Dataset Information

Socially stigmatized company's CSR efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effects of CSR fit and perceived motives.

ABSTRACT: Acknowledging the unique challenges of the socially stigmatized industry and the substantial but varying impact of COVID-19 on business, this study examined how corporate social responsibility (CSR) fit influences public attitudinal and behavioral responses. This study found that low (high) CSR fit generated a higher level of public-serving motive (firm-serving motive) than high (low) fit CSR. The fit effect on public-serving motives was changed by the valence of the COVID-19 impact (negative vs. positive) on the financial performance. This study also found that the fit affects attitudinal and behavioral intentions (word of mouth) mediated via public-serving motives, moderated by the valence of the pandemic impact. The findings hold implications for the stigmatized industry companies' CSR initiatives in the context of the unexpected crisis, like the pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Lee YJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8960158 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Socially stigmatized company's CSR efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effects of CSR fit and perceived motives.

Lee Yoon-Joo YJ Cho Moonhee M

Public relations review 20220329 2

Acknowledging the unique challenges of the socially stigmatized industry and the substantial but varying impact of COVID-19 on business, this study examined how corporate social responsibility (CSR) fit influences public attitudinal and behavioral responses. This study found that low (high) CSR fit generated a higher level of public-serving motive (firm-serving motive) than high (low) fit CSR. The fit effect on public-serving motives was changed by the valence of the COVID-19 impact (negative vs ...[more]

PMID: 35368969

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is a high prevalence of cardiovascular disease across diverse groups in the U.S. population, and increasing research has identified stigma as a potential barrier to cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment. This systematic review examines evidence linking discrimination and cardiovascular health among socially stigmatized groups.Study designSix databases were systematically reviewed from inception through February 2018 for studies with adult subjects, focusing on cardiovascular health indicators among social groups stigmatized because of their gender, race/ethnicity, age, body weight/obesity, or sexual orientation. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality and risk of bias for nonrandomized studies, and the Cochrane Collaboration 7-item domain for randomized controlled and experimental trials.ResultsThe search identified 84 eligible studies published between 1984 and 2017. Studies retrieved were categorized according to demonstrated links between stigma and cardiovascular disease risk factors including blood pressure (n = 45), heart rate variability (n = 6), blood/saliva cardiovascular biomarkers (n = 18), as well as other indicators of cardiovascular health (n = 15). Based on the findings from included studies, 86% concluded that there was a significant relationship among stigma or discrimination and cardiovascular health indicators among socially stigmatized groups. However, there were varying degrees of evidence supporting these relationships, depending on the type of discrimination and cardiovascular health indicator. The current evidence implies an association between perceived discrimination and cardiovascular health. However, a majority of these studies are cross-sectional (73%) and focus on racial discrimination (79%), while using a wide variety of measurements to assess social discrimination and cardiovascular health.ConclusionsFuture research should include longitudinal and randomized controlled trial designs, with larger and more diverse samples of individuals with stigmatized identities, using consistent measurement approaches to assess social discrimination and its relationship with cardiovascular health.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough students were removed from patient-facing settings at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic due to concerns of burdening teaching physicians and depleting personal protective equipment, some leaders suggest students can be effectively utilized when personnel resources may be scarce. There have been narrative discussions surrounding medical student involvement, but no studies exploring the attitudes of these students. The authors aim to quantify the degree to which factors influenced a medical student's decision to or to not volunteer during the pandemic and to characterize medical students' attitudes towards medical professionals' duty to serve in a pandemic.MethodsThe authors developed and tested a secure web-based survey before distribution to students at 23 different US allopathic medical schools that did not graduate medical students early to aid in pandemic efforts between April and June 2020. Of the 599 students who completed the survey, 65.5% self-identified as female and were on average 25.94 years old (SD = 2.5). Multiple comparisons were made based on volunteer status. Ordinal scale questions were compared with the Mann Whitney U test, and the Chi-Squared test was used for categorical variables using R version 3.62.Results67.6% of students volunteered in pandemic relief activities and a majority of those students volunteered in non-patient-facing roles. Community service, new skills, and time commitment were top 3 influencing factors for students who volunteered, while risk to other, time commitment, and risk to self were top 3 influencing factors for students who chose not to volunteer. Compared to other specialties, students interested in primary care specialties agreed to a greater degree that physicians have a duty to serve in pandemic relief efforts.ConclusionsMedical students who volunteered cited self-serving factors and altruistic values as significant motivators. Students who did not volunteer were significantly more concerned with risks of COVID-19 exposure. However, medical students in general agreed that students should be allowed to volunteer in COVID-19 related relief efforts. As large areas of the United States continue to experience increases in COVID-19 cases, institutions should involve medical students in balancing the level of acceptable risk with the educational benefits.

Project description:Background Previous investigations suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic effects on alcohol consumption were heterogenous and may vary as a function of structural and psychological factors. Research examining mediating or moderating factors implicated in pandemic-occasioned changes in drinking have also tended to use single-study cross-sectional designs and convenience samples.AimsFirst, to explore structural (changed employment or unemployment) and psychological (subjective mental health and drinking motives) correlates of consumption reported during the COVID-19 pandemic using a UK nationally representative (quota sampled) dataset. Second, to determine whether population-level differences in drinking during the COVID-19 pandemic (versus pre-pandemic levels) could be attributable to drinking motives.MethodData collected from samples of UK adults before and during the pandemic were obtained and analysed: Step1 carried out structural equation modelling (SEM) to explore data gathered during a period of social restrictions after the UK's first COVID-19-related lockdown (27 August-15 September, 2020; n = 3,798). It assessed whether drinking motives (enhancement, social, conformity, coping), employment and the perceived impact of the pandemic on subjective mental health may explain between-person differences in self-reported alcohol consumption. Step 2 multigroup SEM evaluated data gathered pre-pandemic (2018; n = 7,902) in concert with the pandemic data from step 1, to test the theory that population-level differences in alcohol consumption are attributable to variances in drinking motives.ResultsAnalyses of the 2020 dataset detected both direct and indirect effects of subjective mental health, drinking motives, and employment matters (e.g., having been furloughed) on alcohol use. Findings from a multigroup SEM were consistent with the theory that drinking motives explain not only individual differences in alcohol use at both time points, but also population-level increases in use during the pandemic.ConclusionThis work highlights socioeconomic and employment considerations when seeking to understand COVID-19-related drinking. It also indicates that drinking motives may be particularly important in explaining the apparent trend of heightened drinking during the pandemic. Limitations related to causal inference are discussed.

Dataset Information

Socially stigmatized company's CSR efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effects of CSR fit and perceived motives.

Publications

Socially stigmatized company's CSR efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effects of CSR fit and perceived motives.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets