All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Relative effectiveness of prior corporate ability vs. corporate social responsibility associations on public responses in corporate crises
Unformatted Document Text:  Relative effectiveness of prior CAb vs. CSR in crises 16 =1.5) to the company than those with negative CAb associations (locus M =5.2, SD = 1.7; control M = 5.4, SD = 1.7), the differences were not statistically significant (locus: F (1, 199) = 2.71, p =.102, η p 2 = .01, control: F (1, 199) =.967, p =.327, η p 2 = .005). Thus, H1a was partially supported. Positive prior CSR associations also influenced crisis causality attributions (Wilk’s Λ F (1, 192) = 3.06, p <.03, η p 2 =.05). Both internal locus and stability causality were significantly different between positive and negative CSR associations (locus: F (1, 192) = 4.06, p <.05, η p 2 = .021, stability: F (1, 192) =8.14, p <.006, η p 2 = .052). When people had positive prior CSR associations toward the company before the crisis, they tended to think the cause of the crisis was less internal (locus: M = 4.5, SD = 1.5) and will not remain over time (stability: M = 3.7, SD=1.4) than those with negative CSR associations (locus M = 4.9, SD =1.5, stability M =4.4, SD =1.4). Though participants with positive CSR associations tended to attribute less controllability (M = 4.9, SD=1.6) to the company than those with negative CSR associations (M=5.3, SD=1.5), the differences were not statistically significant (F (1, 192) =1.6, p = .21, η p 2 = .008). Thus, H1b was also partially supported. As to RQ1, the results found no moderating effects of crisis type and crisis severity on the path of CAb associations  crisis causality factors ( crisis type: Wilk’s Λ F (1, 199) = 2.59, p =.06, η p 2 =.039; crisis severity: Wilk’s Λ F (1, 199) = .82, p =.48, η p 2 =.012). In addition, no moderating effects of crisis type and crisis severity on the path of CSR associations  crisis causality were found (crisis type: Wilk’s Λ F (1, 192) =.58, p =.63, η p 2 =.009, crisis severity: Wilk’s Λ F (1, 192) =.82, p =.48, η p 2 =.013).

Authors: Kim, Sora.
first   previous   Page 16 of 31   next   last



background image
 Relative effectiveness of prior CAb vs. CSR in crises 16 
 
 
 
=1.5) to the company than those with negative CAb associations (locus =5.2, SD = 1.7; 
control M = 5.4, SD = 1.7), the differences were not statistically significant (locus: (1, 199) = 
2.71, p =.102, η
p
2
= .01, control: F (1, 199) =.967, p =.327, η
p
2
= .005). Thus, H1a was partially 
supported.  
Positive prior CSR associations also influenced crisis causality attributions (Wilk’s Λ 
(1, 192) = 3.06, p <.03, η
p
2
 =.05). Both internal locus and stability causality were significantly 
different between positive and negative CSR associations (locus: F (1, 192) = 4.06, p <.05, 
η
p
2
= .021, stability: F (1, 192) =8.14, p <.006, η
p
2
= .052). When people had positive prior CSR 
associations toward the company before the crisis, they tended to think the cause of the crisis 
was less internal (locus: = 4.5, SD = 1.5) and will not remain over time (stability: = 3.7, 
SD=1.4) than those with negative CSR associations (locus = 4.9, SD =1.5, stability =4.4, 
SD =1.4). Though participants with positive CSR associations tended to attribute less 
controllability (M = 4.9, SD=1.6) to the company than those with negative CSR associations 
(M=5.3, SD=1.5), the differences were not statistically significant (F (1, 192) =1.6, p = .21, 
η
p
2
= .008). Thus, H1b was also partially supported.     
As to RQ1, the results found no moderating effects of crisis type and crisis severity on 
the path of CAb associations 
 crisis causality factors ( crisis type: Wilk’s Λ F (1, 199) = 2.59, 
p =.06, η
p
2
 =.039; crisis severity: Wilk’s Λ F (1, 199) = .82, p =.48, η
p
2
 =.012). In addition, no 
moderating effects of crisis type and crisis severity on the path of CSR associations 
 crisis 
causality were found (crisis type: Wilk’s Λ F (1, 192) =.58, p =.63, η
p
2
 =.009, crisis severity: 
Wilk’s Λ F (1, 192) =.82, p =.48, η
p
2
 =.013).  


Convention
Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 16 of 31   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.