Next Article in Journal
Dynamic Simulation and Experimental Study of the HDPE Double-Walled Corrugated Pipe Grouting Robot
Previous Article in Journal
Changes of Bioclimatic Conditions in the Kłodzko Region (SW Poland)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 11
10.3390/su14116771
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Consumer Engagement via Social Media

by
Shafig Al-Haddad
1,
Abdel-Aziz Ahmad Sharabati
2,*,
Mohammad Al-Khasawneh
1,
Rand Maraqa
1 and
Raya Hashem
1
1
Princess Sumaya University for Technology, Amman 11941, Jordan
2
Business Faculty, Middle East University, Amman 11831, Jordan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(11), 6771; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116771
Submission received: 26 April 2022 / Revised: 12 May 2022 / Accepted: 27 May 2022 / Published: 1 June 2022
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become a vital factor in how organizations run their businesses. Consumers are becoming more aware of it and are expecting it from organizations. With the rise of social media, organizations have another channel to communicate their CSR activities to their stakeholders. A good deal of research has been conducted on CSR and its relation to consumers. However, there is limited research on its influence on consumers via social media channels. Therefore, this research studied the impact of an organization’s CSR activities on consumer purchase intention with the mediating effect of consumer engagement via social media. A total of 21 questionnaire surveys were provided. A sample size of 250 responses was successfully collected via different social media platforms. Results show that ethical responsibility has a positive significant impact on customer engagement (15%) and purchase intentions (35%). Environmental responsibility has a positive significant impact on consumer engagement (11%) and purchase intentions (18%). Meanwhile, Philanthropic Responsibility and Economic Responsibility have an insignificant effect on Customer engagement. Customer engagement has a positive and significant effect on Purchase Intension (47%). Finally, the purchasing intention of consumers is mediated positively and significantly by consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media. In addition, consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media has a positive impact on purchase intention. However, contrary to other research, economic and philanthropic responsibilities have no significant impact on consumer engagement with social media activities.

1. Introduction

Understanding CSR, which includes social, economic, and environmental responsibilities, as well as the welfare of society, is very important for all organizations, whatever they do or wherever they work [1]. Previous studies indicated that CSR positively affects customer satisfaction, organizations’ image, reputation, employee engagement, and business performance in general [2]. Therefore, maintaining CSR activities is important because CSR assists companies in successfully managing their sustainable development with their surrounding environment [3]. Aside from the importance of social media engagement, social media has turned into a significant tool for companies to improve customer interaction and engagement. Companies now offer a huge amount of online content to a wide range of customers while also engaging with them throughout marketing initiatives, thanks to their social media existence [4,5,6]. There are limited studies on how CSR activities influence customer engagement in social media environments and how firms could present and develop networks to obtain the best results [7].
Therefore, the purpose of this research is to measure the impact of an organization’s CSR activities (philanthropic, economic, ethical, environmental responsibilities) on consumer purchase intention via social media. Moreover, the mediating of consumer engagement to indicate if this linkage is worth more spotlight. Most previous research papers focused on the link between CSR activities and corporate image, but this study focuses on the link between CSR and consumer engagement on social media, focusing specifically on purchase intention.

2. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

The research model was put forward by referring to a variety of previous relevant literature. It contains six constructs: economic responsibilities, ethical responsibilities [8], environmental responsibilities [9], philanthropic responsibilities [10], consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media [11], and purchase intention [12].
Carroll’s original model was based on a four-phase pyramid for CSR dimensions, which are ethical, legal, economic, and discretionary responsibilities. Moreover, the model contained corporate image as a mediator and, finally, behavioral intention as an independent variable [8]. Specific dimensions were adapted to fit the current context; therefore, discretionary responsibilities were substituted with philanthropic responsibilities, and the legal responsibilities were substituted with environmental. Moreover, consumer engagement with CSR activities in social media was used instead of corporate image. Finally, purchase intention was integrated instead of behavioral intention.
Carroll’s four-part dimensions of CSR were first introduced in 1979; it suggests that businesses have to fulfill their responsibility at the four levels mentioned above, economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary [13]. However, in 2016, Carroll made modifications to the dimensions; he took out the four-part dimensions and transformed them into the form of a CSR pyramid. Moreover, he replaced discretionary responsibilities with philanthropic responsibilities [14]. Carroll identified both terms as voluntary roles that are guided by an organization’s desire to participate in social activities that are not mandatory by law, and not normally expected by a business in an ethical sense. Therefore, the terms are used interchangeably by many authors. However, in his more recent research (2016), Carroll mentioned that even though philanthropic activities are not seen as a responsibility in a literal sense, they are generally expected by organizations and are part of the public’s expectations. Therefore, the term philanthropic responsibilities are used here to keep up with the most recent research and to stress that in recent times, philanthropic responsibilities have become generally expected by organizations and the public [14].
Environmental responsibilities were added in place of legal responsibilities. The rationale behind this is the growing environmental crisis due to the absence of commitment toward environmental responsibility, as well as the progressive development in several sectors such as the industrial sector [15]. Moreover, in some countries, companies are mandated by law to have some level of environmental responsibility, such as the energy act law in the UK, which requires organizations to adhere to certain energy efficiency requirements when providing energy to consumers [16]. The growing consumer concern over the environment puts pressure on organizations to be environmentally responsible [17].
The legal responsibilities were eliminated for this research since they can be seen as part of the organization’s ethical responsibility, as legal expectations are founded on ethical grounds, and being legally responsible can be considered the first step to becoming ethically responsible, but ethical expectations take it a step further [14]. In other words, the law establishes minimum standards of behavior while ethics establish maximum standards [18]. More importantly, abiding by legal regulations is insubstantial in today’s business world, as the demand for more ethical organizations is increasing [19]. However, the relationship between ethical responsibilities, and buying behavior was presented as more significant than legal responsibilities [20]. According to a study on the effect of corporate social responsibility on consumer buying behavior, being legally responsible is not enough for stakeholders, as organizations are expected to not only conform to the law but to be ethically responsible [18].
With the increasing realization that most organizations are made up of interactions among businesses and customers, there is a growing demand for research on consumer engagement with brands [21]. Social media use has risen dramatically in recent years [22], creating opportunities and connections for customer engagement [23]. Even though customer engagement is becoming increasingly relevant, it has been overlooked in CSR literature [24]. Furthermore, CSR is widely discussed on social media. Nonetheless, its effect on consumers has received little attention [25]. To fill the gap, consumer engagement in CSR communication on social media was chosen as a mediator for this research as an alternative to corporate image. As a mediator, consumer engagement designates the relationship between the related variables. As in some studies, a positive relationship was found between a company’s CSR activities and consumer behavior toward the company and its products [26]. One study on customer engagement toward CSR shows that CSR has a direct impact on customers’ purchase intention of an organization’s goods [27].
A study published by MDPI (2020) concluded that behavioral intentions refer to the likelihood of individuals’ engagement with a specific behavior [10]. Purchase intention is also a behavioral variable that is concerned with the purchase effort made by consumers [28]. Purchase intention considers customers’ future behavior based on their attitudes. Future behavior should be analyzed consistently since it has become an indispensable concern for organizations [28]. Moreover, according to previous studies, customers are more likely to buy an organization’s product if it adheres to CSR [29]. Moreover, another study found that there are lower purchasing intentions for brands that are socially irresponsible [30]. Therefore, with the prominence of future consumer behavior for organizations, and the strong correlation that exists between an organization’s participation in CSR initiatives and customers’ purchasing intentions, this research incorporated purchase intention as a dependent variable to find out if a positive relationship also exists between CSR and purchase intention for Jordanian consumers.

2.1. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

As has been previously reported in the literature, Carroll viewed CSR as consisting of four dimensions which are economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities. Legal responsibility and economic responsibility signify traditional corporate responsibilities, while philanthropic responsibility and ethical responsibility are modern responsibilities [10]. However, other authors suggested that CSR activities comprise three dimensions, which are the environment, society, and stakeholders, that have a significant impact on customer decisions, and their behavioral intentions [31]. In addition, the European Commission identifies CSR as “a voluntary concept in which businesses incorporate social and environmental issues into their company practices and relationships with their stakeholders” [32]. Whereas some researchers described CSR as a business activity expressed to meet social demands [33].
Many academics have applied some or all of Carroll’s dimensions in their CSR literature [14]. These are economic, legal, ethical, philanthropic, and discretionary. Moreover, researchers have been studying the effect of CSR on consumer behavior by observing dimensions such as behavioral intention [10], purchase intention [12], word of mouth, and electronic word of mouth intentions [11], consumer awareness [7], and engagement [34]. For more accurate results, some researchers have included independent variables that are not directly related to CSR but are aimed at gaining a better understanding of consumers’ perceptions of CSR or the brand. For example, consumer loyalty [35], consumers’ attitude toward using a brand [10], and consumer perception of CSR practices [24]. Research on different variables of CSR is crucial for organizations involved in it, as it can assist them in how to better incorporate CSR into their business practices, which can be later shown by positive customer outcomes [24].

2.2. Philanthropic Responsibilities

Philanthropic responsibility refers to voluntary actions taken by corporations in response to societal expectations, such as donations to non-profit organizations [36]. Some authors have also suggested that corporate philanthropy is a form of social corporate business in which companies have responsibilities to the environment, suppliers, shareholders, and employees [18]. Revenue is not directly increased by performing philanthropic responsibilities. Nonetheless, philanthropy can aid in building and creating the company’s reputation or image [37]. Here, the term philanthropic responsibility will be focused on activities that are aimed at building a better society through donations, events, and volunteer work. Philanthropic responsibilities are becoming increasingly popular in recent years due to the growing consumer attention; therefore, light needs to be shed on them.
The relationship between philanthropic responsibility and consumer engagement on social media has not been observed in previous research. However, a recent study concluded that there is a positive relationship between philanthropic corporate social responsibility and attitude toward using a brand [10]. Some authors have also suggested that consumers expect organizations to engage in acts of altruism, and they would undoubtedly endorse the organization’s acts [20]. This was further supported by a variety of literature through the appearance of a positive relationship between philanthropic responsibilities and consumer buying behavior [38]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
Philanthropic responsibility has a significant positive influence on consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.

2.3. Environmental Responsibilities

Corporate social responsibility, as a whole, centers on the concept of maximizing the benefits and minimizing the problems. Similarly, being a part of CSR, environmental responsibility pertains to sustaining the environment by reducing harmful impacts [39]. There is insufficient research on the definition of environmental corporate social responsibility for the reason that environmental responsibility is commonly a section of philanthropic responsibilities. Here, the term environmental responsibility is made to stand alone, to be able to test it separately and to emphasize its increasing significance in CSR practices, as well as to consumers. The term covers organizations that comply with environmental regulations, offer environmentally products/services, put effort into conserving the environment, and organizations with a mission that incorporates environmentally friendly behavior [39].
There is limited literature explaining the relationship between environmental responsibilities and consumer engagement. However, previous studies proved that environmental responsibility positively impacts green consumption intention [17]. Moreover, it is generally clear that CSR practices and customer purchasing behavior have a positive relationship [20]. Furthermore, the modern world is being led by the millennial generation [40]. This was later evidenced in 2016, as millennials became the largest generation in the labor force [41]. When it comes to this group of consumers, it is clear that being environmentally conscious is crucial to pique their interest. They are known to pursue brands they regard as having a positive effect on the environment [41]. Further, in 2019, over 90% of Jordanian youth responded that they are worried about climate change, and nearly half of them use social media platforms to express their concerns, while others express their concerns in their communities and schools [42]. Few authors have also suggested that CSR commonly has a significant impact on customer outcomes through customer engagement [24]. According to the above discussion, the following hypotheses are formed.
Hypothesis 2a (H2a).
Environmental responsibility positively influences consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.
Hypothesis 2b (H2b).
Consumer engagement positively and significantly mediates the effect between environmental responsibilities and purchase intentions with CSR activities on social media.

2.4. Ethical Responsibilities

Ethical responsibilities tend to involve socially accepted approaches to environmental protection, human rights, and moral principles [36]. According to [43], ethical responsibilities are an organization’s voluntary activities aimed at encouraging and achieving social objectives that go beyond the law [37]. Certain activities are not codified into law, yet are expected of companies by society’s members [44]. For example, a behavior can be restricted by society members even if it is not formalized by law. Therefore, ethical responsibilities are represented as a separate dimension in the four-phase pyramid; they are existent in each of the other responsibility dimensions as well. They should be seen as an aspect that cuts through the entire pyramid [13]. Therefore, ethical responsibilities are a crucial part of CSR. Additionally, organizations cannot attain them without abiding by laws and regulations. Thus, legal responsibilities can be seen as the foundation of ethical responsibilities.
A direct link between ethical responsibility and consumer engagement on social media has not been studied. However, [45] explained a relationship between the ethical dimension and consumer behavior. Moreover, consumers consider a company’s ethical practices to be a critical factor in their buying decision, and there seems to be a significant relationship between ethical responsibilities and consumer buying behavior [20]. With this, it is proposed that.
Hypothesis 3a (H3a).
Ethical responsibility has a significant positive influence on consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.
Hypothesis 3b (H3b).
Consumer engagement positively and significantly mediates the effect between ethical responsibilities and purchase intention with CSR activities on social media.

2.5. Economic Responsibilities

Several studies suggest that economic responsibility is the most relevant and fundamental responsibility [8]. Carroll defined it as an essential condition or necessity for a business; since businesses are our society’s basic economic unit, they are responsible for producing products and services that society desires and selling them at a profit [13]. Economic responsibility discusses the degree of CSR-related activities and financial results, taking into account cost-related advantages, market advantages, and reputational benefits for businesses [37,46]. Economic responsibilities can be perceived as the basis of CSR and can not be overlooked, as companies must be able to meet their financial obligations before engaging in any other social program such as environmental campaigns or community support [14].
Previous studies have not examined the relationship between economic responsibility and consumer engagement. However, a significant relation was found between economic responsibility and consumer behavior [45]. Other studies confirmed that a positive relationship exists between CSR responsibilities and consumer purchase behavior, which concluded that economic responsibility had the most significant impact [47]. Moreover, several studies established that consumers expect businesses to perform their economic responsibility and that price perception are one of the most significant factors to be considered by consumers [20]. The above discussion leads us to the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis 4 (H4).
Economic responsibility has a significant positive influence on consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.

2.6. Consumer Engagement with CSR Activities on Social Media

Consumer engagement can be broadly described as the development of a meaningful relationship between a business and its customers [48]. Consumer engagement refers to consumer behaviors focused on specific firms or brands with motives that go beyond purchasing. It relates to customers having strong emotional bonds with the brand [24]. Therefore, consumer engagement can be viewed as a multidimensional concept encompassing cognitive, emotional, and/or behavioral dimensions that play a vital role in the development of long-term relationships that benefit businesses and their customers [49]. Nonetheless, some researchers have narrowed the definition by merely focusing on the behavioral dimension [24].
The significance of consumer engagement on social media has flourished in recent years and has become an academic attraction for both practitioners and researchers [50]. Some studies have found that social media connections with consumers can have a positive impact on brand evaluations and purchase intentions [28]. It has become an essential component of any marketer’s marketing strategy. It acts as an effective two-way communication method that allows businesses and customers to interact with one another. The ongoing growth of social media usage emphasizes the importance of social media in observing consumer engagement. For this research, consumer engagement will be regarded as a behavioral dimension, established by following the brand page on social media, interacting via comments, clicking the “like” button, and sharing content [51].
Prior studies have related consumer engagement to loyalty and usage intention [52]. Additionally, previous literature has revealed the positive impact of brand engagement on consumers’ intentions to use a brand’s product [53]. Customer engagement has a positive direct and indirect effect on purchasing intention [54]. EWom engagement influences consumers’ purchase intentions [55]. Not to mention, previous literature emphasized that consumers, investors, as well as other stakeholders in an enterprise like to reward organizations that practice good CSR by endorsing them and punish companies that only concentrate on profit without engaging in CSR activities [20]. This is further shown by the presence of a significant positive relationship between corporate social responsibility practices and consumer buying behavior [38]. Therefore, the effect of consumer engagement on purchase intention will be closely examined. More precisely, consumers’ engagement with CSR communication in social media will be observed. Consequently, the main focus will be on the behavioral dimension, so the following hypothesis is suggested based on the above discussion.
Hypothesis 5 (H5).
Consumer engagement has a significant positive influence on consumers’ purchase intention.
This research provides three main contributions to the literature. First, it studies how corporate social responsibility dimensions affect customer engagement on social media. Second, the mediating role of customer engagement is explored in creating a positive purchase intention. Third, purchase intention is incorporated as a dependent variable, with customer engagement as a mediator. The relationship between CSR and purchase intention with the mediating role of consumer engagement has not been discovered. However, previous research has revealed that consumer engagement positively influences consumer purchase intention. Moreover, it has been discovered that highly engaged consumers generate 23% more revenue because they spend more on each purchase and buy products more frequently [56].
Finally, Figure 1 shows the research model, as follows:

3. Methodology

The research method that has been adopted for this study is quantitative research to investigate the cause-and-effect link between different variables by the application of analytical, statistical, and numerical approaches [57], which have several advantages by using a statistical data to describe and analyze research, to examine cause and effect correlations [58], also the data and findings give a strong policy guidance indication [59]. The research uses a survey to gather data from a sample of people. The survey is a series of interconnected steps [60], which are usually used in the social sciences [61]. In addition, the online survey has many advantages as participants can respond at any location and at any time as long as they have an internet connection, online survey is very flexible [62].
The survey in this study was developed using Google forms; it is being well-defined as a cloud database management tool for designing and developing online surveys [63]. This study had a total of 31 questions, 26 questions consisting of a Likert scale ranging from “1” strongly disagree to “5” strongly agree. The other five questions focused on demographic factors like gender, age, behavior, and level of education, and the last question concentrates on the audience’s most associated social media platform. The survey was designed to obtain information mostly from social media users. The survey link was shared on social media (Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp). It comprises 250 responses, which have been sorted and examined with the use of SPSS and AMOS software. This research was carried out during the summer of 2021.
As for the variables in this study, economic responsibilities were examined by three questions, while ethical responsibilities were explored using five questions [8]. Environmental responsibilities were examined by four questions [9], philanthropic responsibilities were examined by five questions [10], and consumer engagement was examined by six questions [10]. In addition to purchasing, the intention was examined by three questions [12].
The purpose of sampling methods in survey research is to generate a sufficient level that is representative of the population of interest [64]. This study utilized a random sampling method to gather information from the sample—social media users, with 250 successful respondents.

4. Data Analysis and Results

4.1. Measurement Model Fit Indexes

The measurement model was evaluated by calculating the construct reliability test, overall model fit, and validity test. The measurement model fit indices have the following values (Table 1).

4.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Reliability tests were performed by using Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR). The values of CR and Cronbach’s alpha must be a minimum of 0.70 or above. CR gives the variable internal consistency and is represented as an appropriate substitute for Cronbach’s alpha [65]. In this study, the above-mentioned reliability test conditions were met. The Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.810 to 0.895 and CRs from 0.814 to 0.902 (see Table 2).
The discriminant validity and variable validity in the model were also calculated. The benchmark of construct validity assessments are: (1) all the factor loadings must be more than or equal to 0.70. (2) The value of CR of each construct must be a minimum of 0.70 or above [66]. (3) The average variance extracted (AVE) value should be a minimum of 0.50 [67]. After removing items (PHR3, ENR1, COE1, COE4, and PUI1) that possessed low factor loadings, all other remaining constructs and items contented the required conditions for a good convergent validity. The CR values of all the items, ranging from 0.814 to 0.902, AVE values from 0.577 to 0.697, and all the factor loading values from 0.71 to 0.89 showed good convergent validity. For decent square multiple correlations (SMC), the value of all items must be ≥0.5 because SMC articulates how well an item measures a construct [68] (See Table 2).
To get an appropriate discriminant validity, the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) must be more than the corresponding correlations between that construct and the residual of other constructs [66]. To get a suitable discriminant validity result, the square root of average variance extracted for every construct and its correlation coefficient was compared with other constructs (See Table 3).

4.3. Structural Model

The results of the structural equation model (SEM) test and Figure 2 present the effects of all independent variables on dependent variables and are presented as follows (see Table 4, Figure 2).
According to the research model, three of the hypotheses were significant, and the remaining two hypotheses were insignificant. PHR had a significant effect on COE (β < 0.05); hence, Hypothesis 1 (H1) is supported. ENR had a positive and significant influence on PUI (β = 0.18, p < 0.05); hence, Hypothesis 2a (H2a) is supported. ENR had a positive and insignificant influence on COE (β = 0.11, p > 0.05); hence, Hypothesis 2b (H2b) is insignificant. Hypothesis 3a (H3a) corresponds to EHR positively and significantly influencing COE (β = 0.15, p < 0.05); therefore, Hypothesis 3rd is supported. Hypothesis 3b (H3b) corresponds to EHR positively, significantly, and directly affecting PUI (β = 0.35, p <<); therefore, it reflects that Hypothesis 3b (H3b) is supported. ECR had an insignificant effect on COE (β = −0.03); thus, Hypothesis 4 (H4) is unsupported. In addition, according to Hypothesis 5 (H5), COE had a positive and significant effect on PUI (β = 0.47, p < 0.05); hence, Hypothesis 5 (H5) is supported and significant (see Figure 3 and Table 5 and Table 6).

4.4. Mediating Effect of Consumer Engagement

Table 7 presents the mediation effect or indirect effect, which was calculated by using the indirect effect guidelines [69]. In light of the mediation assessment, Hypothesis 2b (H2b), i.e., ENR→COE→PUI, was significant and supported; hence, (β = 0.086, <0.050). Thus, environmental responsibilities have an indirect significant effect on purchase intention with the help of consumer engagement as a mediating variable. In addition, Hypothesis 3b (H3b), i.e., EHR→COE→PUI, was positive and significant; therefore, (β = 0.058, <0.100). It magnifies that consumer engagement significantly and positively mediates the relationship between ethical responsibilities and purchase intention (see Table 7 and Table 8) and Figure 3.

5. Discussion

This research examined the impact of an organization’s CSR activities on consumer purchase intention with the mediating effect of consumer engagement via social media. This section summarizes the findings and contributions made. According to the findings, environmental responsibilities had the most significant impact on consumers with p = 0.001. Consumer engagement on social media had the same amount of impact p (0.001). Further, ethical responsibilities had the third most significant impact with p = 0.100. Lastly, economic and philanthropic activities were not supported, with philanthropic activities having the least amount of impact (p = 0.958) also economic responsibilities (p = 0.810).
As for the mediation variables, the results indicate that environmental and ethical responsibilities have an indirect significant effect on purchase intention with the help of consumer engagement as a mediating variable. This was contrary to the findings of [45], where a positive impact was found between philanthropic responsibilities and consumer behavior. Furthermore, philanthropic responsibility positively influences attitude, which consequently increases behavioral intentions [10]. There is a positive effect of philanthropic responsibility on consumer buying behavior; a positive relationship was found that was most important with responsibility [47]. One particular reason for the results in this study may be due to philanthropic activities not being a prominent action among companies in Jordan where the study was conducted. There is little research relating to the CSR activities of companies in Jordan. Therefore, consumers may not see it as a particularly important factor when making a decision. The study did not find a positive relationship between economic responsibility and consumer engagement on social media. One study conducted in Malaysia was broadly in line with this; it proposed that there is no significant relationship between economic responsibility and consumer buying behavior [37]. It also concluded that the majority of Malaysians relate the term CSR to ethical responsibility, which they consider the most significant factor. The results of the study in Malaysia correlate with this study, as economic responsibility was not seen as significant in both of them. Malaysians perceived ethical responsibility as the most substantial factor of CSR. However, according to this study, it seems that Jordanians believe that environmental factors are the most significant factor of CSR. This might be since Jordan has strong efforts in environmental awareness, which made youth more engaged in the cause. This was further proven in a study in 2019 where over 90% of Jordanian youth responded that they are worried about climate change, and nearly half of them use social media platforms to express their concerns, while others express their concerns in their communities and schools [42]. Not to mention that most respondents were between the ages of 18 to 34, which additionally proves the growing millennial concern over the environment. Further, both types of research were based in developing countries; therefore, the results indicate that CSR is not prominent for consumers. There is little research on CSR activities; therefore, each country correlated it with the factor they believe is the most important. Moreover, organizations in developing countries may not be as involved in CSR responsibilities as organizations in developed countries. Nonetheless, the majority of literature on consumer buying behavior concluded that economic responsibility is the most significant and basic responsibility; hence, it had the most significant positive influence on consumer buying behavior [20,47].
Secondly, as previously discussed, the rest of the hypotheses were supported, starting with environmental responsibilities having a significant influence on consumer engagement on social media. Prior studies did not explore the relationship between environmental responsibility and consumer behavior. However, in most previous studies, environmental responsibilities were seen as part of philanthropic responsibilities, and, as mentioned, a positive relationship was seen between philanthropic responsibilities and consumer buying behavior [47], not to mention the rise in environmentally conscious consumers today’s generation [41]. In this study, ethical responsibilities were shown to have a positive influence on consumer engagement on social media. This is consistent with previous studies that concluded that customers expect organizations to always achieve ethical responsibilities [37]. Besides, other studies revealed a positive relationship between ethical responsibilities and consumer buying behavior [20,38,47]. More precisely, one study revealed that in comparison to other responsibilities, ethical responsibilities had the most significant impact on consumer buying behavior [37]. Furthermore, it was found that consumer engagement has a significant positive influence on purchase intention. This finding follows Blasco, who suggested that customer engagement has a positive effect on purchasing intention [54]. A similar conclusion was reached in 2018 when it was discovered that eWOM engagement has a significant positive influence on consumer purchase intention [55]. Lastly, concerning the mediation variable, as mentioned, environmental and ethical responsibilities have an indirect significant effect on purchase intention with the help of consumer engagement as a mediating variable. A similar pattern of results was obtained by [24], who revealed that CSR has a significant impact on customer outcomes through customer engagement.
When comparing the results to those of previous studies, it must be pointed out that no prior research has been conducted on the impact of CSR responsibilities on consumer engagement. Nonetheless, other variables of consumer behavior were regarded. The results of economic and philanthropic responsibilities did not support the suggested hypotheses for the reasons mentioned above.

6. Conclusions

This paper explored the impact of an organization’s CSR activities on consumer purchase intention with the mediating effect of consumer engagement via social media. The study used a quantitative cross-sectional method to collect data through social media networks such as Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp. The Independent variable included four dimensions: economic responsibilities, ethical responsibilities, environmental responsibilities, and philanthropic responsibilities, while the dependent variable was purchase intentions, and consumer engagement was used as a mediator. Data was gathered from 250 respondents, and direct and indirect analyses were carried out by using SPSS and AMOS software. Validity and reliability were confirmed by using Confirmatory Factor Analysis, discriminant validity, variable validity, Cronbach’s alpha, and composite reliability. Moreover, structural equation modeling (SEM) and path analysis were used to test the direct effect and indirect effect (mediating effect). The results indicated that ethical responsibilities and environmental responsibilities have a significant positive impact on consumer engagement on social media in Jordan. Moreover, they have an indirect significant effect on purchase intention with the help of consumer engagement as a mediating variable. A positive relationship was also found between consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media and purchase intention. As for economic and philanthropic responsibilities, they did not have a positive impact on consumer engagement on social media. These results can benefit organizations in developing CSR marketing campaigns by having a better understanding of the impact that CSR activities have on consumers on social media and what they are most likely to engage with.

6.1. Practical Implications

Based on the findings of this study, marketers and social media managers could use the data to create effective CSR marketing campaigns on social media that provide detail about the type of CSR activity that customers are most likely to engage with. Moreover, it will help to better understand the role that customer engagement with CSR activities on social media plays on purchase intention. Thus, it will aid in generating more profit for the firms. More specifically, this research is intended to assist companies in marketing campaigns that improve their consumer engagement through CSR activities. Based on the results, it appears that consumers regard environmental factors as the most important component of CSR on social media. Hence, organizations should start adopting more environmental CSR activities and post them on their social media channels. The results also indicate that consumers care about ethical responsibilities. Thus, companies ought to engage in more ethical acts and post them on social media. Besides, it was evident that Instagram was the channel that the respondents associated with the most. Therefore, companies can focus on that when posting about their brand. As for economic and philanthropic responsibilities, consumers are less engaged with them on social media for the reasons mentioned above. However, since consumers are engaging with environmental responsibilities, which usually fall under philanthropic, engaging in these activities may be beneficial for organizations.

6.2. Limitations, Recommendations, and Future Research

The findings also bear some limitations that offer an opportunity for future research. First, the research has identified a gap in CSR marketing campaigns on social media. Second, there is little research on consumers’ perception and knowledge about CSR activities; therefore, both of these factors need to be considered. Further, consumer perception about the brand engaging in such activities also needs to be considered. Therefore, for more accurate results, future research should adopt more variables related to consumer behavior and perception, such as consumer perception of the brand, consumer perception of CSR, and consumer loyalty toward the brand. Moreover, organizations should start including CSR as part of their marketing plan. Additionally, the sample size consisted of only 250 respondents; it can be increased in the future for more validity. Further, a pretest questionnaire should have been distributed to establish the effectiveness of the questionnaire and to be able to determine its weaknesses and strengths. Lastly, the lack of research on this topic is related to companies in Jordan not engaging in CSR or not publicizing their activities related to CSR. Thus, organizations that engage in CSR activities need to ensure their efforts are publicized.

Author Contributions

Data curation, R.M. and R.H.; Formal analysis, A.-A.A.S. and R.H.; Investigation, M.A.-K.; Methodology, S.A.-H. and A.-A.A.S.; Project administration, S.A.-H.; Resources, M.A.-K. and R.M.; Software, R.H.; Supervision, M.A.-K.; Validation, A.-A.A.S.; Visualization, S.A.-H. and M.A.-K.; Writing–original draft, R.M.; Writing–review & editing, S.A.-H. and A.-A.A.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

Thank Middle East University, Amman, Jordan for the continuous support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Nour, A.I.; Sharabati, A.A.A.; Hammad, K.M. Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure. Int. J. Sustain. Entrep. Corp. Soc. Responsib. 2019, 5, 20–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Sharabati, A.A.A. Effect of corporate social responsibility on Jordan pharmaceutical industry’s business performance. Soc. Responsib. J. 2018, 14, 566–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chehimi, G.M.; Hejase, A.J.; Hejase, N.H. An Assessment of Lebanese Companies’ Motivators to Adopt CSR Strategies. Open J. Bus. Manag. 2019, 7, 1891–1925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Dolan, R.; Conduit, J.; Fahy, J.; Goodman, S. Social media: Communication strategies, engagement and future research directions. Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 2017, 29, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Harrigan, P.; Evers, U.; Miles, M.; Daly, T. Customer engagement with tourism social media brands. Tour. Manag. 2017, 59, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zhang, M.; Guo, L.; Hu, M.; Liu, W. Influence of customer engagement with company social networks on stickiness: Mediating effect of customer value creation. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2017, 37, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Maria, S.; Loureiro, C.; Lopes, J. How Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives in Social Media Affect Awareness and Customer Engagement. J. Promot. Manag. 2019, 25, 419–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cha, J.B.; Jo, M.N. The Effect of the Corporate Social Responsibility of Franchise Coffee Shops on Corporate Image and Behavioral Intention. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Islam, T.; Ali, G.; Asad, H. Environmental CSR and pro-environmental behaviors to reduce environmental dilapidation: The moderating role of empathy. Manag. Res. Rev. 2019, 42, 332–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hwang, J.; Kim, J.J.; Lee, S. The importance of philanthropic corporate social responsibility and its impact on attitude and behavioral intentions: The moderating role of the barista disability status. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chu, S.C.; Chen, H.T.; Gan, C. Consumers’ engagement with corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication in social media: Evidence from China and the United States. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 110, 260–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Shukla, A.; Goel, G.; Tiwari, N. Consumer perception of corporate social responsibility and purchase behaviour. Int. J. Bus. Excell. 2019, 18, 22–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Carroll, A.B. A Three Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1979, 4, 497–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Carroll, A.B. Carroll’s pyramid of CSR: Taking another look. Int. J. Corp. Soc. Responsib. 2016, 1, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. European Commision. Ministry of Environment Strategic Plan (2020–2022); European Commision: Brussels, Belgium, 2022.
  16. Parliament of the United Kingdom. Energy Act 2013 Chapter 32; Parliament of the United Kingdom: London, UK, 2013; p. 238.
  17. Yue, B.; Sheng, G.; She, S.; Xu, J. Impact of consumer environmental responsibility on green consumption behavior in China: The role of environmental concern and price sensitivity. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Mihaljevic, M.; Tokic, I. Ethics and philanthropy in the field of corporate social responsibility pyramid. Interdiscip. Manag. Res. 2015, 11, 799–807. [Google Scholar]
  19. Velentzas, J.; Broni, G. Ethical Dimensions In the conduct of business: Business ethics, corporate social responsibility and the law. the “ethics in business” as a sense of business ethics. Int. Conf. Appl. Econ. 2010, 45, 18565. [Google Scholar]
  20. Thomas, B.; Tahir, N.S. The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility towards Consumer Buying Behaviour: A Study among Universities Students. J. Int. Bus. Econ. Entrep. 2019, 4, 8–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sharma, P.; Jain, K.; Kingshott, R.U. Customer engagement and relationships in multi-actor service ecosystems. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 121, 487–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mason, A.N.; Narcum, J.; Mason, K. Social media marketing gains importance after Covid-19. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2021, 8, 797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Shawky, S.; Kubacki, K.; Dietrich, T.; Weaven, S. A dynamic framework for managing customer engagement on social media. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 121, 567–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Abbas, M.; Gao, Y.; Shah, S.S.H. CSR and customer outcomes: The mediating role of customer engagement. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Corbeij, D. CSR Communication and Social Media a Critical Research Into the Impact of Communicating CSR on Social Media for Corporations and Consumers; Tilburg University: Tilburs, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  26. Sidek, J.J.; Omar, N.H.O.; Hua, N.T. Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Brand Engagement: A Study on Malaysian Youth. In Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Arts anfd Humanities, Kobe, Japan, 30 March–2 April 2017. [Google Scholar]
  27. Addo, P.C.; Jiaming, F.; Kulbo, N.B.; Liangqiang, L. COVID-19: Fear appeal favoring purchase behavior towards personal protective equipment. Serv. Ind. J. 2020, 40, 1823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Sharma, S.; Singh, S.; Kujur, F.; Das, G. Social media activities and its influence on customer-brand relationship: An empirical study of apparel retailers’ activity in india. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021, 16, 602–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Dodd, M.D.; Supa, D.W. Understanding the Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Purchase Intention. Public Relat. J. Vol. 2011, 5, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sweetin, V.H.; Knowles, L.L.; Summey, J.H.; McQueen, K.S. Willingness-to-punish the corporate brand for corporate social irresponsibility. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mohammed, A.; Al-Swidi, A. The influence of CSR on perceived value, social media and loyalty in the hotel industry. Span. J. Mark. ESIC 2019, 23, 373–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Boysselle, J. The influence of CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) communication on brand perceived value and trust: The case of SME in the food industry. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Montpellier, Montpellier, France, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  33. Mohr, L.A.; Webb, D.J.; Harris, K.E. Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Uncertain Suppl. Chain. Manag. 2001, 35, 45–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Menaga, A.; Vasantha, S. Effects of social media engagement in CSR and Customer satisfaction. J. Crit. Rev. 2020, 7, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chung, K.H.; Yu, J.E.; Choi, M.G.; Shin, J.I. The Effects of CSR on Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty in China: The Moderating Role of Corporate Image. J. Econ. Bus. Manag. 2015, 3, 542–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Mohammed, A.; Rashid, B. A conceptual model of corporate social responsibility dimensions, brand image, and customer satisfaction in Malaysian hotel industry. Kasetsart J. Soc. Sci. 2018, 39, 358–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mei-Min, C.; Ai, Y.J.; Choo, A.C.P.; Wah, W.P.; Yang, Y.C. A Study Of The Effect Of Corporate Social Responsibility (Csr) Towards Consumer Buying Behavior. In Proceedings of the In International Conference of Management, Economics and Finance, Sarawak, Malaysia, 15–16 October 2012; pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  38. Yeo, A.C.M.; Lee, S.X.M.; Carter, S. The influence of an organisation’s adopted corporate social responsibility constructs on consumers’ intended buying behaviour: A Malaysian perspective. Soc. Responsib. J. 2018, 14, 448–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Han, H.; Al-Ansi, A.; Chi, X.; Baek, H.; Lee, K.S. Impact of environmental CSR, service quality, emotional attachment, and price perception on word-of-mouth for full-service airlines. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Jones, L.G. The Sustainability of Lean Manufacturing as a Competitive Advantage. Master Thesis, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA, 2013; p. 51. Available online: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4731&context=etd (accessed on 25 April 2022).
  41. Naderi, I.; Van Steenburg, E. Me first, then the environment: Young Millennials as green consumers. Young Consum. 2018, 19, 280–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Higgins, E.; Montell, J.C. Adolescents and Youth for Climate Action UNICEF Jordan Country Office Background; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA, 2019. Available online: https://www.unicef.org/jordan/media/3226/file/Climate%20Action.pdf (accessed on 25 April 2022).
  43. Carroll, A.B.; Shabana, K.M. The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2010, 12, 5456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Geva, A. Three models of corporate social responsibility: Interrelationships between theory, research, and practice. Bus. Soc. Rev. 2008, 113, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Safi, A.; Ramay, M.I. Corporate Social Responsibility and Consumer Behavior: A Study from Pakistan. Inf. Manag. Bus. Rev. 2013, 5, 194–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Siwar, C.; Md Harizan, S.H. A study on corporate social responsibility practices amongst business organisations in Malaysia. Inst. Environ. Dev. Univ. Kebangs. Malaysia. 2006, 45, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  47. Rahim, R.A.; Jalaludin, F.W.; Tajuddin, K. The importance of corporate social responsibility on consumer behaviour in Malaysia. Asian Acad. Manag. J. 2011, 16, 119–139. [Google Scholar]
  48. Glavee-Geo, R.; Shaikh, A.A.; Karjaluoto, H.; Hinson, R.E. Drivers and outcomes of consumer engagement: Insights from mobile money usage in Ghana. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2020, 38, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hollebeek, L.D.; Glynn, M.S.; Brodie, R.J. Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. J. Interact. Mark. 2014, 28, 149–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hussein, R.; Hassan, S. Customer engagement on social media: How to enhance continuation of use. Online Inf. Rev. 2017, 41, 1006–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Pongpaew, W.; Speece, M.; Tiangsoongnern, L. Social presence and customer brand engagement on Facebook brand pages. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2017, 26, 262–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hepola, J.; Karjaluoto, H.; Shaikh, A.A. Consumer engagement and behavioral intention toward continuous use of innovative mobile banking applications: A case study of Finland. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Information Systems, Dublin, Ireland, 11–14 December 2016; pp. 1–20. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308611589_Consumer_Engagement_and_Behavioral_Intention_Toward_Continuous_Use_of_Innovative_Mobile_Banking_Applications_-_A_Case_Study_of_Finland (accessed on 25 April 2022).
  53. Park, H.; Jiang, Y. A human touch and content matter for consumer engagement on social media. Corp. Commun. 2020, 26, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Huerta-Álvarez, R.; Cambra-Fierro, J.J.; Fuentes-Blasco, M. The interplay between social media communication, brand equity and brand engagement in tourist destinations: An analysis in an emerging economy. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2020, 16, 413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Yusuf, A.S.; Che Hussin, A.R.; Busalim, A.H. Influence of e-WOM engagement on consumer purchase intention in social commerce. J. Serv. Mark. 2018, 32, 493–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Toor, A.; Husnain, M.; Hussain, T. The impact of social network marketing on consumer purchase intention in Pakistan: Consumer engagement as a mediator. Asian J. Bus. Account. 2017, 10, 167–199. [Google Scholar]
  57. Ahmad, S.; Wasim, S.; Irfan, S.; Gogoi, S.; Srivastava, A.; Farheen, Z. Qualitative v/s. Quantitative Research- A Summarized Review. J. Evid. Based Med. Healthc. 2019, 6, 2828–2832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Daniel, E. The Usefulness of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Researching Problem-Solving Ability in Science Education Curriculum. J. Educ. Pract. 2016, 7, 91–100. [Google Scholar]
  59. Hulme, D. Integrating Quantitative And Qualitative Research For Country Case Studies Of Development. Econ. Soc. Res. Councel ESRC 2007, 5, 1–46. [Google Scholar]
  60. Showkat, N.; Parveen, H. Quantitative Methods: Survey Quadrant-I (e-Text). Media Commun. Stud. 2017, M26, 56. [Google Scholar]
  61. Nayak, M.; Narayan, K.A. Strengths and Weakness of Online Surveys. IOSR J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2019, 24, 52–64. [Google Scholar]
  62. Martins, N. Measurement model equivalence in web- and paper-based surveys. South. African Bus. Rev. 2010, 14, 77–107. [Google Scholar]
  63. Vasantha, R.N.; Harinarayana, N.S. A case study of Google Forms Online. In Proceedings of the National conference on Scientific, Computational and Information Research Trends in Engineering, Mysore, India, 30 January 2016; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  64. Ponto, J. Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. J. Adv. Pract. Oncol. 2015, 6, 168–171. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  65. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis. Vectors 2010, 74, 55–57. [Google Scholar]
  66. Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modelling. In Modern Methods for Business Research Chapter Ten; Marcoulides, G.A., Ed.; Psychology Press: London, UK, 1998; Volume 295, pp. 295–336. [Google Scholar]
  67. Fornell, C. A Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis: Classification of Methods and Implications for Marketing Research; University of Michigan: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  68. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; Volume 15. [Google Scholar]
  69. Gaskin, J.; Lim, J. AMOS Plugin. Master Validity Tool; Brigham Young University: Provo, UT, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 14 06771 g001 550
Figure 1. The research model.
Figure 1. The research model.
Sustainability 14 06771 g001
Sustainability 14 06771 g002 550
Figure 2. Structural Model.
Figure 2. Structural Model.
Sustainability 14 06771 g002
Sustainability 14 06771 g003 550
Figure 3. Structural model/path analysis results of all direct effects.
Figure 3. Structural model/path analysis results of all direct effects.
Sustainability 14 06771 g003
Table
Table 1. Fit indices.
Table 1. Fit indices.
Threshold ValuesX2/d.f
(<3)		RMSEA
(<0.08)		CFI
(>0.9)		AGFI
(>0.8)		GFI
(>0.9)		TLI
(>0.9)
Measurement Model Fit Indices2.130.0680.9280.8410.910.913
Table
Table 2. Confirmatory factor analysis.
Table 2. Confirmatory factor analysis.
Constructs & ItemsFactor Loading
(>0.7)		SMC
(>0.5)		CRCronbach’s αAVE
Philanthropic Responsibilities (PHR) 0.9020.8950.697
PHR10.790.62
PHR20.860.74
PHR40.800.64
PHR50.890.79
Environmental Responsibilities (ENR) 0.8340.8310.628
ENR20.710.50
ENR30.870.75
ENR40.790.63
Ethical Responsibilities (EHR) 0.8720.8700.577
EHR10.770.58
EHR20.740.55
EHR30.780.61
EHR40.770.59
EHR50.740.55
Economic Responsibilities (ECR) 0.8180.8150.600
ECR10.750.56
ECR20.770.59
ECR30.810.65
Consumer Engagement (COE) 0.8780.8760.644
COE20.760.57
COE30.780.61
COE50.810.66
COE60.860.74
Purchase Intention (PUI) 0.8140.8100.687
PUI20.880.77
PUI30.780.60
Table
Table 3. Discrimination validity.
Table 3. Discrimination validity.
PHRENRHERECRCOEPUI
PHR0.835
ENR−0.0540.792
HER0.170 *0.187 *0.760
ECR0.636 ***0.0180.214 **0.774
COE−0.0010.214 **0.161 *0.0220.803
PUI0.1140.0530.409 ***−0.1150.480 ***0.829
Significance threshold values: p < 0.100, * p < 0.050, ** p < 0.010, *** p < 0.001.
Table
Table 4. Fit indices model.
Table 4. Fit indices model.
Threshold ValuesX2/d.f
(<3)		RMSEA
(<0.08)		CFI
(>0.9)		AGFI
(>0.8)		GFI
(>0.9)		TLI
(>0.9)
Structural Model Fit Indices2.320.0730.9410.8260.9020.91
Table
Table 5. The path analysis of all direct effects items.
Table 5. The path analysis of all direct effects items.
HypothesesRelationshipC.R.
(t-Value)		pStandardized Structural CoefficientsResult
H1PHR→COE0.0530.9580.01Unsupported
H2aENR→COE2.396 *0.0170.19Supported
H2bENR→PUI0.1570.1000.11Supported
H3aEHR→COE2.009 *0.0450.13Supported
H3bEHR→PUI0.610 ***0.0000.35Supported
H4ECR→COE−0.2400.810−0.02Unsupported
H5COE→PUI6.832 ***0.0000.47Supported
Significance threshold values: * p < 0.050, *** p < 0.001.
Table
Table 6. Direct hypothesis testing.
Table 6. Direct hypothesis testing.
HypothesespResult
H1: Philanthropic responsibility has a significant positive influence on consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.0.958Unsupported
H2a: Environmental responsibility has a significant positive influence on consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.p < 0.050Supported
H2b: Environmental responsibility has a significant, positive, and direct effect on purchase intention.p < 0.100Supported
H3a: Ethical responsibility has a significant, positive, and direct effect on purchase intention p < 0.050Supported
H3b: Ethical responsibility has a significant positive influence on consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.p < 0.001Supported
H4: Economic responsibility has a significant positive influence on consumer engagement with CSR activities on social media.0.810Unsupported
H5: Consumer engagement has a significant positive influence on purchase intention.p < 0.001Supported
Table
Table 7. Mediating effect analysis.
Table 7. Mediating effect analysis.
Indirect PathUnstandardized EstimateLowerUpperp-ValueStandardized Estimate
Environmental Responsibilities → Consumer Engagement→ Purchase Intention (ENR→COE→PUI)0.1310.0360.2550.0260.086 *
Ethical Responsibilities → Consumer Engagement → Purchase Intention (EHR→COE→PUI)0.1000.0060.2280.0820.058 †
Significance of Estimates: * p < 0.050, † p < 0.100.
Table
Table 8. Mediating hypothesis testing.
Table 8. Mediating hypothesis testing.
HypothesespResult
H2c: Consumer engagement positively and significantly mediates the effect between environmental responsibilities and purchase intentions with CSR activities on social media.p < 0.050Supported
H3c: Consumer engagement positively and significantly mediates the effect between ethical responsibilities and purchase intention with CSR activities on social media.p < 0.100Supported
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Al-Haddad, S.; Sharabati, A.-A.A.; Al-Khasawneh, M.; Maraqa, R.; Hashem, R. The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Consumer Engagement via Social Media. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6771. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116771

AMA Style

Al-Haddad S, Sharabati A-AA, Al-Khasawneh M, Maraqa R, Hashem R. The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Consumer Engagement via Social Media. Sustainability. 2022; 14(11):6771. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116771

Chicago/Turabian Style

Al-Haddad, Shafig, Abdel-Aziz Ahmad Sharabati, Mohammad Al-Khasawneh, Rand Maraqa, and Raya Hashem. 2022. "The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Consumer Engagement via Social Media" Sustainability 14, no. 11: 6771. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116771

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop