IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i7p4053-d530746.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unintended CSR Violation Caused by Online Recommendation

Author

Listed:
  • Yeujun Yoon

    (Business Administration Department, School of Management, Kyung Hee University, 26 Kyungheedae-ro, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 02447, Korea)

  • Yating Fu

    (HSBC Business School, Peking University, University Town, Nanshan, Shenzhen 518055, China)

  • Jaewoo Joo

    (Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration, Kookmin University, 77 Jeongneung-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02707, Korea)

Abstract

This paper investigates whether online recommendation of products that exhibit corporate social responsibility (CSR) penalizes the purchase intention of non-CSR products. When consumers browse online retail stores and consider buying a particular product, online recommendation is made (e.g., “Customers who viewed this item also viewed”). This recommendation is often made between products of which attributes have a trade-off relationship (e.g., CSR vs. price). (A trade-off is where one thing increases, and another must decrease. A trade-off relationship between CSR and price suggests a pair of competing products are available: a more expensive, CSR product and an economical, non-CSR product.) We borrowed from the psychological literature of evaluability to hypothesize that when a CSR product is recommended, consumers would decrease their purchase intention of the economical product. However, when an economical product is recommended, consumers would maintain their purchase intention of the CSR product. We further hypothesized that this asymmetric effect would disappear when reinforcement information regarding the CSR is provided. Two carefully designed experiments conducted in China supported these hypotheses. Our findings contribute to the growing literature on online retailers by elucidating the psychological impact of online recommendations, which may influence manufacturers’ sales in an unexpected manner. The findings also indicate that online recommendations could be a potential source of channel conflict. While this study newly verifies the unintended CSR violation effect of online recommendations, future studies are required to expand our understanding of the CSR violation effect by investigating the effect under the trade-off relationship with other attributes of the product.

Suggested Citation

  • Yeujun Yoon & Yating Fu & Jaewoo Joo, 2021. "Unintended CSR Violation Caused by Online Recommendation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-14, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:7:p:4053-:d:530746
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/7/4053/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/7/4053/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kar Yan Tam & Shuk Ying Ho, 2005. "Web Personalization as a Persuasion Strategy: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 271-291, September.
    2. Ganesh Iyer, 1998. "Coordinating Channels Under Price and Nonprice Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 338-355.
    3. Hsee, Christopher K., 1996. "The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation for Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 247-257, September.
    4. Catherine W. M. Yeung & Dilip Soman, 2005. "Attribute Evaluability and the Range Effect," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(3), pages 363-369, December.
    5. Yeujun Yoon & Kevin Chastagner & Jaewoo Joo, 2020. "Inner-Self vs. Outer-Self and Socially Responsible Product Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Lafferty, Barbara A. & Goldsmith, Ronald E., 1999. "Corporate Credibility's Role in Consumers' Attitudes and Purchase Intentions When a High versus a Low Credibility Endorser Is Used in the Ad," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 109-116, February.
    7. Martin A. Lariviere & V. Padmanabhan, 1997. "Slotting Allowances and New Product Introductions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 112-128.
    8. Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf & David E. M. Sappington, 2007. "The Bright Side of Supplier Encroachment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 651-659, 09-10.
    9. Sridhar Moorthy, 2005. "A General Theory of Pass-Through in Channels with Category Management and Retail Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 110-122, August.
    10. Lal, Rajiv & Matutes, Carmen, 1994. "Retail Pricing and Advertising Strategies," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 345-370, July.
    11. Gerald Häubl & Valerie Trifts, 2000. "Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 4-21, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Bai-Xun & Zhou, Yong-Wu & Li, Ji-zi & Zhou, Shi-ping, 2013. "Contract choice game of supply chain competition at both manufacturer and retailer levels," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 188-197.
    2. Sreya Kolay & Greg Shaffer, 2022. "Slotting Fees and Price Discrimination in Retail Channels," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(6), pages 1145-1162, November.
    3. Tan, Huimin & Lv, Xingyang & Liu, Xiaoyan & Gursoy, Dogan, 2018. "Evaluation nudge: Effect of evaluation mode of online customer reviews on consumers’ preferences," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 29-40.
    4. Dmitri Kuksov & Yuanfang Lin, 2010. "Information Provision in a Vertically Differentiated Competitive Marketplace," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 122-138, 01-02.
    5. Nathan M. Fong, 2017. "How Targeting Affects Customer Search: A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(7), pages 2353-2364, July.
    6. Zhang, Hong & Zhao, Ling & Gupta, Sumeet, 2018. "The role of online product recommendations on customer decision making and loyalty in social shopping communities," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 150-166.
    7. Suk, Kwanho & Yoon, Song-Oh, 2012. "The moderating role of decision task goals in attribute weight convergence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 37-45.
    8. Ailawadi, Kusum L. & Beauchamp, J.P. & Donthu, Naveen & Gauri, Dinesh K. & Shankar, Venkatesh, 2009. "Communication and Promotion Decisions in Retailing: A Review and Directions for Future Research," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 42-55.
    9. Dokyun Lee & Kartik Hosanagar, 2019. "How Do Recommender Systems Affect Sales Diversity? A Cross-Category Investigation via Randomized Field Experiment," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 239-259, March.
    10. Li, Xilin & Hsee, Christopher K., 2019. "Beyond preference reversal: Distinguishing justifiability from evaluability in joint versus single evaluations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 63-74.
    11. Sriram Thirumalai & Kingshuk K. Sinha, 2013. "To Personalize or Not to Personalize Online Purchase Interactions: Implications of Self-Selection by Retailers," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 683-708, September.
    12. Long Gao & Liang Guo & Adem Orsdemir, 2021. "Dual‐Channel Distribution: The Case for Cost Information Asymmetry," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(2), pages 494-521, February.
    13. Dmitri Kuksov & Amit Pazgal, 2007. "Research Note—The Effects of Costs and Competition on Slotting Allowances," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 259-267, 03-04.
    14. Lusi Li & Jianqing Chen & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2018. "Recommender System Rethink: Implications for an Electronic Marketplace with Competing Manufacturers," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 1003-1023, December.
    15. Daniel Zeng & Yong Liu & Ping Yan & Yanwu Yang, 2021. "Location-Aware Real-Time Recommender Systems for Brick-and-Mortar Retailers," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1608-1623, October.
    16. Huiqi Guan & Zhibin Yang & Haresh Gurnani, 2023. "Value of information with manufacturer encroachment," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(3), pages 780-793, March.
    17. Jaikumar, Saravana & Sahay, Arvind, 2016. "Effect of Overlapping Price Ranges on Price Perception: Revisiting the Range Theory of Price Perception," IIMA Working Papers WP2016-02-02, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    18. Leigh McAlister, 2007. "—Cross-Brand Pass-Through: Fact or Artifact?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 876-898, 11-12.
    19. Kopalle, Praveen & Biswas, Dipayan & Chintagunta, Pradeep K. & Fan, Jia & Pauwels, Koen & Ratchford, Brian T. & Sills, James A., 2009. "Retailer Pricing and Competitive Effects," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 56-70.
    20. Lu, Jye-Chyi & Tsao, Yu-Chung & Charoensiriwath, Chayakrit, 2011. "Competition under manufacturer service and retail price," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1256-1264, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:7:p:4053-:d:530746. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.