Message Framing in CSR Communication: An Abstract

Abstract

Firms are increasingly engaging in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and actively communicate this engagement to stakeholders. In doing so, they can use different types of framing. For example, firms may emphasize that they engage in ethical or socially responsible conduct or, contrariwise, that they avoid unethical and socially irresponsible behavior. For example, Unilever’s 2014 Sustainable Palm Oil Report states that more than 98% of all palm oil directly sourced for Unilever’s European Foods business is traceable and certified sustainable; alternatively, the company could also have stated that only 2% of all directly sourced palm oil is not traceable and certified. Objectively, both statements provide the same information in terms of CSR engagement. However, the framing of the information may lead to different consumer responses. Research on message framing has referred to this type of framing as “attribute framing”. Attribute framing involves wording the description of an attribute of a company, product, or other attitude object. It is one of the simpler types of framing, and can be distinguished from goal framing, which involves stating the positive outcomes of doing something versus the negative outcomes of not doing something; and risky choice framing, which involves a choice between a risky option and a riskless option, framed as gains versus losses. Surprisingly little is known about how attribute framing of CSR communication affects consumer responses. Relatedly, only little is known about the psychological mechanisms that explain how positively vs. negatively framed CSR messages inform consumer behavior. This research examines the role of positive versus negative attribute framing of CSR information on brand attitudes and brand purchasing intentions. The results of our experimental study with fictive brands indicate that positively framed CSR communication leads to more favorable consumer responses than negatively framed CSR communication. Moreover, attribute framing effects seem to be contingent on the type of product: the effects are stronger for products that consumers can easily evaluate (here apparel) than for products that are more difficult to evaluate (here smartphones). Finally, consumers’ beliefs about the company’s social responsibility, but not their beliefs about the company’s ability in producing and delivering its outputs, explain how CSR attribute framing affects attitudes and purchase intentions.