1. Introduction
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become an increasingly indispensable part of the corporate landscape because it helps firms improve their financial performance and creates good citizenship [
1]. An estimated 90% of companies on the S&P 500 index published a CSR report in 2019, recognizing the need to act on sustainability [
2]. Further, consumers respond enthusiastically to companies’ CSR activities. Consumers expect companies to go beyond simple profit-seeking and pursue a corporate purpose that positively impacts society [
3].
Concerns regarding sustainability are especially important in stigmatized industries. Thus, a growing number of firms in these stigmatized industries is engaging in diverse CSR activities. For example, a beer company helps underage drinking programs, and a tobacco company funds youth tobacco prevention programs. Stigmatized or controversial industries possess socially undesirable characteristics, often due to the negative consequences of the use or overuse of their products, which frequently lead to a shared sense of risk [
4]. Such industries include alcohol, tobacco, gambling, fast food, oil, weapons, and biotechnology [
4,
5,
6]. Despite active CSR efforts of stigmatized industries, the effectiveness of their CSR activities in improving their corporate images has remained unclear.
Recent research has examined several factors that affect the CSR efforts of stigmatized industries and consumers, including corporate reputation, communication strategies, and CSR fit [
4,
6,
7,
8,
9]. Among them, CSR fit or congruence is particularly pertinent for stigmatized industries because these companies have an unfavorable image due to the products that they manufacture. As such, their causes are related to improving negative outcomes from the use or overuse of their products. Prior studies have shown that a highly-fitted CSR program received more negative comments on social media [
9], which may consequently backfire and negatively affect the firm’s image [
10,
11]. In contrast, another study found that a highly-fitted CSR program improves corporate reputation by increasing CSR legitimacy and decreasing skepticism [
7]. Despite recent research on this topic, studies on the effects of CSR fit in stigmatized industries are still in their infancy, and empirical evidence is mixed [
7].
Thus, this study aims to expand previous knowledge of CSR in controversial industries by linking CSR fit with different types of CSR initiatives and product. Using attribution theory as a theoretical foundation, this study attempts to conduct two experiments with college students to examine the effects of congruence, CSR initiative type, and product type on consumers’ corporate evaluations. Specifically, the first experiment examines congruence effects with two types of CSR initiatives (cause-related marketing vs. advocacy advertising), and the second experiment further explores congruence effects in association with two types of products (hedonic vs. utilitarian).
The combined results of these two studies make several contributions to the CSR literature. First, past research has largely examined CSR in regular industries. This study expands on previous work by examining the effects of CSR in the domain of stigmatized industries. Second, while a large body of literature demonstrated positive congruence effects in CSR activities, this study adds to the emerging body of work that suggests that congruence may result in unintended negative consequences [
1,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13]. Third, this study investigates the conditions under which the CSR activities of stigmatized industries may lead to a negative consumer response. The role of CSR type and product type is particularly examined with respect to the effects of congruence. Finally, the findings of this study can aid companies—especially those suffering from a negative reputation due to the products that they manufacture—in designing effective CSR strategies to recover or enhance their corporate image.
2. Theoretical Framework
2.1. Congruence between the Company and Cause
Congruence refers to the perceived similarity between partners [
14] and is explained in terms of image or functional similarity [
15]. The degree of congruence is defined as “high when the two are perceived as congruent (i.e., as going together), whether that congruity is derived from mission, products, markets, technologies, attributes, brand concepts, or any other key association” [
16] (p. 155). A large body of work has focused on the positive effects of congruence regarding attitudes toward companies and brands [
17,
18], identification with companies [
19], purchase behavior [
20], and market share [
21]. In contrast, other studies have suggested that congruence may raise consumer skepticism about corporate motives of CSR initiatives and lead consumers to respond positively to an incongruent condition [
22]. Furthermore, congruence does not influence consumer attitudes toward the brand or purchase intentions [
23]. Thus, several previous studies have demonstrated that congruence may have unintended negative consequences [
11,
24,
25].
Despite their controversial nature and operation, industries that manufacture, license, and distribute harmful products or services—such as alcohol, tobacco, and gambling—are also actively involved in socially responsible initiatives [
8]. Recent studies have examined diverse CSR efforts in stigmatized industries, finding that consumers’ reactions to CSR initiatives vary significantly in contrast to regular industries [
7]. As the congruence of CSR in controversial industries usually contradicts a company’s mission, it is particularly important for stigmatized industries. As such, carefully investigating the role of congruence in stigmatized industries should add to our understanding of CSR activities’ effectiveness.
Prior studies have found that a high fit of the CSR initiatives of stigmatized industries helps enhance corporate reputation and value [
7,
26]. However, other studies have found that highly-fitted CSR programs may backfire and lead to negative perceptions of the company [
9,
10,
11]. Given the literature on CSR fit in controversial industries and consumer reactions to their initiatives, empirical findings are mixed, and thus further investigation is required [
6,
7,
9].
In this context, this study examines how CSR congruence in stigmatized industries affects consumer responses by incorporating the concept of congruence based on a functional (product-based) match between the stigmatized product and cause. Thus, congruence is achieved when the cause is related to the moderate or preventive use of a corporate core product. Stigmatized industries, such as oil, alcohol, and tobacco, attempt to improve negative perceptions of the nature of their main product and thus, strategically engage in congruent CSR activities.
2.2. Attribution of Corporate Motives, Credibility, and Attitude
Attribution theory suggests that consumers are social perceivers who attempt to understand the reasons behind the occurrence of certain events or actions, and these causal inferences drive consumers’ subsequent behavior [
27]. Attribution theory posits that two types of factors can shape an attribution of motives for events or actions: dispositional (intrinsic) factors and situational (extrinsic) factors [
27]. In the CSR context, intrinsic motivation refers to consumer inferences that the company engages in CSR due to its altruistic motives, such as philanthropic or ethical obligation [
22]. However, if consumers cannot easily infer a company’s intrinsic or altruistic motive, they attribute its CSR activities as extrinsic or self-serving motives, thereby leading to negative consequences [
11,
22]. The attribution of a firm’s CSR motives has been a key factor in determining the success or failure of CSR activities [
11,
22,
28,
29,
30].
Previous research has provided empirical evidence for the importance of congruence between the cause and company in judgments of corporate motives in the CSR context [
22,
31]. The level of congruence significantly influences the consumer’s attribution of corporate motives and guides the subsequent evaluation of the appropriateness of a company’s CSR activities [
32,
33]. Numerous prior studies have proposed that a high-fit CSR program might facilitate the acceptance of the CSR activity because it can be more easily integrated into the consumer’s existing cognitive structure (i.e., schema), thus facilitating more fluent information processing [
31,
34]. Thus, consumers minimize their skepticism of corporate motives and are more likely to infer the company’s altruistic motives. Consequently, their favorable attitude toward the company would be enhanced [
31,
35].
However, a high-fit CSR program does not necessarily lead to a positive outcome. Drumwright [
32] suggested that a high-fit CSR program heightens selfish attribution by associating it with a company’s profitability or benefits. Thus, a high fit between a company and cause may emphasize the company’s opportunism, which yields a greater number of elaborations on CSR programs. This leads to more skeptical motives for CSR programs and negative reactions among stakeholders [
22,
32].
In the context of stigmatized industries, when CSR initiatives fit with the company’s core business, this may increase the salience of the cause and draw consumers’ attention because of its contradiction to the company’s core business. Additionally, it potentially serves as a reminder of companies’ inherent harm to society [
10]. Thus, a high-fit CSR program would expectedly stimulate the cognitive elaboration of a CSR message. Accordingly, a high level of elaboration may activate consumers’ knowledge of the self-serving motives of CSR and weaken their belief in the altruistic motives of CSR.
Therefore, when congruence is high in CSR initiatives of stigmatized industries, consumers are less likely to attribute altruistic motives, which may deteriorate the effects of CSR. In comparison, an incongruent condition may not generate as many elaborations as congruence would and thus may minimize the judgment of corporate motive and facilitate the acceptance of the CSR message. Thus, when stigmatized industries achieve incongruence, consumers are more likely to infer altruistic motives for CSR initiatives.
In addition, corporate credibility and attitude reportedly play important roles in determining advertising outcome variables [
36,
37]. Corporate credibility is conceptualized as a part of corporate reputation and proposes “expertise” and “trustworthiness” as important elements [
38]. A previous study examining the relationship between CSR and corporate credibility showed the positive effect of CSR on corporate credibility and brand equity as well as on participation intention [
39,
40]. Previous studies on sponsorship effects have indicated that the congruent pairing of sponsors and events leads to positive consumer attitudes toward the sponsor [
14,
22]. Additionally, several studies on CSR have supported the idea that CSR activities affect evaluations of the company [
18,
19,
22].
However, in the context of stigmatized industries, consistent with the logic of attribution of corporate motive, congruence is expected to generate lower corporate credibility and a more negative attitude toward the company than incongruence. Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated:
H1. Congruent CSR activities will generate (a) stronger self-serving motive attribution, (b) weaker altruistic motive attribution, (c) lower corporate credibility, and (d) a more negative attitude toward the company than incongruent CSR activities in stigmatized industries.
2.3. CSR Initiative Type
Scholars have identified diverse types of CSR initiatives and explored how such diversity influences consumer attributions and evaluations [
18,
39,
41,
42,
43]. Kotler and Lee [
44] classified CSR initiatives into six activity types: corporate social marketing, cause promotion, cause-related marketing, corporate philanthropy, community volunteering, and socially responsible business practice [
40]. Among the six CSR initiative types, cause-related marketing, a popular CSR activity, uses sales business revenue to promote a specific cause [
44]. Cause-related marketing is defined as “the process of formulating and implementing marketing activities that are characterized by an offer from the firm to contribute a specified amount to a designated cause when customers engage in revenue-providing exchanges that satisfy organizational and individual objectives” [
45] (p. 60).
Previous research has yielded mixed results on the effects of cause-related marketing on consumer attribution. Some studies have found that consumers attribute cause-related marketing as a selfish motive because it benefits the firm before donations are given to the cause [
42,
46,
47]. Other studies have found that cause-related marketing might drive consumers to attribute altruistic motives because they view it as a natural and ordinary business promotion that focuses on the purchase of products [
18,
48,
49].
Advocacy advertising is another important CSR activity that should be examined in the context of stigmatized product manufacturers. Advocacy advertising is a marketing communication tool that influences public opinion and behavior on a sociopolitical issue [
36]. It focuses on a social message and is unrelated to the direct purchase of a sponsor’s product. Such advertising often includes messages encouraging consumers to engage in social issues, including racial equality, world hunger, and the green movement [
39,
41]. Typically, advocacy advertising supports a brand’s social responsibility program and demonstrates activism regarding a sociopolitical issue of public interest [
41]. From a marketing perspective, this type of advertising is considered unconditional because it is not linked to direct revenue-producing transactions with a company [
42].
The present study investigates the effects of two different types of CSR initiatives in the domain of stigmatized industries: cause-related marketing and advocacy advertising. Given that cause-related marketing is a charitable donation and marketing strategy that benefits the firm, it displays a more explicit commercial nature than advocacy advertising. For stigmatized industries, cause-related marketing may lead to a greater cognitive elaboration of a message, suggesting that the worthy cause of cause-related marketing comes from the purchase of socially harmful products, which seems inconsistent or contradictory. Hence, cause-related marketing may increase the likelihood of consumer inferences that a company has fewer altruistic motives for supporting the cause.
Conversely, advocacy advertising communicates to raise awareness of a social issue [
39] and appears to offer a less explicit commercial benefit to the firm because it is independent of the sale of products and focuses on a philanthropic issue. Without the appearance of salient corporate profit, consumers may rely on a relatively basic cognitive elaboration process and accept the message of advocacy advertising at face value. This would draw stronger attributions of an altruistic motive and weaker attributions of a self-serving motive to the firm. In addition, a cause-related marketing format will expectedly decrease corporate credibility and attitude toward the company more than advocacy advertising. These conjectures lead to the following hypothesis:
H2. CSR activities with cause-related marketing will generate (a) stronger self-serving motive attribution, (b) weaker altruistic motive attribution, (c) lower corporate credibility, and (d) a more negative attitude toward the company than CSR activities with advocacy advertising in stigmatized industries.
Moreover, the congruence may vary depending on the type of CSR activities. When congruence is combined with the type of CSR activities, the congruence is more likely to activate the knowledge of stronger self-serving and weaker altruistic motive attribution if the type of CSR activity is cause-related marketing rather than advocacy advertising. Subsequently, congruence may generate lower corporate credibility and a more negative attitude toward the company when such CSR program is related with cause-related marketing than advocacy advertising. Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated:
H3. Congruent CSR activities will generate (a) stronger self-serving motive attribution, (b) weaker altruistic motive attribution, (c) lower corporate credibility, and (d) a more negative attitude toward the company for cause-related marketing than advocacy advertising.
2.4. Product Type
Previous research has shown that product type might have different effects on individuals’ charitable behaviors. A widely accepted product type distinction in the literature is hedonic versus utilitarian products [
50]. Strahilevitz and Myers [
51] found that products perceived as pleasure-oriented and frivolous stimulated more altruistic motivations than those viewed as goal-oriented and practical. For instance, hedonic products (e.g., a hot fudge sundae) tend to evoke both pleasure and guilt, whereas utilitarian products (e.g., a box of laundry detergent) usually evoke neither of these emotions. Thus, consumers are more likely to be motivated to be altruistic and donate to charity when it is associated with a hedonic product to lessen the feeling of guilt derived from the purchase of the latter.
In the domain of stigmatized industries, hedonic goods (e.g., alcohol, video games) are affect-based products that provide experiential consumption, fun, pleasure, and excitement. Utilitarian goods (e.g., oil, plastic bags) are cognitively driven instrumental products, and their functional aspects motivate their purchase. Although both hedonic and utilitarian goods belong to the stigmatized industry sector, hedonic goods may be perceived more negatively because the undesirable consequences of using them stem from unnecessary impulsive wants, with anticipated resulting damages in the long term [
52,
53]. Compared with hedonic products, consumers normally consume utilitarian products not for fun or pleasure, but out of necessity [
52,
53]. Although consuming such products yields negative outcomes, they are necessary for living, and alternatives rarely exist. Thus, utilitarian products are perceived less negatively than hedonic products.
Following the same logic as for H1 and H2, we expect that the CSR initiated by hedonic stigmatized industries may generate less altruistic and more self-serving motives, and less credible and more negative attitudes toward these firms’ CSR activities. On the contrary, CSR efforts by utilitarian industries may minimize judgment about corporate motive and facilitate the acceptance of the CSR message. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H4. CSR activities by hedonic stigmatized industries will generate (a) stronger self-serving motive attribution, (b) weaker altruistic motive attribution, (c) lower corporate credibility, and (d) a more negative attitude toward the company than CSR activities by utilitarian stigmatized industries.
As consumers are highly aware of the potential social losses linked with hedonic stigmatized industries and the severity of the undesirable consequences of their use or overuse, on the one hand, consumers may be even more sensitive and resistant to CSR activities by hedonic stigmatized industries when the congruence is high.
On the other hand, utilitarian products are necessary for living, and finding alternatives to such products is difficult. The nature of utilitarian products means that CSR activities performed by the industries thereof may not be perceived as negatively as those performed by hedonic stigmatized industries, even when congruence exists. Therefore, the effects of congruence may be more salient among hedonic stigmatized industries than those of utilitarian stigmatized industries. These predictions are formally hypothesized as follows:
H5. The effects of cause–company congruence on (a) self-serving motive attribution, (b) altruistic motive attribution, (c) corporate credibility, and (d) attitude toward the company will be greater for hedonic stigmatized industries than for utilitarian stigmatized industries.
5. Discussion
The present research contributes to our understanding of the key roles of cause–company congruence, CSR type, and product type in determining CSR effectiveness in stigmatized industries. Numerous companies in stigmatized industries actively engage in CSR initiatives, hoping for consumers to draw positive inferences about their CSR initiatives. However, according to attribution theory, consumers will not draw these positive inferences when they suspect that CSR activities are non-altruistic or self-serving. Thus, without enhancing consumers’ perceptions of altruism regarding the company’s CSR motives, stigmatized industries may have difficulty overcoming their poor image through CSR activities.
The first study examined the role of cause–company congruence based on functional similarity as a factor that influences consumers’ motives for CSR in stigmatized industries. The findings of this study confirm that congruence has significant main effects on consumer response. This suggests that CSR congruence is more negatively associated with a firm’s altruistic motives for CSR, credibility, and attitude than CSR incongruence in stigmatized industries. Thus, when stigmatized industries have an incongruent rather than congruent match with a cause, consumers attribute more altruistic motives to their CSR, perceive higher corporate credibility, and demonstrate a more positive attitude toward the company. This shows that CSR activities are relatively fruitful when companies have cause–company incongruence in stigmatized industries.
In terms of the effects of the CSR type on consumers’ evaluations of a company, no significant effects were found. The type of CSR initiatives, namely, cause-related marketing or advocacy advertising, does not influence consumers’ perceived altruistic motives, credibility, or attitudes. One possible explanation is that consumers’ negative perceptions of stigmatized industries are too salient; therefore, the type of CSR activities does not meaningfully influence their cynical perceptions. Additionally, consumers use advertisers’ persuasion knowledge to make assumptions about persuasion attempts [
33]. It is difficult for consumers to differentiate the type of CSR activities because they are familiar with diverse types of CSR activities, including cause-related marketing and advocacy [
39].
The second study further investigated the role of product type in relation to congruence in the effects of CSR activities. Product type exerts significant main effects on altruistic motive attributions, as well as on corporate credibility and attitude. This means that when hedonic stigmatized industries engage in CSR activities, consumers perceive lower altruistic motives than for CSR activities by utilitarian stigmatized industries.
Moreover, there is a marginally significant interaction effect between product type and congruence on consumer response. Hedonic stigmatized industries supporting a high fit CSR program have less favorable outcomes than utilitarian stigmatized industries do. This finding shows that although hedonic stigmatized industries suffer from a poor image because of the nature of their products, CSR activities, especially those paired with congruent causes, might not be a desirable strategic option. In contrast, for utilitarian stigmatized industries, CSR activities with incongruent causes might be a better option.
Theoretically, this study extends attribution theory by applying it to CSR activities in stigmatized industries. The findings of this study suggest that consumer attribution of a firm’s CSR motives plays a key role in determining the success of CSR programs of stigmatized industries. This study confirms that consumers tend to attribute less altruistic motives, and this may lead to negative CSR effects when companies have high-fit CSR programs and they are hedonic stigmatized industries.
Another significant theoretical implication of this study is to extend the understanding of congruence effects in stigmatized industries. Prior research shows mixed findings due to complex dimensions of congruence [
6,
7,
9,
12]. The findings of this study demonstrate the role of congruence in controversial industries by showing how the congruence based on a functional match between the product and the cause negatively influences consumer perceptions of the company and its CSR initiatives.
Managerially, these findings have implications for the CSR activities of stigmatized industries. Managers of stigmatized industries may need to strategically select incongruent causes to ensure the effectiveness of their CSR activities. Moreover, if such products have utilitarian characteristics, an incongruent cause will be more rewarding than if their products are hedonic.
Further, this study has implications for the managers of non-profit organizations. By partnering with stigmatized manufacturers that support CSR, non-profit organizations should analyze the costs and benefits of CSR collaboration [
56]. Given the findings of this study, nonprofit organization managers should consider their stigmatized corporate partners based on congruence and type of product to prevent possible negative effects (e.g., mission integrity).
Furthermore, this study highlights important implications for policymakers. Some studies have shown that Philip Morris’ anti-smoking campaign may not only increase the likelihood of children smoking [
57,
58] but can also be used to promote its product indirectly and gain some benefits in paying taxes or creating jobs [
59]. In this regard, researchers and policymakers could investigate whether their CSR campaigns have goals other than to influence consumers. Thus, they need to pay attention to such issues and develop strict CSR guidelines for stigmatized industries.
Despite our contributions, this study also has some limitations that call for future research. This study used fictitious companies and convenience samples, which limits its external validity. Further research concerning real companies and random sampling is suggested to better identify the degree of generalizability of the findings. Moreover, the present study did not include control variables in examining the CSR effects in stigmatized industries. In the future, it would be beneficial to examine the effect of CSR considering some control variables, such as attitudes toward advertising, involvement in CSR, prior product knowledge and affect toward advertising stimuli.
An interesting topic for future research may involve identifying other variables that might affect consumer response to CSR activities in stigmatized industries. For example, Patagonia and Ben & Jerry have consistently donated a significant portion of their profits to several activism groups for a long time. Considering their commitment to CSR activities, it would be interesting to examine whether and how consumers perceive the level of time and amount of money as authenticity of CSR initiatives in stigmatized industries.
Another interesting variable for future research is the corporate governance issue in examining CSR effects in stigmatized industries. Corporate governance is one of the important criteria for stakeholders, and it embraces some issues including the diversity of the board of directors, disclosure policy, and ownership structure [
60,
61,
62]. As corporate governance can greatly influence consumer perceptions of the company, how these factors might interact with consumer response to CSR efforts of stigmatized industries could be of great interest to both researchers and managers.
6. Conclusions
The CSR engagement of stigmatized industries has been a topic of great interest in recent years, because concerns regarding sustainability are especially urgent for these industries [
4,
6,
7]. This study expands the findings of the CSR literature on stigmatized industries by examining the effect of congruence, CSR type, and product type on consumer response. The first study showed that congruence has significant main effects on consumer response. This suggests that CSR congruence is more negatively associated with a firm’s altruistic motives for CSR, credibility, and attitude than CSR incongruence in stigmatized industries. However, the type of CSR initiative does not have a significant influence on consumer response in stigmatized industries.
In addition, the second study found that product type has a significant main effect on consumer response. The CSR initiatives of hedonic stigmatized industries are more negatively associated with a firm’s altruistic motives, credibility, and attitude toward the company than utilitarian stigmatized industries’ CSR initiatives. Moreover, there is a marginally significant interaction effect between product type and congruence on attitude toward the company. In other words, hedonic stigmatized industries supporting a CSR fit initiative have less favorable outcomes than utilitarian stigmatized industries.
Based on attribution theory, the current study sheds light on CSR initiatives of stigmatized industries, suggesting that consumer attribution should be a strategic option to maximize the positive effects of CSR initiatives. As stigmatized industries implement their CSR initiatives with incongruent causes, and the product type of industries is utilitarian, consumers’ evaluation of the company can be enhanced through the increase of altruistic motive attribution.