Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Attribution Theory
- Creators: Knopf, Richard C.
- Creators: Schmitz, Troy G.
Description
There have been multiple calls for research on consumers' responses to social issues, regulatory changes, and corporate behavior. Thus, this dissertation proposes and tests a conceptual framework of parents' responses to government regulations and corporate social responsibility (CSR) that address juvenile obesity. This research builds on Attribution Theory to examine the impact of government regulations and CSR on consumers' attitudes and their subsequent behavior. Three pilot studies and three main experiments were conducted; a between-subjects and randomized experimental design being used to capture the effects of regulations and corporate actions on product satisfaction, company evaluations, and behavioral intentions, while examining the mediating role of attributions of responsibility for a negative product outcome. This research has implications for policy makers and marketing practitioners and scholars. This is the first study to offer a new perspective, based on attributions of blame, to explain the mechanism that drives consumers' responses to government regulations. Considering numerous calls for government actions that address childhood obesity, it is important to understand how and why consumers respond to such regulations. The results illustrated that certain policies may have unintended consequences due to unexpected attributions of blame for unhealthy products. Only recently have researchers tried to address the psychological mechanism through which CSR has an impact on consumers' attitudes and behavior. To date, few studies have investigated attributions as a mediating variable in the transfer of CSR associations on consumer responses. Nonetheless, this is the first study that concentrates on attributions of responsibility, per se, to explain the impact of CSR on company evaluations. This dissertation extends previous research, where locus, stability, and controllability mediated the relationship between CSR and attributions of blame; the degree of blame being consequential to brand evaluations. The current results suggest that attributions of responsibility, per se, mediate the impact of CSR on company evaluations. Additionally, attributions of blame are measured as the degree to which consumers take personal responsibility for a negative product outcome. This highlights a new role of the CSR construct, as a moderator of consumers' self-serving bias, a fundamental psychological response that has been neglected in the marketing literature.
ContributorsDumitrescu, Claudia (Author) / Shaw Hughner, Renée (Thesis advisor) / Schmitz, Troy G. (Committee member) / Seperich, George (Committee member) / Shultz, Ii, Clifford J. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Program leadership’s decision to include an evaluator during the program planning and design phase is the critical first step necessary for evaluators to provide the
programmatic benefits associated with the evaluation profession. Several recent
developments have promoted evaluator inclusion in program planning and design
activities, including federal legislation that mandates evaluator inclusion and advocacy
efforts from evaluation academics. However, the evaluation literature presents a
collective frustration within the evaluation field due to ongoing exclusion from program
planning and design activities. Utilizing the defensive attribution hypothesis, this
quantitative study gathered responses from 260 American Evaluation Association
members and 61 Project Management Institute members to determine an evaluator
exclusion rate, develop a taxonomy of exclusion factors, and explore the extent to which
program leaders and program evaluators demonstrate defensive attributions when rating
these factors’ influence on evaluator exclusion in program planning and design activities.
Results indicated an approximately 70% evaluator exclusion rate in respondents’ most
recent program experiences. Furthermore, the defensive attribution hypothesis was not
supported in the study, as program evaluators more strongly attributed their lack of
inclusion to deficiencies outside of the evaluation practice, but program leaders also more
strongly attributed evaluator exclusion to deficiencies outside of the evaluation practice.
Program evaluators most strongly attributed their exclusion to program leaders’
insufficient training and knowledge on the role of evaluation during the program planning
and design phase. Program leaders most strongly attributed evaluator exclusion to their
own staffing decisions, indicating a preference to not include evaluators in program
planning and design activities due to achieving previous program success without them,
assigning evaluation activities to non-evaluation staff, and a funding process that allows
the practice to occur. As the first study to explore evaluator exclusion in the program
planning and design phase, it sets a foundation for future research studies to corroborate
and build upon its findings, identify policies that encourage evaluator inclusion, and
continue efforts to establish mutually beneficial relationships in the program planning
and design phase.
ContributorsGallagher, Matthew (Author) / Lecy, Jesse (Thesis advisor) / Knopf, Richard C. (Committee member) / Budruk, Megha (Committee member) / Schuster, Roseanne (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022