang, H. H. (2014). Consumer attitudes toward blogger’s sponsored recommendations and
purchase intention: The effect of sponsorship type, product type, and brand awareness. Computers in Human
Behavior, 34, 258–266. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.007.
Lupo, A. V., Bruno, S. L., & Pulliam, E. J. (2012). The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010. Computer &
Internet Lawyer, 29(4), 13–14.
Ma, Y. J., Lee, H. H., & Goerlitz, K. (2014). Implementation of the California Transparency in supply chains act in the
apparel industry. In: Proceedings of the 2014 International Textile and Apparel Association, Charlotte.
Mann, M., Byun, S. E., Kim, H. J., & Hoggle, K. (2014). Assessment of leading apparel specialty retailers’ CSR practices as
communicated on corporate websites: Problems and opportunities. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(4), 599–622.
https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1055 1‑013‑1766‑3.
Mohr, L. A., & Webb, D. J. (2005). The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. The
Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(1), 121–147. https ://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745‑6606.2005.00006 .x/full.
Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact
of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affair, 35(1), 45–72. https ://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1745‑6606.2001.tb001 02.x.
Nielsen (2013). 50% of global consumers surveyed willing to pay more for goods, services from socially responsi‑
ble companies, up from 2011. http://www.niels en.com/us/en/press ‑room/2013/niels en‑50‑perce nt‑of‑globa
l‑consu mers‑surve yed‑willi ng‑to‑pay‑more‑fo.html. Accessed 18 Apr 2018.
Nielsen (2014). Global consumers are willing to put their money where their heart is when it comes to goods and
services from companies committed to social responsibility. Retrieved May 9, 2017 from http://www.niels
en.com/ca/en/press ‑room/2014/globa l‑consu mers‑are‑willi ng‑to‑put‑their ‑money ‑where ‑their ‑heart ‑is.html.
Page 16 of 16
Leeetal. Fash Tex t (2018) 5:27
Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Murphy, P. E. (2013). CSR practices and consumer perceptions. Journal of Busi-
ness Research, 66(10), 1839–1851. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusr es.2013.02.005.
Pickes, J. & Zhu, S. (2013). The California transparency in supply chains act. Retrieved May 4, 2017 from http://www.
captu ringt hegai ns.org/pdf/ctg‑wp‑2013‑15.pdf.
Pickett‑Baker, J., & Ozaki, R. (2008). Pro‑environmental products: Marketing influence on consumer purchase decision.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(5), 281–293. https ://doi.org/10.1108/07363 76081 08905 16.
Pivato, S., Misani, N., & Tencati, A. (2008). The impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer trust: The case of
organic food. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(1), 3–12. https ://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‑8608.2008.00515 .x.
Reichert, T., Heckler, S. E., & Jackson, S. (2001). The effects of sexual social marketing appeals on cognitive processing
and persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 13–27. https ://doi.org/10.1080/00913 367.2001.10673 628.
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. https ://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838 .
Singhapakdi, A., Lee, D. J., Sirgy, M. J., & Senasu, K. (2015). The impact of incongruity between an organization’s CSR
orientation and its employees’ CSR orientation on employees’ quality of work life. Journal of Business Research,
68(1), 60–66. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusr es.2014.05.007.
Stanaland, A. J. S., Lwin, M. O., & Murphy, P. E. (2011). Consumer perceptions of the antecedents and consequences
of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 47–55. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1055
1‑011‑0904‑z.
Sweetin, V. H., Knowles, L. L., Summey, J. H., & McQueen, K. S. (2013). Wiliness‑to‑punish the corporate brand for
corporate social irresponsibility. Journal of Business Research, 66(19), 1822–1830. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusr
es.2013.02.003.
Tang, L., Gallagher, C. C., & Bie, B. (2015). Corporate social responsibility communication through corporate websites:
A comparison of leading corporations in the United States and China. International Journal of Business Communi-
cation, 52(2), 205–227. https ://doi.org/10.1177/23294 88414 52544 3.
Tian, Z., Wang, R., & Yang, W. (2011). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in China. Journal of
Business Ethics, 101(2), 197–212. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1055 1‑010‑0716‑6.
Wang, Z., & Sarkis, J. (2013). Investigating the relationship of sustainable supply chain management with corporate
financial performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 62(8), 871–888. https ://
doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM ‑03‑2013‑0033.
Weber, M. (2008). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A company‑level measurement approach for CSR.
European Management Journal, 26(4), 247–261. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2008.01.006.
Welford, R., & Frost, S. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Asian supply chains. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 13(3), 166–176. https ://doi.org/10.1002/csr.121.
Wu, S. I., & Wang, W. H. (2014). Impact of CSR perception on brand image, brand attitude and buying willingness: A study
of a global café. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 6(6), 43–56. https ://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v6n6p 43.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the Involvement Construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(December), 341–352.
https ://doi.org/10.1086/20852 0.
