The effect of CSR expectancy violation: value from expectancy violation theory and confirmation bias

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study applies expectancy violation theory and confirmation bias to the corporate social responsibility (CSR) context to explore how consumers respond to a corporation’s CSR activities. A 2 (CSR expectancy: higher vs. lower) X 2 (CSR practice: good vs. bad) experimental study examines how both negative and positive expectancy violation/conformity influence consumers’ attitudes to a corporation and their intentions to support it. The results reveal a significant interaction between CSR expectancy and CSR practice (i.e., expectancy violation/conformity effects). Specifically, negative expectancy violation (i.e., where a corporation violates consumers’ higher CSR expectancy) elicited less positive corporate attitudes and supportive behavior intentions than lower expectancy conformity (i.e., where a corporation meets consumers’ lower-CSR expectancy). On the other hand, positive expectancy conformity (i.e., where a corporation meets consumers’ higher CSR expectancy) yielded more positive consumer responses than positive expectancy violation (i.e., where a corporation exceeds consumers’ lower-CSR expectancy). This study also explores the mediating role of corporate credibility as communicator reward valence in influencing the effects of expectancy violation/conformity. The implications of the study provide strategic guidance that should help corporations implement CSR initiatives that satisfy consumer expectancy and enhance corporate credibility, thus minimizing negative expectancy violation effects.