Next Article in Journal
Regenerating and Developing a National Botanical Garden (NBG) in Khartoum, Sudan: Effect on Urban Landscape and Environmental Sustainability
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of the Circular Economy Pilot Policy on Carbon Emissions in Chinese Cities and Its Underlying Mechanisms
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 17
10.3390/su16177862
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

Corporate Social Responsibility and Society 5.0: Assessing Consumer Awareness, Loyalty, and Trust toward Socially Responsible Organizations

by
Li Li
1 and
Jong-Yoon Li
2,*
1
School of Arts, Anyang Normal University, Anyang 455008, China
2
School of Media, Sangmyung University, Cheonan 31066, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(17), 7862; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177862
Submission received: 21 June 2024 / Revised: 11 August 2024 / Accepted: 26 August 2024 / Published: 9 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and Society 5.0 (s5.0) are transformative models that both seek a human-centric approach by integrating certain capabilities for the betterment of stakeholders. This study investigates the nexus among CSR, brand awareness, customer trust (CrT), the s5.0 model, and customer loyalty (CrL) from the perspective of a developing nation, China. Structural equation modeling using partial least squares was applied to a sample size of eight hundred and ninety-three (N = 893). First, the study confirmed a positive relationship between CSR, brand awareness, and customer loyalty. Second, the study revealed a positive linkage through the mediation of customer trust. Finally, a moderating effect of the s5.0 model was found at the nexus of CSR, brand awareness, and brand loyalty. This study provides several insights into corporate social responsibility, brand awareness, and brand loyalty with additional facts on how customer trust and Society 5.0 may play important roles in engaging stakeholders such as customers in the present era. Therefore, managers should prioritize CSR along with Society 5.0 practices that can help to win over customers and elicit their loyalty and trust toward organizations.

1. Introduction

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reflects a company’s commitment to ethical behavior, environmental sustainability, and social impact [1]. It is claimed that, beyond profit-making, CSR entails integrating responsible practices into business operations, fostering positive relationships with communities, and contributing to societal well-being. It enhances a company’s reputation, attracts socially conscious consumers, and drives long-term sustainability. Corporate sustainability is defined as a process in which a firm manages social, financial, and environmental duties and responsibilities to achieve sustainable growth [2,3]. In the statement by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in 1987, which discussed research on sustainability that was in the initial stages, experts attributed significant importance to sustainability, and they have since discovered factors in different contexts and dimensions to achieve sustainability, including social aspects, ecological aspects, and economic aspects [4,5,6]. However, Society 5.0 technologies (s5.0) represent the fifth stage of societal evolution, which mostly emphasizes the integration of cutting-edge technologies. Their importance lies in their potential to address pressing global challenges [7]. Society 5.0 technologies can enhance healthcare, education, environmental sustainability, and other aspects of human life. Society 5.0 envisions inclusivity by reducing the digital divide and promoting social cohesion.
Likewise, customer loyalty is a business’s most important asset [8]. It shows a customer’s dedication to repeatedly choosing a specific brand or product over its competitors. It is claimed that loyal customers not only contribute to consistent revenue but also act as brand advocates by promoting the company to others [9]. It is asserted that building and maintaining customer loyalty involves delivering exceptional customer experiences, personalization, consistent quality, and effective communication. In an era of competition, customer loyalty is a testimony to a brand’s trustworthiness and competence to conform to the evolving needs and expectations of customers by fostering lasting relationships. Customer trust is the cornerstone of a successful business [9]. Customer trust can foster brand loyalty, repeat sales, and positive word-of-mouth [10,11]. According to experts, trust can be earned through consistent quality, transparent communication, and the fulfillment of promises. It shields a brand from reputational damage, which makes it a critical asset for long-term success and customer relationships [12].
The logic of achieving and using these variables in a developing nation, such as China, should be stated. Empirical research on CSR in the context of brand awareness and customer loyalty is critical [13,14]. It offers evidence-based information on the performance of CSR strategies, which will help organizations make informed decisions [14]. This study can reveal the most effective channels and messages to optimize marketing activities. In addition, it provides a clear connection between CSR, brand recognition, and customer loyalty by providing a deeper understanding of how they are related and determining the strategies that should be used in marketing for a more successful campaign. Studying Society 5.0 in the domain of CSR is important because it links technological advancement to society. Society 5.0 is an integration of AI and IoT for businesses based on CSR that focuses on societally relevant problems. Applying the features of this model assists organizations in creating CSR programs that not only are based on ethical values but also utilize innovative solutions to contend with global issues and drive the process of sustainable development in a proper balance with economic growth [15]. In the same manner, the empirical investigation of Society 5.0 in the brand awareness and customer loyalty context is important since this new concept merges technology with society [7,16]. Comprehension of its influence on these areas can advise marketing tactics. Thus, this study contributes to defining concrete channels and techniques that are in line with the principles of Society 5.0 and help in effective brand building [16]. This research reveals how a revolution in society affects the fidelity of clients, improving the ability of businesses to evolve by upgrading their offers and the development of a genuine CRM in the present mutating environment. Further, customer loyalty and trust are subjects of empirical research that is highly crucial, as both of these factors define the success of a business [17,18]. By delving into empirical data, this study tries to uncover the specific drivers of loyalty and trust, which may eventually allow companies to tailor their strategies accordingly. This research provides insights into customer behavior and preferences that will support businesses in building stronger as well as more meaningful connections. This study may help to identify potential areas of improvement, enhancing customer retention and long-term brand resilience in today’s competitive and rapidly evolving market. Most previous studies were conducted in developed nations without an empirical focus; however, this study attempts to empirically demonstrate the outcomes based on these variables from the perspective of China, a developing nation.
China, the world’s most populous nation, having >1.41 billion people, is renowned for its rich history, culture, and economic growth [19,20]. Its influence spans global politics, technology, manufacturing, and trade. Chinese customers are crucial for the global economy. China’s massive consumer base offers significant opportunities for businesses across the world. The purchasing power of Chinese consumers influences various industries [21]. Understanding and catering to the preferences and needs of Chinese consumers are key to success in the modern global marketplace [21]. It is also worth noting that the level of brand awareness among Chinese consumers varies widely. For instance, in major urban areas, several consumers are highly aware of both domestic and international brands. However, in rural regions, awareness may be lower than in urban areas. This study attempts to meet certain objectives as mentioned below by showing the deep analysis of CSR, Society 5.0 (s5.0), customer awareness (CrA), customer loyalty (CrL), and customer trust (CrT).
First, this study uncovers the connection between CSR and brand awareness from the perspective of China. Second, this study examines the connection between CSR and customer loyalty. Third, this study tries to observe the direct connection between CSR on customer trust. Fourth, the aim is to explore the mediating influence of customer trust between CSR and brand awareness. Fifth, the aim is to explore the mediating influence of customer trust between CSR and customer loyalty. Sixth, this study tries to uncover the mediating nexus of Society 5.0 among the relationships of CSR, brand awareness, and customer loyalty, respectively. To this end, this study is divided into certain sections for clarity such as follows. This study presents a literature review along with hypotheses development after this introductory section. Thereafter, the section on adopted methodologies is carefully mentioned, along with detailed techniques and tools. This study presents results, along with a discussion, after the Methodology section. The final section is based on implications both managerially and theoretically. This study also presents concluding lines, limitations, and future research possibilities for researchers.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

2.1. Theoretical Support

The literature has witnessed a range of theories related to customer, customer engagement, and customer loyalty. For instance, customer engagement theory (CET) is a contemporary marketing concept that underscores the importance of cultivating deep and interactive relationships between brands and customers [22,23]. This conceptual framework goes beyond traditional loyalty by focusing on emotional connections and two-way interactions [24]. It is hypothesized that CET theory indicates that customers who are committed customers are converted into loyal customers [25]. It includes such things as personalized communication, social media involvement, community creation, and top customer satisfaction [26,27]. Furthermore, interacting will support a business in creating brand loyalty, raising customer satisfaction, and popularizing a brand image of consumerism [27]. CET helps researchers in conducting and promoting the brand, providing feedback, and giving crucial insights [24]. This principle deals with the creation of the customer experience and the emotion that the users have regarding the product, making the users more attached to the specific brand [22]. CET aims to adhere to the principles that can increase customer value [22].
Furthermore, lots of researchers have been pointing out the validity of the CET justification and practice from various aspects. In e-commerce, it was found that engaged customers have higher loyalty, number of purchases, and willingness to refer to friends. Indeed, studies on e-commerce have demonstrated that loyal customers are likely to make follow-up purchases and spend more over time [22,23]. CET theory prompts empirical inquiry by offering a clear scope to investigate customer–brand interaction [23]. It provides a systematized method to measure and analyze engagement levels, which influences the loyalty of the customers. Therefore, this theory is useful to develop hypotheses for more detailed empirical research to understand consumer behavior. In such supporting arguments, we suggest the specific relationships indicated in Figure 1.

2.2. Hypotheses Formation

2.2.1. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Brand Awareness (BrA)

The associations between CSR and brand awareness may be intricate and interrelated [22]. CSR is a philosophy for achieving coherence and helping to support distinct stakeholders [3]. Nonetheless, brand awareness is the degree to which a brand is known and recalled by customers [28]. CSR effectiveness in shaping BrA can be explained in some ways. It is logical to assume that a successful CSR approach will result in a higher BrA [29]. Brands that use a single message and visuals in all communication channels enhance brand recognition and awareness among the audience [30]. CSR encompasses integrating different communication platforms, including advertising, public relations, social media, and content marketing [31]. Likewise, CSR stresses message consistency, which helps the brand strengthen its main values and identity [31]. Furthermore, CSR activities improve the image of the firm in the market, which eventually helps to increase brand awareness among the public [32,33]. It is also advocated that an organization that highly incorporates CSR practices can better create brand awareness among different stakeholders [33]. According to experts, improving brand awareness is the key to success for organizations, whereas focusing on CSR can support achieving such capability for the organizations. It is also worth mentioning that organizations that highly emphasize CSR practices are more active in creating brand awareness [34].
The more consistent the messaging across distinct platforms, the stronger BrA helps to remember and recognize the brand [35]. It is claimed that a higher engagement with consumers can lead to higher BrA [28]. A relationship might be formed whereby brands that actively engage with their audience through CSR strategies will experience increased awareness because of increased word of mouth (WOM) [36]. It is stated that effective CSR can build a strong emotional connection with consumers [1,37]. Brands that evoke loyalty and advocacy through their CSR campaigns may experience higher brand awareness as loyal customers are more likely to promote the brand [37]. It is noteworthy that these relationships might vary based on industry, audience, and particular tactics that were employed using CSR [38,39]. On the other hand, customer engagement theory (CET) stresses the function of lively interaction between brands and the customer [22,23,24]. In this regard, another argument is that the imminent online marketing research is valuable not only in terms of customers’ attraction from different online channels but also in revealing the most successful methods of doing so. Because of the supporting facts of CET theory and hypothesized relationships, the researcher now put forward the following hypothesis.
H1: 
Corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with brand awareness.

2.2.2. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Customer Loyalty (CrL)

The possible associations of CSR and CrL are very intricate and multi-layered due to different circumstances and elements [36]. CSR allows companies to present their unique and uniform branding in each channel they use (e.g., advertising, social media, email, online store, and in-store experiences). It might have the tendency to yield positive outcomes for CrL by keeping their trust and bonding the CrL with a particular brand. Due to the importance of customer loyalty toward organizations, well-implemented CSR strategies can lead to increased CrL [40]. For example, if customers or consumers feel that they are more engaged with a brand due to consistent and relevant messaging, they are more likely to be loyal to that specific brand [41]. Moreover, a well-coordinated marketing approach can bring about superior consumer experiences [21]. Brand detection and recall could be reinforced by CSR, creating an integrated and memorable brand image [28]. Corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with customer loyalty [42,43]. For example, when companies engage in ethical practices, community support, and environmental sustainability, it helps build trust and a positive image among consumers [43]. Similarly, customers are more likely to support and remain loyal to particular brands that align with their values [44]. It is claimed that effective CSR initiatives may create emotional connections that eventually can better enhance customer loyalty and prefer to associate with brands that demonstrate a commitment to societal well-being [45,46]. It is recommended that clients who easily recognize and recall a brand are more likely to be loyal. CSR can communicate the value proposition of a product or service more effectively, which eventually helps to bring customer loyalty [22]. Authentic communication using the CSR technique can build trust and credibility with customers [1,36] because trust is a fundamental element of customer loyalty [37]. It is advocated that personalized messages and offers based on customer preferences can enhance loyalty since customers feel appreciated [1]. It is important to note that the correlation between CSR and customer loyalty can vary based on the industry, the specific strategies, and the unique characteristics of the target audience [47,48]. Therefore, empirical research is often necessary to establish the precise nature of the relationship in a particular context. Based on supporting arguments, we currently assume the following proposition to examine the interplay between CSR and customer loyalty.
H2: 
Corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with customer loyalty.

2.2.3. Mediation of Customer Trust (CrT)

A mediation relationship of customer trust (CrT) helps clarify the underlying mechanism by revealing how and why the relationship between CSR, brand awareness, and customer loyalty occurs by providing insights into the causal pathway [1,11,36,47]. Customer trust plays a crucial role as a mediator between corporate social responsibility and customer loyalty [11]. When companies engage in CSR, they build trust by demonstrating a commitment to ethical practices and social values [49,50]. This trust serves as a bridge through enhancing the positive impact of CSR on customer loyalty [50]. Moreover, as trust is established, customers are more likely to feel secure and satisfied with the specific brand, which eventually leads to increased loyalty and long-term relationships [51]. It is revealed that CSR efforts positively impact brand awareness, whereby consistent and integrated messaging across various channels may also enhance brand visibility [52]. According to researchers, effective CSR capabilities foster CrT by conveying a cohesive and trustworthy brand image [36,47]. Hence, customer trust is expected to mediate the relationship between CSR and brand awareness [5]. If the trust of the customers increases due to CSR, then customers are more likely to recall and recognize the brand, which supports elevating brand awareness [47,52]. It is suggested by the scholar that customer trust acts as a bridge by explaining how CSR impacts the brand by maintaining customer trust [37]. However, several scholars agree that empirical research is needed to validate relationships in a specific context [53]. This relationship as a mediator highlights the importance of customer trust between CSR and brand awareness [25]. It highlights that building and maintaining trust through consistent messaging and positive customer experiences is a key strategy for brands seeking to enhance their visibility and recognition in the market, ultimately improving brand awareness [1,25,41].
On the other hand, this model supports the idea that trust is a pivotal intermediary that helps explain how CSR efforts can lead to enhanced customer loyalty [36]. This relationship underscores the significance of trust-building strategies within the CSR framework for fostering long-term and sustainable customer loyalty [16]. A study confirmed that CSR positively influences customer trust by delivering consistent and reliable brand messages [47]. Likewise, customer trust is expected to have a positive impact on customer loyalty since researchers suggested that trust often leads to a stronger customer relationship [54]. It is also confirmed that effective CSR builds trust, which helps to increase customer loyalty [39]. In these relationships, the role of customer trust as a mediator emphasizes an important tie between CSR and customer loyalty [11]. Therefore, CSR is expected to directly influence customer trust by increasing trust through consistent and authentic communication [11,31]. Another study confirms the mediation of customer trust and indicates that maintaining trust is a crucial factor in securing customer loyalty [47]. Hence, based on supporting arguments regarding customer trust as a mediator in terms of CSR, brand awareness, and customer loyalty, we currently assume the following hypotheses to explore the link of customer trust.
H3: 
Corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with customer trust.
H4: 
Corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with brand awareness through the mediation of customer trust.
H5: 
Corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with customer loyalty through the mediation of customer trust.

2.2.4. Moderation of Society 5.0 Model of Technologies

The idea of Society 5.0 is a new concept that supports a society with a human-centered model, where advanced technologies are the important elements to support such a society [7]. The aim of the Society 5.0 paradigm is the integrated use of physical and virtual worlds to solve societal problems [55]. The Society 5.0 model envisions a future where technology and human well-being are harmoniously integrated by creating a super-smart society that discusses social challenges through innovation [56,57]. Moreover, Society 5.0 emphasizes balancing economic advancement with societal needs by leveraging IoT, AI, and big data for the benefit of the public [57]. As a moderator, Society 5.0 can optimize the relationship between CSR and societal impact by ensuring that CSR initiatives are well aligned with technological advancements and societal goals by advancing a more inclusive and resilient society [15,58]. In essence, the concept refers to an environmentally friendly, innovative, and inclusive society that provides equal opportunities for everyone and combines economic growth, improved living conditions, and environmental harmony. Society 5.0 can incorporate “quantity quality” as an intermediary model between CSR and brand awareness [7,55]. The superior technologies and digital assimilation in Society 5.0 can support the enhancement of this efficiency [59]. As contemporary tools are employed for digital marketing campaigns, the efforts are directed to the desired audiences in a more efficient way, which can hopefully bring more awareness to the brand [40]. In this way, Society 5.0 plays the role of an intermediary because it creates the necessary environment, the technological architecture, and the digital realm where brand awareness is powered through CSR [60]. As a result, Society 5.0 uses advanced technology such as AI, IoT, and big data, which indicates that personalization and efficiency are possible. This enhances the precision and customer-friendly nature of the correspondences and increases the likelihood of successful trust creation and loyalty over the long term [25].
Society 5.0 fosters digital customer experiences in a more productive manner [7]. Customers are more likely to have positive interactions with a brand that belongs to user-friendly platforms [7,41,60]. Through technology, CSR strategies allow responses to the customers immediately. Society 5.0′s focus on instant connectivity enables brands to address customer needs promptly, reinforcing trust and loyalty [7,41,57,60]. Society 5.0′s technological advancements and focus on digital integration can moderate the relationship between CSR and customer loyalty by providing the tools and infrastructure to enhance CSR’s impact on building trust, awareness, and engagement, all of which are vital components of customer loyalty in the present digital age [36,57]. Hence, based on supporting arguments regarding Society 5.0, we currently assume the following hypotheses to explore the role of Society 5.0 as a moderator.
H6: 
Society 5.0 technologies moderate the relationships between CSR and brand awareness.
H7: 
Society 5.0 technologies moderate the relationships between CSR and customer loyalty.

3. Methodology

3.1. Data Gathering and Sampling

In this study, the authors developed and circulated questionnaires to twelve hundred respondents within the Chinese market from January 2024 to March 2024 using random distribution [61] by following formula suggested by Krejcie et al. [62].
n = N · Z 2 · p · ( 1 − p ) E 2 · ( N − 1 ) + Z 2 · p · ( 1 − p )
The random dissemination of a questionnaire is a process in which the survey is executed without any particular order or favoritism. It guarantees that every potential respondent has an equal probability to be part of the survey and therefore reduces selection bias and improves the survey’s representativeness for the target population. For data collection, the authors used an internet-based circulation of the questionnaires along with personal visiting approach. To begin with, the online tool was WeChat, which is among the leading applications in China. China has been using WeChat for data collection, and it is extremely important tool due to the large number of users and its popularity [63]. The use of WeChat ensures that the demographic group covered is broader and more representative since data collection is facilitated. In addition, the features of WeChat facilitate interaction and promptness. Therefore, the platform is good for collecting useful information in the tech-savvy nation [64]. Second, the authors also employed the conventional method of data collection in order to expedite the process of data collection.
Moreover, the five-point Likert scale was used to record the data. Due to a higher acceptability, the 5-point Likert scale is essential in data collection [65]. It offers a balanced range of response options, which allows experts to have a more nuanced and precise interpretation of data. This scale minimizes response bias and provides statistical validity by offering greater insights into respondents’ attitudes and opinions. From the selected sample size, we obtained nine hundred and thirty questionnaires. Hence, after removing improperly handled questionnaires, we finally used a total of eight hundred ninety-two (N = 892) for data analysis. The questionnaire was based on two major parts, key inquiry-related and demographic questions, as reported in Table 1 below.

3.2. Pilot Plan

Additionally, it is good to conduct the trial by taking a small population before a large-scale survey, which will allow the researchers to obtain better and more fruitful results [51]. With regard to the above-stated objective, fifty-five (n = 55) questionnaires were completed for this purpose, and results are evaluated with the standard measures as per recommendations. The values are accurate, where CSR stood at 0.711, Society 5.0 stood at 0.778, brand awareness stood at 0.810, customer trust stood at 0.821, and customer loyalty stood at 0.725, respectively. All these values confirmed the normality of the variables based on the Cronbach alpha of each factor [66,67].

3.3. Measures

First, scales for CSR were accessed using 42 items from the previous studies of the researchers [68]. Second, scales for Society 5.0 were accessed using 10 items, as adopted from the previous studies [55]. Third, scales for BrA were accessed using 3 items, as adopted from the previous experts’ studies [69]. Fourth, scales for CrT were accessed using 6 items, as adopted from the previous studies [70]. Finally, scales for CrL were accessed using 8 items, as adopted from previous studies [71]. In addition, all the adopted scales, along with sources, are reported in Table 2 below.

3.4. Data Analysis Techniques

To perform the initial analysis, we used descriptive statistics to find out the fundamental details concerning the participants (see Table 1). In this study, a correlation testing approach was used in order to analyze the interconnection (Table 3). Third, discriminant validity was computed and tested with consideration of two procedures, Fornel and Lacker along with HTMT [58,59]. Similar to this, to seek validity, the convergent validity approach was performed as per the suggested standard procedures, like AVEs, loadings, and assessment of reliability [60]. Further, to confirm the path directions of the relationships, SEM using SmartPLS software (version 4.1.0.7) was finally employed. Thus, it is necessary to calculate the values of NFI and to confirm the validity of the model—SEM [60,61]. According to experts, these techniques are best to identify the direction of the proposed relationships, as several researchers have already applied similar tools to obtain results over the past decades [37,38,39].

4. Results

4.1. Analysis of Pearson’s Correlation

The status of the correlation analysis results, as presented in Table 3 below, confirms the correlation between the proposed variables of this study. Pearson’s correlation analysis is the statistical technique used to establish the direction of the correlation of currently studied variables like CSR, BrA, CrL, CsT, and s5.0. It offers an indicator that can vary between −1 and +1.

4.2. Model of Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity is a crucial aspect of identifying the validity of the dataset, as conceptualized by past experts [72] and also mentioned in Table 4 below. It assesses the extent to which constructs are different from one another. The validity of this index is usually assessed by statistical methods such as factor loadings, AVEs, and reliability tests. Discriminant validity indicates that the results of AVE square roots will be greater than the interrelationships of the latent variables [72,73,74,75].

4.3. Heterotrait–Monotrait (HTMT)

HTMT, given in Table 5, is a measure used to test another validity between constructs such as CSR, BrA, CrL, CsT, and s5.0. It contrasts the correlations among different constructs (heterotrait) with those within the same construct (monotrait). The criteria suggest that lower HTMT values suggest stronger validity (<0.9). It is worth noting that HTMT is a widely accepted technique that affirms the validity of the data by exploring for similarities [74].

4.4. Convergent Validity

Table 6 below supports the claim on convergent validity and also reveals reliability values, as well as other descriptions of means and standard deviations. According to the below-mentioned outcomes, loadings and AVE outcomes should exceed 0.5, while reliability values should be greater than 0.7 to determine the convergent validity [73,74]. Moreover, it assesses the degree to which different measures are theoretically expected to be related to the same construct to exhibit strong correlations. The current convergent validity is measured by AVEs and loadings, while reliability is measured by composite reliability.

4.5. Path Relationships Using SEM

Table 7 shows the outcome of the structural equation modeling (SEM) statistical technique that could be used in the social sciences field to analyze complex relationships among variables [76,77]. SEM combines factor analysis and regression analysis to examine causal relationships and latent constructs. It is valuable for testing and refining theoretical models, eventually making it an adaptable tool in research. It is endorsed that NFI and SRMR must be observed to detect the authenticity of the model. For instance, the values of NFI should be >0.9, and SRMR should be <0.08 [74,77]. The values of the current results are the best fit, as per recommendations, where NFI stood at 0.9145 and SRMR stood at 0.0230.

4.6. Discussion

In this research, seven hypotheses were proposed to measure the insights into corporate social responsibility (CSR), Society 5.0 (s5.0), customer awareness [22], customer loyalty (CrL), and customer trust (CrT). In the first hypothesis, it was assumed that CSR is positively associated with BrA (H1: CSR→BrA) from the perspective of China. The values, as shown in Table 6 and Figure 2, affirmed a positive connection between CSR and BrA at (β = 0.125; sig = 0.001; SE = 0.0102). Based on these outcomes, H1 is accepted, which shows CSR to be an essential element of brand awareness. In the second assumption, it was assumed that CSR is positively related to CrL (H2: CSR→CrL). The values affirmed a positive association between CSR and CrL at (β = 0.251; sig = 0.000; SE = 0.0482). Based on these outcomes, H2 is accepted, which indicates CSR as an essential element of customer loyalty. In the third hypothesis, it was assumed that CSR is positively related to CsT (H3: CSR→CsT). The values affirmed a positive connection between CSR and CsT at (β = 0.198; sig = 0.000; SE = 0.0250). Based on these outcomes, H3 is accepted, which indicates CSR as an essential element of customer trust. Our present outcomes using the SEM approach are closely relevant and consistent with the previous related studies in which experts concluded the positive connections of CSR in various perspectives and domains of the world [1,5,11,20,39,47,48,60,68].
In the fourth hypothesis, it was assumed that CSR is positively related to BrA with the mediation of CsT (H4: CSR→CsT→BrA). The values affirmed a positive mediation connection of CsT between CSR and BrA at (β = 0.325; sig = 0.002; SE = 0.0230). Based on these outcomes, H4 is accepted, which indicates that customer trust positively mediated the nexus between CSR and BrA. In the fifth hypothesis, it was assumed that CSR is positively related to CsL with mediation of CsT (H5: CSR→CsT→CsL). The values affirmed a positive mediation connection of CsT between CSR and CsL at (β = 0.258; sig = 0.000; SE = 0.0157). Based on these outcomes, H5 is accepted, which indicates that customer trust positively mediated the nexus between CSR and CsL. All these outcomes are closely consistent with previous related studies in which experts concluded a positive connection of CSR in various perspectives, such as customer trust [1,11,36,47,52,53]. Likewise, the study assumed two assumptions about the moderation of Society 5.0 (s5.0) among the nexus of CSR, BrA, and CsL. To this end, in the sixth hypothesis, it was assumed that s5.0 moderates the nexus between CSR and BrA (H6: CSR*s5.0→BrA). The values affirmed a positive moderation of the s5.0 model between CSR and BrA at (β = 0.057; sig = 0.001; SE = 0.0115). Based on these conclusions, H6 is accepted, which indicates that the s5.0 model positively moderated the nexus between CSR and BrA. Finally, it was presumed that s5.0 moderates the nexus between CSR and CsL (H7: CSR*s5.0→CsL). The values affirmed a positive moderation of the s5.0 model between CSR and CsL at (β = 0.156; sig = 0.000; SE = 0.0348). Based on these outcomes, H7 is accepted, which indicates that the s5.0 model positively moderates the nexus between CSR and CsL, respectively. Moreover, we controlled certain variables, and these variables helped to isolate the influence of extraneous factors on the relationship. On the other hand, these outcomes are closely relevant and consistent with previous related studies in which experts concluded a positive connection between Society 5.0 and various perspectives of the world [7,55,57,59,60].

5. Implications

This study empirically contributes to the literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR), Society 5.0 (s5.0), brand awareness, customer loyalty (CrL), and customer trust (CrT). This study revealed multidirectional outcomes that confirmed the significance of CSR toward brand awareness and customer loyalty with the consideration of certain factors. For example, a positive influence of CSR was observed toward brand awareness and customer loyalty, which confirms that corporations should adopt CSR to effectively assess brand awareness and customer loyalty. This study adds to the literature by showing that customer trust is another essential element that affects the relational strength of CSR and brand awareness. Likewise, customer trust also affects the relational intensity of corporate social responsibility and customer loyalty, respectively. This study is influential because it promotes the notion of CSR with additional empirical evidence from the Chinese domain.
From a management perspective, managers should recognize the significance of CSR, which involves proper care of their stakeholders, such as consumers and society. It is critical to comprehend that CSR plays an important role in creating consumer trust and reducing the impact of competitive forces on the organization. In this way, being ethical, socially active, and environmentally sustainable helps in carving favorable brand goodwill. It was found that people respond positively to companies that portray strong CSR, thereby improving the authenticity of the brands. Furthermore, organizations should voluntarily disclose their CSR activities, as these stimulate the feelings of the consumers and increase the likelihood of repeat patronage and continued patronage. Hence, CSR is not only performed for the general betterment of society but also aims to improve consumer relationships, which leads to continuous company success. Moreover, CSR takes advantage of the consumers to create a broader concept that includes all the stakeholders, such as employees, investors, and local societies. In the case of employees, CSR enhances organizational commitment and identification because they feel proud to be a part of it, which translates to high job satisfaction and reduced turnover. Through CSR, it is crucial to have stakeholder engagement to build and sustain a good image and partnership as well as strengthen the corporate objectives. Thus, CSR is used to develop a unique value that is aimed at generating a positive change and meaningful co-ordination of business activities with society’s objectives.
Society 5.0 concept is a dynamic and human-oriented technological progression that provides numerous managerial implications in terms of brand awareness. Managers should adopt socially responsible practices and technologies by matching brand values with social requirements. By showing habitude of improving society, brands can increase their beauty and create favorable brand awareness to the resonation of socially aware clients. It is also recommended that partnering with technology-driven projects and social enterprises can create chances for brands to make a positive contribution to society. Such an approach, Society 5.0, may also play an important role in CSR initiatives and brand awareness, which in turn leads to more socially responsible and informed consumers.

6. Conclusions

It is concluded that CSR is a major player in creating brand awareness and customer loyalty. It is concluded that CSR can better strengthen the emotional bond between a brand and its consumers, which also leads to more trust, customer retention, and long-term brand loyalty. It is found that CSR is a foundational model for building the trust of the consumers toward the organizations. It is concluded that socially responsible actions are far more appealing to consumers, building up trust and eliciting positive emotions. This trust tends to result in more loyalty, which is essential to guarantee the company’s constant sustainability. Moreover, Society 5.0 capabilities play a key role in brand awareness and customer loyalty. This study found a positive correlation between CSR and brand awareness and a positive relationship with customer loyalty. This study also found a direct connection between CSR and customer trust. The mediation of customer trust was found between the connection of CSR, brand awareness, and customer loyalty. Finally, this study provides important insights into CSR and Society 5.0 as a moderating force that influences the relational intensity among CSR, brand engagement, and customer loyalty.

Limitations and Future Work

This study bears certain limitations in terms of sampling and location-based collection of the data. These constraints may serve as mechanisms for future studies. For instance, carrying out a larger sample size in future studies will improve the generalizability of the current findings. This research is limited to China; therefore, future work can encompass various regions, both developing and developed economies, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of CSR, Society 5.0, brand awareness, customer loyalty, and customer trust. To gain a more holistic perspective, researchers should explore additional factors such as other mediating variables to assess the interrelationships understanding CSR, Society 5.0, brand awareness, customer loyalty, and customer trust. Another limitation of this study is the potential for selection bias since the researchers may focus on specific industries or demographics that eventually may support its generalizability. Finally, the authors can conduct a more comprehensive analysis, such as with consideration of kurtosis, range, or skew, in their coming studies to validate the current findings from other regions of the world to promote the notion of CSR and Society 5.0.

Author Contributions

L.L.: methodology; writing—review and editing; J.-Y.L.: conceptualization, writing—original draft preparation. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be available upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Lindgreen, A.; Swaen, V. Corporate social responsibility. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2010, 12, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nicolăescu, E.; Alpopi, C.; Zaharia, C. Measuring corporate sustainability performance. Sustainability 2015, 7, 851–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Atkinson, G. Measuring corporate sustainability. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2000, 43, 235–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Pereira, H.N. Contemporary trends in conservation: Culturalization, significance and sustainability. City Time 2007, 3, 15–25. [Google Scholar]
  5. Kolk, A. A decade of sustainability reporting: Developments and significance. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. Dev. 2004, 3, 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kavouras, S.; Vardopoulos, I.; Mitoula, R.; Zorpas, A.A.; Kaldis, P. Occupational health and safety scope significance in achieving sustainability. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nair, M.M.; Tyagi, A.K.; Sreenath, N. The future with industry 4.0 at the core of society 5.0: Open issues, future opportunities and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics (ICCCI), Coimbatore, India, 27–29 January 2021; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  8. Heskett, J.L. Beyond customer loyalty. Manag. Serv. Qual. Int. J. 2002, 12, 355–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Skogland, I.; Siguaw, J.A. Are your satisfied customers loyal? Cornell Hotel. Restaur. Adm. Q. 2004, 45, 221–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Leninkumar, V. The relationship between customer satisfaction and customer trust on customer loyalty. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2017, 7, 450–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Saif, S.; Zameer, H.; Wang, Y.; Ali, Q. The effect of retailer CSR and consumer environmental responsibility on green consumption behaviors: Mediation of environmental concern and customer trust. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2024, 42, 149–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ünal, U.; Bağcı, R.B.; Taşçıoğlu, M. The perfect combination to win the competition: Bringing sustainability and customer experience together. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2024, 33, 4806–4824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Tao, J.; Shan, P.; Liang, J.; Zhang, L. Influence Mechanism between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Sustainability: Empirical Evidence from China. Sustainability 2024, 16, 2406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lagoudaki, G.; Tsitskari, E.; Karagiorgos, T.; Yfantidou, G.; Tzetzis, G.; Tsiotras, G. Corporate Social Responsibility and Consumer Behavior in Sports: Exploring and Adapting a Participatory Sports Scale. Sustainability 2024, 16, 5825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Elim, H.; Zhai, G. Control system of multitasking interactions between society 5.0 and industry 5.0: A conceptual introduction & its applications. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1463, 012035. [Google Scholar]
  16. Vacchi, M.; Siligardi, C.; Settembre-Blundo, D. Driving manufacturing companies toward industry 5.0: A strategic framework for process technological sustainability assessment (P-TSA). Sustainability 2024, 16, 695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Khattak, K.-N.; Hassan, Z.; Shehryar Ali Naqvi, S.; Khan, M.A.; Qayyum, F.; Ullah, I. A Conceptual Framework Based on PLS-SEM Approach for Sustainable Customer Relationship Management in Enterprise Software Development: Insights from Developers. Sustainability 2024, 16, 2507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Vasilev, V. The Impact of Human Capital on Strategic Plannig and implementation of CRM for Enhancing Customer Realitionship in Enveroument and Resources. In Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference, Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria, 27–28 June 2024; pp. 408–412. [Google Scholar]
  19. Liu, K.; Mahmoud, H.A.; Liu, L.; Halteh, K.; Arnone, G.; Shukurullaevich, N.K.; Alzoubi, H.M. Exploring the Nexus between Fintech, natural resources, urbanization, and environment sustainability in China: A QARDL study. Resour. Policy 2024, 89, 104557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chang, R.-D.; Zuo, J.; Zhao, Z.-Y.; Soebarto, V.; Lu, Y.; Zillante, G.; Gan, X.-L. Sustainability attitude and performance of construction enterprises: A China study. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 1440–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Dickson, M.A.; Lennon, S.J.; Montalto, C.P.; Shen, D.; Zhang, L. Chinese consumer market segments for foreign apparel products. J. Consum. Mark. 2004, 21, 301–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Harmeling, C.M.; Moffett, J.W.; Arnold, M.J.; Carlson, B.D. Toward a theory of customer engagement marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2017, 45, 312–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Castillo, A.; Benitez, J.; Llorens, J.; Luo, X.R. Social media-driven customer engagement and movie performance: Theory and empirical evidence. Decis. Support Syst. 2021, 145, 113516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Delahunty, J.; Verenikina, I.; Jones, P. Socio-emotional connections: Identity, belonging and learning in online interactions. A literature review. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2014, 23, 243–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lim, W.M.; Rasul, T. Customer engagement and social media: Revisiting the past to inform the future. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 148, 325–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bowen, J.T.; Chen, S.L. The relationship between customer loyalty and customer satisfaction. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2001, 13, 213–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Strenitzerová, M.; Gaňa, J. Customer satisfaction and loyalty as a part of customer-based corporate sustainability in the sector of mobile communications services. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ročkutė, K.; Minelgaitė, I.; Zailskaitė-Jakštė, L.; Damaševičius, R. Brand awareness in the context of mistrust: The case study of an employment agency. Sustainability 2018, 10, 695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ali, S.S.; Kaur, R. Effectiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in implementation of social sustainability in warehousing of developing countries: A hybrid approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 324, 129154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lertpratchya, A.P.; Besley, J.C.; Zwickle, A.; Takahashi, B.; Whitley, C.T. Assessing the role of college as a sustainability communication channel. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2017, 18, 1060–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sánchez-Teba, E.M.; Benítez-Márquez, M.D.; Bermúdez-González, G.; Luna-Pereira, M.d.M. Mapping the Knowledge of CSR and Sustainability. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Popoli, P. Linking CSR strategy and brand image: Different approaches in local and global markets. Mark. Theory 2011, 11, 419–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ismael, Z.N. Marketing strategy: The influence of corporate social responsibility on brand awareness. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2022, 6, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Olšanová, K.; Escobar Ríos, A.; Cook, G.; Král, P.; Zlatić, M. Impact of the awareness of brand-related CSR activities on purchase intention for luxury brands. Soc. Responsib. J. 2022, 18, 597–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Bernarto, I.; Berlianto, M.P.; Meilani, Y.F.C.P.; Masman, R.R.; Suryawan, I.N. The influence of brand awareness, brand image, and brand trust on brand loyalty. J. Manaj. 2020, 24, 412–426. [Google Scholar]
  36. Bian, J.; Liao, Y.; Wang, Y.-Y.; Tao, F. Analysis of firm CSR strategies. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2021, 290, 914–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Waheed, A.; Zhang, Q. Effect of CSR and ethical practices on sustainable competitive performance: A case of emerging markets from stakeholder theory perspective. J. Bus. Ethics 2022, 175, 837–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Khan, S.Z.; Yang, Q.; Waheed, A. Investment in intangible resources and capabilities spurs sustainable competitive advantage and firm performance. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, 26, 285–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zameer, H.; Wang, Y.; Yasmeen, H.; Mofrad, A.A.; Waheed, A. Corporate image and customer satisfaction by virtue of employee engagement. Hum. Syst. Manag. 2018, 37, 233–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Chen, R.J. From sustainability to customer loyalty: A case of full service hotels’ guests. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2015, 22, 261–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Maurya, U.K.; Mishra, P. What is a brand? A Perspective on Brand Meaning. Eur. J. Bus. Manag. 2012, 4, 122–133. [Google Scholar]
  42. Rasoolimanesh, S.M.; Tan, P.L.; Nejati, M.; Shafaei, A. Corporate social responsibility and brand loyalty in private higher education: Mediation assessment of brand reputation and trust. J. Mark. High. Educ. 2024, 34, 156–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Batuwael, M.A.; Fauziyah, A.R.; Hwihanus, H. The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Customer Loyalty Across Countries. Ethics Law J. Bus. Notary 2024, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Le, T.T.; Le, M.H.; Nguyen Thi Tuong, V.; Nguyen Thien, P.V.; Tran Dac Bao, T.; Nguyen Le Phuong, V.; Mavuri, S. Prestige over profit, corporate social responsibility boosts corporate sustainable performance: Mediation roles of brand image and brand loyalty. J. Glob. Responsib. 2024, 15, 215–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sanchez, M.; Miller, J. Corporate Social Responsibility: Measuring the Impact on Brand Loyalty and Consumer Trust. Int. J. Manag. Bus. Econ. 2024, 1, 15–19. [Google Scholar]
  46. Parray, Z.A.; Iqbal, J.; Mushtaq, R. Customer perception of corporate social responsibility and its impact on customer engagement: Critical significance of corporate reputation. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 2024, 29, 592–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Martínez, P.; Del Bosque, I.R. CSR and customer loyalty: The roles of trust, customer identification with the company and satisfaction. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2013, 35, 89–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ozkan, M.; Cek, K.; Eyupoglu, S.Z. Sustainable development and customer satisfaction and loyalty in North Cyprus: The mediating effect of customer identification. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ginting, Y.; Chandra, T.; Miran, I.; Yusriadi, Y. Repurchase intention of e-commerce customers in Indonesia: An overview of the effect of e-service quality, e-word of mouth, customer trust, and customer satisfaction mediation. Int. J. Data Netw. Sci. 2023, 7, 329–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Albarq, A.N. The impact of CKM and customer satisfaction on customer loyalty in Saudi banking sector: The mediating role of customer trust. Adm. Sci. 2023, 13, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Hussein, A.S.; Sumiati, S.; Hapsari, R.; Abu Bakar, J. Bank 4.0 experiential quality and customer loyalty: A serial mediating role of customer trust and engagement. TQM J. 2023, 35, 1706–1721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Othman, A.K.; Fadzil, A.S.A.; Abdullah, N.N.; Suib, F.H. Enhancing Social Sustainability via Branding Strategies among Personal Care and Cosmetics Customers: The Moderating Role of Brand Visibility. Inf. Manag. Bus. Rev. 2023, 15, 306–315. [Google Scholar]
  53. Chatzoudes, D.; Papadopoulos, D.; Dimitriadis, E. Investigating the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies: An empirical research. Int. J. Law Manag. 2015, 57, 265–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Nguyen, N.; Leclerc, A.; LeBlanc, G. The mediating role of customer trust on customer loyalty. J. Serv. Sci. Manag. 2013, 6, 96–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zengin, Y.; Naktiyok, S.; Kaygın, E.; Kavak, O.; Topçuoğlu, E. An investigation upon industry 4.0 and society 5.0 within the context of sustainable development goals. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Magni, D.; Del Gaudio, G.; Papa, A.; Della Corte, V. Digital humanism and artificial intelligence: The role of emotions beyond the human–machine interaction in Society 5.0. J. Manag. Hist. 2024, 30, 195–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Deguchi, A.; Hirai, C.; Matsuoka, H.; Nakano, T.; Oshima, K.; Tai, M.; Tani, S. What is society 5.0. Society 2020, 5, 1–24. [Google Scholar]
  58. Mizani, Z.M. Factual Construction of Islamic Religious Education with the Insight of Religious Moderation and Resistance in the Society 5.0 Era in Formal Education Institutions in Indonesia. Proc. Annu. Int. Conf. Islam. Educ. 2023, 1, 195–212. [Google Scholar]
  59. Huang, S.; Wang, B.; Li, X.; Zheng, P.; Mourtzis, D.; Wang, L. Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0—Comparison, complementation and co-evolution. J. Manuf. Syst. 2022, 64, 424–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Thakur, R.; Borkar, P.S.; Agarwal, M. Smart Society 5.0 for social and technological sustainability. In Decision Analytics for Sustainable Development in Smart Society 5.0: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 299–319. [Google Scholar]
  61. Turitsyn, S.K.; Babin, S.A.; Churkin, D.V.; Vatnik, I.D.; Nikulin, M.; Podivilov, E.V. Random distributed feedback fibre lasers. Phys. Rep. 2014, 542, 133–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Krejcie, R.V.; Morgan, D.W. Determining sample size for research activities. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1970, 30, 607–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yu, Q.; Xu, L.; Li, L.; Zhi, M.; Gu, Y.; Wang, X.; Guo, H.; Li, Y.; Fan, Y.; Yang, B. Internet and WeChat used by patients with Crohn’s disease in China: A multi-center questionnaire survey. BMC Gastroenterol. 2019, 19, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wang, X.; Tao, J.; Zhu, Q.; Wu, X.; Li, T.; Zhao, C.; Yang, W.; Wang, X.; Zhang, J.; Guan, N. Depression and anxiety symptoms to COVID-19 outbreak among the public, medical staff and patients during the initial phase of the pandemic: An online questionnaire survey by a WeChat Mini Program. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e046350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Finstad, K. Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: Evidence against 5-point scales. J. Usability Stud. 2010, 5, 104–110. [Google Scholar]
  66. Tavakol, M.; Dennick, R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int. J. Med. Educ. 2011, 2, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Vaske, J.J.; Beaman, J.; Sponarski, C.C. Rethinking internal consistency in Cronbach’s alpha. Leis. Sci. 2017, 39, 163–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ha, C.; Krishnan, P. CSR Compliance and Disclosure in BRICS: An Intra-and Inter-Country Comparison; Department of Business Administration, Lund University: Lund, Sweden, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  69. Alhaddad, A. Perceived quality, brand image and brand trust as determinants of brand loyalty. J. Res. Bus. Manag. 2015, 3, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  70. Suh, B.; Han, I. The impact of customer trust and perception of security control on the acceptance of electronic commerce. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2003, 7, 135–161. [Google Scholar]
  71. Chaudhuri, A.; Holbrook, M.B. The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: The role of brand loyalty. J. Mark. 2001, 65, 81–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ab Hamid, M.R.; Sami, W.; Sidek, M.M. Discriminant validity assessment: Use of Fornell & Larcker criterion versus HTMT criterion. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2017, 890, 012163. [Google Scholar]
  73. Hair, J. Multivariate Data Analysis. Exploratory Factor Analysis. 2009. Available online: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/facpubs/2925/ (accessed on 25 August 2024).
  74. Hu, L.-T.; Bentler, P.M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 1998, 3, 424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Mueller, R.O.; Hancock, G.R. Structural equation modeling. In The Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences; Routledge: London, UK, 2018; pp. 445–456. [Google Scholar]
  77. Savalei, V.; Bentler, P.M. Structural equation modeling. In The Handbook of Marketing Research: Uses, Misuses, and Future Advances; SAGE: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2006; Volume 330, p. 36. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 16 07862 g001
Figure 1. Research framework.
Figure 1. Research framework.
Sustainability 16 07862 g001
Sustainability 16 07862 g002
Figure 2. Structural model of paths.
Figure 2. Structural model of paths.
Sustainability 16 07862 g002
Table 1. Descriptive information of the respondents.
Table 1. Descriptive information of the respondents.
MaleFemale
Freq.%Freq.%
Gender46251.7943048.21
Education of the participants
Bachelor’s degree10222.0808820.47
Master’s degree15433.3311727.21
Ph.D. degree10422.5114533.72
Other degrees or diploma10222.0808018.60
Age of the participants
18–2308819.0510123.49
24–2914631.6008820.47
30–3511825.5411626.98
>3611023.8112529.07
Personal Income of the participants
5–10 k RMB07015.1505512.79
11–16 RMB15934.4214934.65
17–22 RMB11324.4611025.58
>23 k RMB12025.9711626.98
N = 892
Table 2. Adopted scales and sources.
Table 2. Adopted scales and sources.
ConstructsCodingItemsSources
Corporate social responsibility *CSR42[68]
Brand awareness **BrA03[69]
Customer loyalty **CrL08[71]
Customer trust ***CrT06[70]
Society 5.0 ****s5.010[55]
Ectio; * Independent factors, ** dependent factors, *** mediating factors, **** moderating factor.
Table 3. Pearson correlation.
Table 3. Pearson correlation.
CSRBrACrLCrTs5.0
CSR1.00
BrA0.211.00
CrL0.190.341.00
CrT0.320.250291.00
s5.00.280.220.320.311.00
Key to abbreviations: CSR = corporate social responsibility; BrA = brand awareness; CrL = customer loyalty; CrT = customer trust; s5.0 = Society 5.0 model of technologies.
Table 4. Discriminant analysis.
Table 4. Discriminant analysis.
CSRBrACrLCrTs5.0
CSR0.82
BrA0.360.74
CrL0.450.350.83
CrT0.290.450.270.84
s5.00.330.440.360.380.79
Bold values: square roots of AVEs; nonbold values: interrelationships.
Table 5. Heterotrait–monotrait.
Table 5. Heterotrait–monotrait.
CSRBrACrLCrTs5.0
CSR
BrA0.35
CrL0.330.45
CrT0.260.450.35
s5.00.190.340.220.36
Values must be lower than 0.9.
Table 6. Convergent validity, SD, and loadings.
Table 6. Convergent validity, SD, and loadings.
CodingMeanSDLoadingsAVEReliability
Corporate social responsibility (CSR)0.7820.801
CSR-15.2630.3560.715
CSR-25.2380.0200.635
CSR-35.2260.1480.712
CSR-45.1300.1350.735
CSR-55.5850.3560.722
CSR-65.2630.3560.710
CSR-85.2380.0200.635
CSR-105.5440.1480.712
CSR-115.1340.3560.710
CSR-135.5.850.0200.635
CSR-145.2630.1480.712
CSR-155.2380.1350.735
CSR-165.2230.3560.722
CSR-175.1300.3560.710
CSR-185.5.850.0200.635
CSR-205.2630.1480.712
CSR-215.2430.1350.735
CSR-235.2380.3560.722
CSR-245.220.3560.710
CSR-255.1520.0200.635
CSR-275.5850.1480.712
CSR-285.2630.1350.735
CSR-295.2380.3560.722
CSR-305.2230.3560.710
CSR-315.1350.0200.635
CSR-325.5.850.1480.712
CSR-335.2630.1350.735
CSR-345.2380.3580.722
CSR-365.2230.3560.710
CSR-375.1300.0200.635
CSR-385.5.850.1410.712
CSR-405.2630.1350.735
CSR-415.2380.3550.722
CSR-425.2230.3560.710
Brand awareness [22]0.7550.800
BrA-15.2150.3540.712
BrA-25.2350.0250.635
BrA-35.1310.3560.688
Customer loyalty (CrL)0.7200.810
CsrL15.2440.0200.635
CsrL25.2160.3540.712
CsrL35.1240.0250.635
CsrL45.1310.3560.688
CsrL55.1240.5430.635
CsrL65.2100.0200.712
CsrL75.1240.3540.635
CsrL85.2640.0250.678
Customer Trust (CrT)0.7880.805
CrT-15.2440.0200.635
CrT-25.2110.3540.712
CrT-35.1240.0250.635
CrT-45.1310.3560.688
CrT-55.1240.5430.640
CrT-65.2000.5620.684
Society 5.0 (s5.0)0.7450.745
s5.015.2440.0200.635
s5.025.2170.3540.712
s5.035.1240.0250.635
s5.045.1310.3560.688
s5.055.2440.5430.645
s5.065.2110.5620.684
s5.075.1240.0200.635
s5.085.1360.3540.712
s5.095.1240.0250.635
s5.0105.2750.3560.648
Note. Items removed having <0.5 AVEs, <0.5 loadings, and <0.7 reliability. Key to abbreviations: CSR = corporate social responsibility; BrA = brand awareness; CrL = customer loyalty; CrT = customer trust; s5.0 = Society 5.0 model of technologies.
Table 7. SEM model.
Table 7. SEM model.
DirectionsDEMediationModerationSig.S. EDecision
H1: CSR→BrA0.125 ***----0.0010.0102supported
H2: CSR→CrL0.251 ***----0.0000.0482supported
H3: CSR→CrT0.198 ***----0.0000.0250supported
H4: CSR→CrT→BrA--0.325 ***--0.0020.0230supported
H5: CSR→CrT→CrL--0.258 ***--0.0000.0157supported
H6: CSR*s5.0→BrA----0.057 ***0.0010.0115supported
H7: CSR*s5.0→CsL----0.156 ***0.0000.0348supported
Model fitness
NFI 0.9145
SRMR 0.0230
SIZE NS----
AGE NS----
*** sig at 0.05; Key to abbreviations: CSR = corporate social responsibility; BrA = brand awareness; CrL = customer loyalty; CrT = customer trust; s5.0 = Society 5.0 model of technologies: NS = not significant.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, L.; Li, J.-Y. Corporate Social Responsibility and Society 5.0: Assessing Consumer Awareness, Loyalty, and Trust toward Socially Responsible Organizations. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7862. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177862

AMA Style

Li L, Li J-Y. Corporate Social Responsibility and Society 5.0: Assessing Consumer Awareness, Loyalty, and Trust toward Socially Responsible Organizations. Sustainability. 2024; 16(17):7862. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177862

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Li, and Jong-Yoon Li. 2024. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Society 5.0: Assessing Consumer Awareness, Loyalty, and Trust toward Socially Responsible Organizations" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7862. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177862

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