Corporate Social Responsibility and Patronage Intentions: The Mediating Effect of Brand Credibility

Journal of Marketing Communications
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmc20
Corporate social responsibility and patronage

intentions: The mediating effect of brand
credibility
Hala Mohammed Abu Zayyad, Zaid Mohammad Obeidat, Muhammad Turki

Alshurideh, Mohammd Abuhashesh, Mahmoud Maqableh & Ra’ed Masa’deh
To cite this article: Hala Mohammed Abu Zayyad, Zaid Mohammad Obeidat, Muhammad Turki
Alshurideh, Mohammd Abuhashesh, Mahmoud Maqableh & Ra’ed Masa’deh (2021) Corporate
social responsibility and patronage intentions: The mediating effect of brand credibility, Journal of
Marketing Communications, 27:5, 510-533, DOI: 10.1080/13527266.2020.1728565
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2020.1728565
Published online: 14 Feb 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 821
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 22 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjmc20
JOURNAL OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS
2021, VOL. 27, NO. 5, 510–533
https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2020.1728565
Corporate social responsibility and patronage intentions: The

mediating effect of brand credibility
Hala Mohammed Abu Zayyada, Zaid Mohammad Obeidat a,
Muhammad Turki Alshurideh a,b, Mohammd Abuhasheshc, Mahmoud Maqableh d
and Ra’ed Masa’deh d

a
Department of Marketing, School of Business, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; bManagement
Department, College of Business Administration, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates;
c
E-Marketing and Social Media Department, Princess Sumaya University for Technology (PSUT), Amman,
Jordan; dDepartment of Management Information Systems, School of Business, The University of Jordan,
Amman, Jordan
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a vital construct in the bank- Received 7 April 2019
ing industry due to its influence on brand credibility, positive word Accepted 5 February 2020
of mouth, and repeat purchases. The purpose of this research is to KEYWORDS
examine the influence of the three main dimensions of corporate Corporate social
social responsibility on patronage intentions through the mediat- responsibility; brand
ing role of brand credibility. Based on a sample of (N = 315) custo- credibility; repeat purchase;
mers in Jordan’s banking sector, structural equation modelling patronage intentions
revealed that all of the proposed hypotheses were supported,
proving that CSR dimensions have a significant influence on
brand credibility and patronage intentions. Additionally, a mediat-
ing influence was found for brand credibility on the path between
CSR and patronage intentions. Implications for managers are also
provided.
1. Introduction
The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) was first introduced in 1926 when it
became apparent that corporations benefited from working for the good of the commu-
nity, and that led to what is now known as CSR (Schmeltz 2012). Subsequently, in 1953,
Howard R. Bowen formalized the terminologies and objectives surrounding CSR by
stating his belief that firms had social as well as economic and legal obligations. While
in the early 2000s corporations focused mainly on stakeholders, this focus has shifted to
the general society more recently (Bulut and Yumrukaya 2009). CSR generally refers to the
responsibility of the initiatives and their influence on culture and society (Porter and
Kramer 2006). Those initiatives are normally divided into three categories: those that
revolve around financial success (e.g., profit), those that entail taking responsibility for the
environment (e.g., the planet), and those that assume responsibility for society (e.g.,
people) (Wang and Juslin 2013). Consequently, CSR has evolved into a very important
CONTACT Ra’ed Masa’deh r.masadeh@ju.edu.jo Department of Management Information Systems, School of

Business, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
JOURNAL OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS 511
Figure 1. Proposed research model adapted fromWalker and Kent (2009), and Liu et al. (2014).
factor for decision-makers with recent studies showing that investment in Corporate
Social Responsibility can enhance the bottom line for companies (Kaul and Luo 2018;
Aboud and Diab 2018), and are more likely to improve customer retention and promote
positive attitudes towards the firm (Ha 2017).
In 1979, Carroll set out the first classifications of CSR initiatives, dividing them into the
economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic. Maignan, Ferrell, and Hult (1999) later on
defined social responsibility as the degree to which firms perform economic, legal, ethical
and philanthropic responsibilities toward their stakeholders. With these initiatives taking
different forms such as recycling programs, use of green materials, and donations. Mohr,
Webb, and Harris (2001) divided CSR into two general classifications: the one related to
stakeholders and the other based on Kotler’s societal marketing concept. However, Bruun
(2016) stated that attention should be paid to environmental CSR in order to benefit both
internal drivers (e.g., to meet corporate environmental policy or the parent company’s
environmental guidelines) and external drivers (e.g., to communicate a ‘green’ corporate
image and thus enhance reputation). Marin and Ruiz (2007) shared some successful envir-
onmental CSR performances that succeeded in enhancing the firm’s reputation such as
avoiding buying products from companies that harm the environment and using recycled
papers. Consequently, this study holds environmental CSR to be the third domain besides
the two dimensions of stakeholders and society set forth by Mohr, Webb, and Harris (2001).
Recent studies have tended to focus on the three main dimensions used by Carroll
(1979) to examine the impact of CSR on the two important issues of repeat purchase and
word of mouth. However, there is a gap in knowledge regarding the importance of the
banking sector, as most of the studies revolved around the tourism and hospitality
industry (e.g., Bohdanowicz and Zientara 2009; Lee and Park 2009; Eraqi 2010; Aboud
and Diab 2018). In addition, no studies were also found to reveal the effect of brand
512 H. M. ABU ZAYYAD ET AL.
credibility as a mediating factor. As a result, we propose and test a model that incorpo-
rates environmental CSR factors and their influence of brand patronage through the
mediating role of brand credibility. More specifically, the aim of this study is to increase
the understanding of the antecedents of consumer patronage intentions by examining
a number of possible environmental CSR predictors – namely, stakeholders, society, and
environmental on consumers patronage intentions towards Jordanian banks. Within the
CSR literature, no research has yet studied the influence of factors relating to environ-
mental CSR on consumers’ patronage intentions. Another criticism that can be directed at
the literature is the limited attention given to investigating the influence of these factors
in the banking sector (Obeidat et al. 2018). In addition, limited attention was given in the
literature to examining how brand credibility is influenced by CSR acts and how in turn it
influences patronage intentions. Accordingly, this study makes three main contributions.
First, the literature on CSR mainly focuses on ethical and legal dimensions and hardly
ponders the influence of environmental traits that could encourage consumer patronage
intentions (Heesup, Jongsik, and Wansoo 2019). Evidence in different sectors other than
the banking sector shows that green, caring and environmentally friendly companies are
more attractive to employees and customers alike (Van Marrewijk 2003). However, studies
in the literature examining the banking sector were solely tested by the ethical, legal or
economic and legal components of CSR while ignoring the environmental and social
element (Carroll 1991; Ramasamy, Yeung, and Au 2010; Arli and Lasmono 2010; Rahbar
and Abdul Wahid 2011; Arıkan and Güner 2013; Martínez, Pérez, and Del Bosque 2014;
Heesup, Jongsik, and Wansoo 2019). Despite the fact that CSR became extremely popular
and important in different industries (Luo and Bhattacharya 2006). Second, this research
incorporates brand credibility as a mediator to explain its facilitating influence in motivat-
ing consumers to repurchase and spread positive word of mouth. While brand credibility
is an important factor in influencing consumer purchase intentions (Lafferty 2007), limited
research attention was given to examine its mediating influence on CSR activities and
consumers patronage intentions despite its positive outcomes for both firms and con-
sumers. Understanding the role of brand credibility in the formation of patronage inten-
tions as a result of CSR activities will be very important and meaningful for marketers, as it
provides guidance in the development of CSR strategies in addition to knowing whether
or not brand credibility may be stronger or weaker as a result of CSR activities (Baek, Kim,
and Yu 2010). Third, the majority of the literature was conducted in Western countries and
cultures in addition to different sectors other that the banking sector (Heesup, Jongsik,
and Wansoo 2019). Thus, limited research attention was given to examining the influence
of environmental CSR in Eastern countries such as Jordan. According to Naményi (2012)
the sustainability and stability of the banking sector and its functions can generally be
understood by many aspects of CSR and they can be implemented by using the tools
provided by CSR. Moreover, the diversity of the CSR definitions and elements created
different implications for CSR (Foote, Gaffney, and Evans 2010; Barnett 2011; Kao et al.
2018). In general, evidence suggests that adopting CSR activities in the banking sector
would increase the attractiveness of the bank and also gives it a competitive advantage
(Porter and Kramer 2006; Bhattacharya, Korschun, and Sen 2009). Furthermore, these
activities were also found to increase the value of the company making it more attractive
for investors (Van Marrewijk 2003).
2. Literature review and theoretical framework

2.1. Corporate social responsibility (CSR)
Corporate social responsibility is a very broad term that encompasses different types of
directions that a brand may take in voluntary and welfare issues (Anderson 2019). This in
return adds value to the brand and creates a competitive advantage (Porter and Kramer
2006). In recent years, CSR has become a vital part of company culture and strategic goals
(Anderson 2019). Therefore, all brands should try to get involved in CSR activities in order
to successfully build a good reputation and strong public relations, which in return will
benefit the brand image and the overall performance of the company (Werther and
Chandler 2005). Studies show that credible CSR activity positively affects consumer
purchase intention (Aro, Suomi, and Saraniemi 2018). Brands with CSR identity attract
loyalty since long-term activities benefit the brand by promoting customer support which
gives the company a competitive advantage (Vanhamme and Grobben 2009; Aro, Suomi,
and Saraniemi 2018). As a result, it is clear that societal needs are becoming increasingly
important to organizations (Erdiaw-Kwasie, Alam, and Shahiduzzaman 2017).
The type of CSR communication chosen is also very important in building a good
reputation. Philanthropic CSR campaigns are popular with consumers as they are very
effective, unlike customer-relationship management (CRM) that is connected to financial
motives (Aro, Suomi, and Saraniemi 2018). According to Majoch, Hoepner, and Hebb
(2017), organizations have increased their interest in understanding responsible invest-
ment and its benefits. According to Carroll (1979, 1991), the main goal of corporates is to
maximize their profitability (economic) and in doing so they should abide by the regula-
tions (legal) while not forgetting the ethical issues (philanthropic) which means giving
back to the community.
Visser (2007) adopted Carroll’s (1991) component of CSR and then claimed that while
economic responsibilities are the core component in some places, philanthropy is
the second most important aspect in developing countries, followed by the legal element,
and finally ethical responsibility (Jamali 2007; Planken, Nickerson, and Sahu 2013). In
Europe and more developed countries, economic and ethical responsibilities are more
important than regulations, but ultimately, customers can choose to act ethically in their
buying behaviour (Mohr and Webb 2005), so philanthropic becomes a major factor for the
customer when making purchasing decisions, besides quality and price. This is because
the main objective of philanthropic responsibility is to influence the perception of the firm
(Berman et al. 1999).
Mohr, Webb, and Harris (2001) divided CSR into three categories: CSR in relation to the
organization various stakeholders (e.g., owners, customers, employees and the commu-
nity), CSR in relation to society, and environmental CSR which later became the focus of
multiple studies (e.g., Mohr and Webb 2005; Dahlsrud 2008; Pedersen 2010; Wei et al.
2017) due to its more visible and immediate effect. Moreover, environmental CSR was
found to benefit both internal drivers (e.g., to meet corporate environmental policy) and
external drivers (e.g., to communicate a ‘green’ corporate image and thus enhance
reputation) (Rahbar and Abdul Wahid 2011). Marin and Ruiz (2007) also deduced that
successful environmental CSR performance would enhance brand reputation since envir-
onmental CSR is easily recognized by both consumers and the media. Furthermore, CSR
activities related to environmental practices, including pollution prevention, energy con-

servation and green production/service, are distinct from social CSR activities that include
philanthropy and public welfare. Whereby, CSR related to stakeholders includes monitor-
ing suppliers’ behaviour and the organization’s obligation to all stakeholders.
Consequently, in environmental CSR the value is not only to maximize the profit of the
company but also to do what is ethically right and fair.
2.1.1. CSR in the banking industry

CSR has become widespread in all sectors and is particularly sensitive in the banking
sector because of the complexity of the services this sector provides (Achua 2008). It is
hard to evaluate how the customer perceives CSR in the banking sector because the
nature of this sector means that the customer often relates any activity to its financial
value (Bhattacharya, Korschun, and Sen 2009; Ramlugun and Raboute 2015; Kim 2017).
However, there is a need to differentiate between the tangible functions of services
provided and the possible sociological benefits since CSR offers the customer intangible
features (Maignan and Ferrell 2003; Marin, Ruiz, and Rubio 2009).
In order to affect customer perception of the bank’s services, the CSR initiative must be
very sensitive and crucial because it has a direct relationship with quality and there must
be no risk of jeopardizing that (Poolthong and Mandhachitara 2009; Genedy and Sakr
2017). In addition, the customer always gives priority to the quality of service (Fatma and
Rahman 2016). Considering all of the above, banking customers are influenced by the
practice of CSR initiatives that directly affect the quality (Forcadell and Aracil 2017) and
therefore the credibility of the bank. Thus, we propose that the positive impact of CSR and
patronage intentions is as follows:
H1: CSR positively impacts patronage intentions.
2.1.2. CSR to stakeholders

CSR to stakeholders refers to a company’s perceived corporate social responsibility
activities and efforts directed toward its stakeholders which includes both its customers
and its employees (Hess 2001). Generally, customers may perceive a company’s CSR
activities as a promise that creates an expectation that the company will make and deliver
services in an appropriate way (Hess 2001). Consequently, customer expectations act as
an input to form their attitudes (Oliver 1980). CSR activities focused toward stakeholders
were found to increase customer trust and lower uncertainty about the company’s,
resulting in a higher level of patronage intentions (Vlachos et al. 2009). The effect of
CSR on stakeholders has risen in many types of research (Turker 2009), as it creates a link
between the firm and the stakeholders (Peloza and Shang 2011). Creating awareness of
the company’s chosen CSR initiative by choosing the right communication tools will
enhance the brand image and create a bond between the company and stakeholders
(Maignan and Ferrell 2004; Erdiaw-Kwasie, Alam, and Shahiduzzaman 2017). Werther and
Chandler (2005) stated that stakeholders’ reactions to CSR activity are important and
should meet the corporate strategy. Creyer and Ross (1997) found a positive link between
customer buying decision and stakeholders’ ethical activities. Positive attitude held by
stakeholders regarding the company’s CSR activities will also affect perceptions of
employee behaviour. This in turn, positively reflects on the company’s overall employee
attitude, affecting the quality of productivity which directly impacts customers

(Klimkiewicz and Oltra 2017).
Employees, customers, and government bodies that hold an interest in an organization
are deemed to be its main stakeholders (Carroll 1991; Freeman and Dmytriyev 2017).
Meeting the expectations of both customers and employees will raise preferences,
resulting in a higher possibility of repeat purchase and positive word of mouth
(Boulding et al. 1993). Consequently, brand credibility represents the trust built by
people’s experiences with particular services and goods (Erdem, Swait, and Louviere
2002). Furthermore, it was shown that brand credibility positively influences brand
purchase intentions due to its ability to increase the observed value and quality of the
information provided by the service (Baek, Kim, and Yu 2010).
Finally, Anselmsson and Johansson (2007) claimed that human responsibility influ-
ences brand credibility and preferences which will directly affect both initial and repeat
purchase, focusing on the three general attitude-based dimensions (i.e., human, product
and environment CSR) for CSR positioning. Therefore, stakeholders that participate and
react positively to CSR reflect positively on brand credibility (Alamro and Rowley 2011).
Thus, there is a direct linkage between CSR to stakeholders and customers’ brand cred-
ibility as per the below hypothesis:
H2: Stakeholders CSR positively impacts brand credibility.
2.1.3. CSR to society

CSR to society involves the activities that contribute to society’s well-being (Turker 2009).
Mohr, Webb, and Harris (2001) added that firms are under pressure to continue operating
in a way which is both profitable and socially acceptable. Murray and Vogel (1997) said
people hold a favorable impression of firms that participate in activities that benefit
society. Mazin et al. (2008) demonstrated that CSR behaviours do enhance and leverage
brand image. In general, social activities normally enhance the brand image of firms;
whether they engaged in charity sponsorships, supporting orphans or cancer patients,
they all positively affected the consumers’ evaluation (Turker 2009). Most of the firms that
enjoy both employee and customer loyalty are often involved in such activities
(Chomvilailuk and Butcher 2010). However, the effect of society CSR on repurchase
intention remains unclear since it is dependent upon the relationship between the
company’s socially responsible behaviour and the consumer’s initial purchase decision
(Titus and Bradford 1996). Moreover, Kim (2017) found the relationship between a firm’s
social activities and its image leads to a more credible brand that, in turn, leads to loyalty
intention, repeat purchase and positive word of mouth.
In addition, CSR related to society will maintain profitability and can deliver social issues
that will positively affect the brand as philanthropy positively increases the corporate associa-
tion (Ricks 2005). Similarly, Mazin et al. (2008) stated that philanthropic activities are positively
related to the brand image. The previous study analyzed some social responsibility patterns
on websites and in annual reports and found that CSR reports in some industries positively
affected the brand credibility and word of mouth (Yoo and Donthu 2001). Having the brand
credibility as a first feature of brand equity, the following is hypothesized:
H3: Society CSR positively impacts brand credibility.

2.1.4. CSR to environment

Many studies highlighted environmental CSR and its effect on customers’ perceptions.
Laroche, Bergeron, and Barbaro-Forleo (2001) emphasized that the brand is more favour-
able when committing to a more ecologically friendly lifestyle and environmentally
friendly practices. This is particularly true of manufacturers who undertake an environ-
mental CSR initiative (Mohr and Webb 2005). Marin and Ruiz (2007) claimed that there is
a direct association between a customer’s liking for a bank and the bank’s initiatives for
engaging in CSR environment activities such as using recycled paper, pollution reduction
campaigns, and other environmentally friendly steps that will positively affect the brand
image (Heesup, Jongsik, and Wansoo 2019).
The dominant driver for environmental CSR activity is government and leaders
(Dummett 2006). Companies that adopt environmental CSR activities find them to be
a key factor in their continued success, despite external challenges (e.g., Asian economic
crises and competition). Drawing upon supportive evidence from the literature, such as
Marin and Ruiz (2007) who found a strong association between a customer’s attraction
and brand credibility and the CSR-related causes, such as environmental protection and
green policies, we hypothesize:
H4: Environmental CSR positively impacts brand credibility.
2.2. Brand credibility

Brand credibility describes the confidence that a customer holds in a certain brand, so it
should deliver what it promised to do (Erdem, Swait, and Louviere 2002). Brand credibility
is an important factor in influencing consumer purchase intentions, brand image and
word of mouth (Lafferty 2007). Osterhus (1997) suggested that brand credibility and the
company’s position with respect to CSR overwhelmingly result in positive outcomes. In
order to get an effective CSR initiative, it is important to build up credibility by having CSR
actions that are communicated properly (Rhee, Ryu, and Yoon 2006). It is well known that
the higher the brand credibility, the higher the perception of its attributes among
customers (Erdem, Swait, and Louviere 2002; Pratihari and Uzma 2018). This can be
utilized by smart marketing communication and promotional strategies to increase
purchase intention (Jahdi and Acikdilli 2009). Brand credibility also rises when it is backed
by a trustworthy campaign that CSR communicates (Ben Ammar, Naoui, and Zaiem 2015).
Previous studies indicate that credibility positively affects purchase intentions via
perceived quality and risk, where perceived quality refers to consumers’ judgments of
what is being provided (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry 1988). Therefore, generating
positive word of mouth and the effective perceived quality will depend on the credibility
of the message sent (Dichter 1966). Scholars have defined brand credibility as having two
main dimensions: source credibility and medium credibility (Chouthoy and Kazi 2016).
While source credibility relies on the characteristics of the brand or the organization itself,
medium credibility is created by the various channels of media such as press, radio, etc.
Another influential variable relates to the nature of the audience receiving the message
(e.g., age, gender, race) (Beaudoin and Thorson 2005). Therefore, CSR initiatives should be
carefully communicated across channels both internally and externally (Borgerson et al.
2009; Esmaeilpour and Barjoei 2016). It was also proven that brand credibility positively
impacts purchase intention by increasing the information provided and the quality
perceived (Baek, Kim, and Yu 2010), so the higher the quality, the higher the credibility
for the brand (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry 1988). In the banking sector, CSR activity
influences the customer’s perception of the quality of service which will promote the
likelihood of increased purchase and generate positive word of mouth (Poolthong and
Mandhachitara 2009; Lai et al. 2010). Based on these findings, we made the following
hypothesis:
H5: Brand credibility positively impacts patronage intentions.
H6: Brand credibility mediates the path between CSR and patronage intentions.
2.3. Patronage intentions

Non-product aspects such as CSR can create purchase outcomes as well as loyalty by
affecting consumer choice and support, though this depends on the effectiveness of the
campaign (Barone, Miyazaki, and Taylor 2000). Some studies suggested that social
responsibility initiatives entered into by a company can generate favourable attitudes
and purchase intention (Ricks 2005). Furthermore, many studies concluded that CSR
initiatives influence the consumer attitude (Mohr and Webb 2005; Porter and Kramer
2006). More specifically, the brand’s support of a cause is a primary reason for some
customers to purchase the product (Barone, Miyazaki, and Taylor 2000). Hoeffler and
Keller (2002) argued that CSR campaigns are an effective way to record better sales and
build equity, an opinion shared by Bhattacharya and Sen (2003). Uusitalo and Oksanen
(2004) emphasize business ethics as an important aspect which might not necessarily be
translated into intentions, but will definitely generate positive word of mouth. It was
proven that CSR initiates a competitive advantage for the brand, which will affect
behavioural intentions (Beckmann 2007). Figure 1 represents the proposed research
variables, and the anticipated relationship between them.
3. Research methodology
Using a quantitative approach, a survey was distributed to consumers of a number of
selected banks that practice CSR through these banks’ social media pages. They are six
banks out of the 16 operating in Jordan and are, namely, Etihad Bank, Jordan Kuwait Bank,
Invest Bank, Arab Bank, Housing Bank and Cairo Amman Bank. According to Bagozzi and
Yi (2012), the preferable sample size for social sciences research is above 200, and in this
research, we generated a sample consisting of 315 respondents (N = 315). Generally, the
sampling method used is purposive sampling a non-random technique. According to
Sekaran and Bougie (2016), the process of purposive sampling starts when the researcher
identifies the study problem and the target that will be providing the information. The
reason purposive sample was chosen here instead of using a probability sampling
technique, besides the nature of the problem, is due to its simplicity, rules and costs,
compared to the probability sampling techniques (Bagozzi and Yi 2012; Obeidat 2014;
Obeidat et al. 2017). In addition, it was much easier to collect the data this way due to the
access demands these banks employ when requesting formal lists of their clients (Obeidat
et al. 2016; Alalwan et al. 2017).
3.1. Data collection

Dewberry (2004) asserted that the aim of data analysis is to summarize the relationship
between data and come up with a final conclusion related to the problem and suggest
how it could be solved. An online survey on Google docs was designed with 28 close-
ended questions that were gathered from previous studies. The first questions were
related to the demographics of participants followed by the main variables of the study.
Items were presented on a 5-point ranging from ‘Strongly Disagree’ to ‘Strongly Agree’.
The questions were distributed as follows: six items for environmental CSR, four items for
society, six items for stakeholders CSR (Liu et al. 2014), six items for brand credibility
(Erdem and Swait 2004), three items for word of mouth and the three items for repeat
purchase scales were taken from Bruner, Hensel, and James (2001). Reliability testing was
performed using Cronbach’s alpha. The Cronbach alpha is the analysis tool that is used to
measure the strength of the reliability between two or more items in the data collected as
seen in the following Table 1 (Pallant and Manual 2010). Regarding the sample, 51.7% of
the respondents were female customers, 29.2% of them were between the ages of 31–
35And nearly 42.9% of the participants were postgraduates, finally, most of the responses
are from Arab bank customer 42%.
4. Findings and discussion

4.1. Measurement model analysis
SmartPLS (i.e., Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling) which is a software
created by Hair et al. (2016) was used to analyze the data. Through this analysis, the PLS-
SEM was applied to judge the measurement and structural models (Chin 1998). The
relationship between the model values often denotes the measurement model (outer
model); whereby, the relationship between the dormant constructs themselves indicates
the structural model. To measure the proposed model, SEM-PLS was implemented, along
with the extreme probability method. A number of measurements were carried out,
including Average Variance, Extracted Factor Loadings and Composite Reliability, in
order to regulate reliability and convergent validity.
Factor loadings are used in order to decide the weight and correlation value for each
questionnaire variable as a perceived indicator. The bigger load value can contribute to
the representation of factors’ dimensionality. To measure reliability, the Composite
Reliability (CR) measure is prominent (Salloum et al. 2018a). CR is related because it
proposes a detailed significance by using factor loadings in the assembled formula.
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) passes up the average amount of variance in the
given variable, which explains the latent construct. When the discriminate validity is
bigger than one factor, AVE can be used to examine the convergence of all factors. As
marked by Table 2, our test result for the questionnaire reliability and convergent validity
shows good reliability and convergent validity scores.
Table 1. Reliability analysis for variables.
Cronbach’s
Variable Statement/Number of items Alpha Source
CSR to (1) This bank promotes environment protection and green consumption concepts to customers and participates in related .903 CSR to environment: Liu et al.
environment activities (2014)
(2) This brand has environmental-friendly design to protect natural landscapes, places of cultural and historical interest
(3) This bank implements special programs to reduce consumption, e.g., decrease usage of disposable goods
(4) This bank implements special programs and uses relevant facilities to improve public security, fire control and food safety
(5) This bank implements special programs, uses relevant facilities to save and use energy efficiently and utilizes renewable
sources energy, such as solar and wind energy
(6) This bank implements special programs and uses relevant facilities to reduce polluted water, noise and rubbish emissions
as well as white pollutions
CSR to social (1) This bank supports nongovernmental organizations working in a problematic area .834 CSR to society: Liu et al.
(2) This bank contributes to campaigns and projects that promote the well-being of the society (2014)
(3) This bank makes the investment to create a better life for future generations
(4) This bank targets sustainable growth which considers future generations
CSR to (1) This bank respects consumer rights beyond the legal requirements .841 CSR to stakeholders: Liu et al.
stakeholders (2) This bank provides its customers with full and accurate information about its products/services (2014)
(3) Customers ‘satisfaction is highly important for this bank
(4) This bank provides a healthy and safe working environment for employees
(5) This bank complies with legal regulations completely and promptly
(6) Pornography, gambling and drug abuse are prohibited in this bank
Brand (1) This bank reminds me of someone who is competent and knows what he/she is doing .914 Erdem and Swait (2004)
credibility (2) This bank has the ability to deliver what it promises
(3) This bank delivers what it promises
(4) This bank’s product claims are believable
(5) Over time, my experiences with this bank have led me to continue dealing with it
(6) This bank doesn’t pretend to be something it isn’t
Word of mouth (1) I ‘speak up’ about this bank to people I know .902 Marketing scale handbook by
(2) I bring up this bank’s services in a positive way in conversations I have with friends and acquaintances Gordon C. Bruner II
(3) In social situations, I often speak favorably about the bank I deal with
Repeat (1) I regret dealing with a bank that practices a CSR activity .738 Marketing scale handbook by
JOURNAL OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS
purchase (2) If I could do it all over again, I would change my decision by choosing a bank that does not practice CSR Gordon C. Bruner II
(3) I would be happier if I had made a different decision when choosing my bank
519
Table 2. Convergent validity results that assures acceptable values (Factor loading, Cronbach’s Alpha,
composite reliability ≥0.70 & AVE > 0.5).
Factor
Constructs Items Loading Cronbach’s Alpha CR AVE
Brand credibility BRD_1 0.767 0.759 0.811 0.651
BRD_2 0.723
BRD_3 0.888
Environment ENV_1 0.840 0.778 0.842 0.673
ENV_2 0.912
ENV_3 0.887
Repeat purchase REPPUR_1 0.826 0.880 0.779 0.661
REPPUR_2 0.720
REPPUR_3 0.734
Society SOC_1 0.799 0.887 0.704 0.713
SOC _2 0.821
SOC _3 0.706
Stakeholders STAK_1 0.792 0.883 0.895 0.729
STAK _2 0.759
STAK _3 0.980
Word of mouth WOM_1 0.788 0.722 0.801 0.770
WOM_2 0.877
WOM_3 0.794
4.1.1. Convergent validity

As stated by Hair et al. (2012), we used the factor loadings, variance extracted and
reliability (consisting of Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability) as a sign to evaluate
the relative quantity of convergent validity. The reliability coefficient and composite
reliability (CR) for each of the constructs go beyond 0.7, representing internal consistency
amongst many measurements of a construct (Hair et al. 2012). As shown in Table 2,
Cronbach’s alpha scores surpass the satisfactory value of 0.7 (Gefen, Straub, and Boudreau
2000; Obeidat et al. 2017) and composite reliabilities of hypotheses extend from 0.704 to
0.895. Moreover, all average variance extracted (AVE) values, extending from 0.651 to
0.770, assure the standard of explaining at least 50% of variance extracted between a set
of items (Falk and Miller 1992), underlying the latent construct. Therefore, the measures
for assessing the constructs are thought to reach convergent validity.
4.1.2. Discriminant validity

As is clear from Table 4, the necessities of discriminant validity are fulfilled as all AVE
values are bigger than squared correlation concerning the constructs in the measurement
model (Hair et al. 2012). It is suggested that the construct establishes at least 50% of the
measurement variance while the AVE value is above 0.5. Partial Least Squares (SmartPLS
version V3.2.6) was exercised in order to estimate the discriminate value. Table 3 consists
of the factor’s loadings and the cross-loadings. The detailed investigation of the cross-
loadings and loadings makes it evident that the measurement elements all load mostly on
their own latent constructs instead of loading on other constructs. Moreover, Table 4
contains the AVE analysis. The bold diagonal features in the table elaborate the square
root of the AVE scores. Contrarily, the off-load diagonal components imply the correla-
tions between the constructs. It is evident from the table that the square root of the AVE
values lies in the scale of 0.737 to 0.902 that is greater in comparison to the advised value
of 0.5. The AVE is suggestively greater in comparison to any correlations among the
construct for every construct that visibly symbolizes a higher variance of all constructs
Table 3. Cross-loading results.

Brand credibility ENV REPPUR SOC STAK WOM
BRD_1 0.767 0.105 0.494 0.166 0.316 0.515
BRD_2 0.723 0.456 0.373 0.258 0.224 0.101
BRD_3 0.888 0.585 0.251 0.292 0.585 0.484
ENV_1 0.121 0.840 0.383 0.198 0.139 0.392
ENV_2 0.282 0.912 0.565 0.299 0.332 0.338
ENV_3 0.446 0.887 0.595 0.143 0.201 0.401
REPPUR_1 0.532 0.554 0.826 0.244 0.363 0.665
REPPUR_2 0.404 0.448 0.720 0.581 0.319 0.434
REPPUR_3 0.468 0481 0.734 0.332 0.315 0.319
SOC_1 0.240 0.292 0.334 0.799 0.237 0.325
SOC _2 0.385 0.293 0.497 0.821 0.351 0.451
SOC _3 0.373 0.387 0.596 0.706 0.373 0.434
STAK_1 0.372 0.239 0.339 0.464 0.792 0.509
STAK _2 0.237 0.415 0.398 0.342 0.759 0.472
STAK _3 0.478 0.496 0.437 0.291 0.980 0.210
WOM_1 0.244 0.430 0.420 0.503 0.303 0.788
WOM_2 0.583 0.547 0.534 0.382 0.481 0.877
WOM_3 0.362 0.434 0.525 0.449 0.542 0.794
Table 4. Fornell-Larcker scale.

Advertising ENV REPPUR SOC STAK WOM
Advertising 0.855
ENV 0.152 0.902 0.404 0.299 0.526 0.250
REPPUR 0.247 0.591 0.796 0.288 0.431 0.578
SOC 0.536 0.276 0.329 0.872 0.311 0.451
STAK 0.144 0.671 0.278 0.281 0.874 0.201
WOM 0.552 0.363 0.599 0.553 0.323 0.737
Table 5. Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio (HTMT).

Advertising ENV REPPUR SOC STAK WOM
Advertising
ENV 0.132
REPPUR 0.101 0.290
SOC 0.144 0.323 0.216
STAK 0.071 0.292 0.230 0.284
WOM 0.135 0.203 0.426 0.215 0.412
with their own actions rather than other constructs in the model, which improves the
discriminate validity.
The second condition of discriminant validity is that the loading of each item should be
higher as linked to the loading of its equivalent variable as per (Gefen, Straub, and
Boudreau 2000). Therefore, it is evident from Table 5 that the second criterion has also
been achieved. The third condition of discriminant validity is that the values of HTMT
should be less than 0.85. From Table 5, the third criterion has also been proven; ensuring
the fact that the discriminant validity has been recognized.
4.1.3. Coefficient of determination R2

The structural model is normally checked using the coefficient of determination
(R2 value) measure (Dreheeb, Basir, and Fabil 2016). This coefficient is applied in order
to make a decision about the predictive accuracy of the model and is treated as the
Table 6. R2 of the endogenous latent variables.

Constructs R2 Results
Brand credibility 0.781 High
Patronage intention 0.694 High
squared correlation among specific endogenous construct’s actual and predicted values
(Hair et al. 2016). The exogenous latent variables’ combining effect on an endogenous
latent variable is implied by the coefficient. The coefficient is the squared correlation
between the actual and predicted values of the variables. Moreover, it entails the degree
of variance in the endogenous constructs strengthened by each exogenous construct
identified with it. As specified by (Chin 1998), when the value is greater than 0.67, it is
seen as high, when it is between 0.33 and 0.66 its medium, and in the range of 0.19 to
0.33 it is considered weak. Likewise, when the approximation is less than 0.19, it is
inadmissible. Table 6 shows that the model has high predictive power, which supports
almost 79% and 69% of the variance in the brand credibility and patronage intention,
respectively.
4.1.4. Test of the hypotheses – path coefficient

A structural model known as SEM-PLS was used to check the proposed hypotheses and
evaluate the relationship present among the theoretical constructs (Salloum et al.
2018a, 2018b). Table 7 and Figure 2 show the results of the structural model.
According to the results, all hypotheses are significant. Based on the data analysis,
hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5 were supported by the empirical data. The results
showed that Patronage intention was significantly influenced by (CSR) (β = 0.391,
P < 0.05), and Brand credibility (β = 0.277, P < 0.05). Thus, supporting H1 and H5,
respectively. Furthermore, Brand credibility significantly influenced Stakeholders
(β = 0.394, P < 0.001), Society (β = 0.517, P < 0.01), and Environment (β = 0.214,
P < 0.001) and therefore supporting H2, H3, and H4. The summary of the hypotheses
testing results is shown in Table 7.
Moreover, in agreement with Preacher and Hayes (2004) and Preacher and Hayes
(2008) bootstrapping method another test was conducted using SmartPLS for the indirect
impact of brand credibility on the path between environmental CSR and patronage
intentions. Similarly, the findings show that the indirect influence with β = 0.202 is
meaningful with its t-value equal to 3.430. Furthermore, the method of Preacher and
Table 7. Results of structural model – Research hypotheses (Significant at p** = <0.01, p* <0.05).
H Relationship Path t-value p-value Direction Decision
H1 CSR 0.391 1.382 0.041 Positive Supported*
-> Patronage intention
H2 Stakeholders 0.394 10.121 0.001 Positive Supported**
-> Brand credibility
H3 Society 0.517 4.192 0.010 Positive Supported**
H4 Environment 0.214 6.312 0.002 Positive Supported**
H5 Brand credibility 0.277 2.531 0.032 Positive Supported*
-> Patronage intention
H6 CSR->Brand credibility 0.202 3.430 0.035 Positive Supported*, partial mediation
->patronage intention
Figure 2. Path coefficient results (Significant at p** ≤0.01, p* <0.05).
Hayes (2008) would indicate the trend, with 0.67, 95% Boot CI: [LL = 0.216, UL = 0.334], as
not overlapping zero in-between the values that specify for mediation. Consequently, we
conclude that brand credibility partially mediates the path between environmental CSR
and patronage intentions.
5. Discussion and conclusion

Based on a sample of (N = 315) Jordanian consumers whose banks practiced CSR, this
study examined the effect of brand credibility on the relationship between corporate
social responsibility and patronage intentions. Social responsibility was measured by
three variables (stakeholders, society, and environment), whereby, a patronage intention
was measured by word of mouth and repeat purchase. The results of the study indicate
that the bank that practices CSR, whether it is stakeholder, social, or environmental, holds
greater credibility for customers and this, in fact, affects positive word of mouth and
enhances repeat purchase.
With regards to H1, which suggests that CSR positively influences patronage intentions
(word of mouth and repeat purchase) in the banking sector in Jordan. This result is
supported by the findings of the Creyer and Ross (1997) which found a relationship
between CSR and patronage intentions. However, the findings of the Creyer and Ross
(1997) did not link it to any industry and without having the same dimensions as this
study had (which are stakeholders, Society and environment). Thus, practicing corporate
social responsibility activity, in general, adds value to the bank which affects the custo-
mer’s perception. This can be observed in real life; for example, the brands that support
King Hussein Cancer Centre were found to touch the customer’s emotions and the
customer’s perception of the brand (Obeidat et al. 2016). Thus, giving leverage to the
image, this in return enhances word of mouth and repeat purchase.
The second hypothesis (H2) suggested that Stakeholder CSR positively influences
brand credibility. Previously (Rhee, Ryu, and Yoon 2006) noticed the importance of
Stakeholder CSR in building brand credibility. The analysis results confirm the positive
influence of Stakeholder CSR on brand credibility. This is especially true in the Jordanian
culture as stakeholders can strongly sway public opinion. For example, the Arab Bank
gained credibility with Jordanians since the Shoman family used to run the bank
(Moussetis, Abu Rahma, and Nakos 2005; Obeidat et al. 2016). Consequently, the very
good reputation of that family earned credibility for the bank among Jordanian society.
Evidence suggests corporate social responsibility with its activities when communicated
well will create awareness for the brand as well as for its stakeholders and vice versa
(Maignan and Ferrell 2004). Moreover, when Stakeholders act in parallel with the com-
pany’s CSR activities they will become more credible. In addition, their credibility will also
affect the brand in return (Sen et al. 2006). Clarkson (1995) also indicated corporate social
responsibility and stakeholders’ credibility are linked (Alamro and Rowley 2011).
The third hypothesis (H3), Social CSR positively influences the brand credibility in the
banking sector and this relationship supports the findings of a study by Kim (2017), which
confirms the relationship between a firm’s social activities and its image, which will lead to
a more credible brand. These social activities are visible and are therefore likely to gain
strong credibility among customers. ‘Visible’ here means that the target audience can
easily recognize these activities (Marin and Ruiz 2007). For example, when Jordan Invest
Bank decided to support underprivileged children, they announced it to the public so
people can be aware of such activity (Obeidat et al. 2016). This directly raises the
credibility of the bank when it is seen to be practicing ‘goodwill’ and giving back to the
community.
The fourth hypothesis (H4) (i.e., Environmental CSR positively influences brand cred-
ibility in the banking sector in Jordan) was also supported. This relationship is also
supported by previous research where Laroche, Bergeron, and Barbaro-Forleo (2001)
reported that a brand is more favourable when engaging in more ecologically friendly
lifestyle and environmentally friendly practices, especially manufacturers who undertake
an environmental CSR initiative (Mohr and Webb 2005). This positive result can be
justified by saying that the banks that practice environmental activities fail to announce
this or bring it to their customers’ attention. For example, a customer cannot be aware
that his/her bank saves energy or uses paperless procedures unless they announce it and
highlight it in their campaigns. The questions mentioned in the survey related to this
dimension highlighted environmental activity such as reducing polluted water and
decreasing the consumption of disposable goods.
The final hypothesis (H5) which proposed that brand credibility affects patronage
intentions was also supported. The analysis results confirm that brand credibility has
a positive effect on patronage intentions, which aligned with results of a previous study
by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988) that stated that credibility positively often
affects purchase intentions. Consequently, the more credible the brand is, the more the
people will buy and talk positively about it. Therefore, greater efforts should be made to
enhance the credibility of the brand by strengthening all influential factors, whether it is
the quality, price, or a social activity. Evidently, how the bank announces and promotes
the activity is very important since participating in CSR without advertising the fact fails to
have the desired effect. To the best of our knowledge, the findings of this research and the
fifth hypothesis which suggested that brand credibility is a mediator between corporate
social responsibility and patronage intentions were tested in the Jordanian banking sector
for the first time. Since the competition is increasing with time, banks need to have
a competitive advantage in order to beat this competition; as a result, they must start
adopting some marketing concepts like CSR as a key strategy due to the huge effect it has
on word of mouth and repeat purchase.
6. Implications, limitations and future research

Practically, this study expands the traditional understanding of the impact of CSR on both
brand credibility and patronage intentions and recommends engaging in more CSR
activities to gain more credibility, which affects the word of mouth and enhances the
repeat purchase. Customers will believe more in a bank that helps the community and the
society when it supports and promotes environmental protection, green consumption or
puts time and money into improving public security. Moreover, implementing special
programs and using resources to reduce water, noise and other forms of pollution will
also help in this regard. Moreover, customers are more likely to relate to the banks that
carry out social responsibility as part of self-esteem and self-enhancement. Banks that
engage in CSR gain greater customer trust and credibility, which is a major focus of this
research. Moreover, the outcomes have managerial effects in gaining the customer’s
credibility in the banking sector by practicing and engaging in social activities.
The results highlight that the credibility of the bank also affects the customer’s trust in
the bank. Consequently, the findings show that customers will have more trust in banks
that practices CSR regardless of whether it should be social, environment or stakeholders.
Given the obvious benefits of CSR, we recommend that banks formulate a clear strategy,
and allocate their managers with a budget to invest in a useful CSR initiative. They should
take care to promote the initiative widely to reinforce the purchase and gain credibility.
For theoretical implications, understanding the impact of CSR on patronage intentions
from the viewpoint of bank customers can assist managers to understand how to best
design CSR programs. The results put forward in this research are very important for bank
managers involved with CSR program development. They confirm that managers who are
involved in designing CSR programs must target and balance their relationship with
stakeholders, society and the environment, which positively influence brand credibility.
Thus, bank managers must clearly consider the CSR target to achieve a competitive
customer edge and avoid implementation misplacement. Moreover, the bank must
implement more activities in the dimension of social responsibility to enhance its cred-
ibility, because CSR directly affects the credibility of the bank. Based on the research
results, it is also recommended that banks create promotional campaigns that focus on
their employees as well as the outside public and consumers.
As with all research studies, a number of limitations exist that could be examined in the
future. First, to generalize the findings of this study, testing this model in new settings and
countries would provide valuable insights regarding CSR and patronage intentions in the
cultures of different nations. Second, almost the entire body of literature on CSR research
uses the survey method as the main tool for data collection, longitudinal and
experimental designs could be used to examine the causality between the variables
identified here. Third, examining other new dimensions and exploring their role in
customer patronage intention could provide more insights into the nature of CSR effec-
tiveness. Moreover, bank managers should lend more importance to the end results of the
design and implementation of CSR. Consequently, further research should take into
account vital factors to examine such associations. Finally, future research could employ
a comparative design for comparing the banks with and without ongoing CSR programs.
This would better highlight the casualty and the influence of some of the factors
examined here such as brand credibility.
This research helps toward understanding the impact of brand credibility on relationships
between corporate social responsibility and patronage intentions. Future research may
extend our proposed model with different behavior, settings and countries that would
provide variable insights regarding CSR and patronage intentions in a different context and
organizational culture. Based on the proposed model and analysis results, future research can
extend the proposed model by investigating new dimensions. Moreover, future research
could analyze trends in thoughts and opinions by conducting interviews with key people
related to this study such as bank customers, managers and other CSR stakeholders.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Hala Mohammed Abu Zayyad currently works as a Regional Digital marketing manager for Middle
East, Africa and India in an international company, a Leader in dental prophylaxis and prevention-
Electro Medical Systems (EMS) located in Nyon, Switzerland. Received her MBA in 2018 from the
University of Jordan, CMS degree in 2008 from London College of Business School. Acquired
diversified experience in different industries in Marketing, Public Relations, Advertising, Media
Relations and Events.
Zaid Mohammad Obeidat holds a PhD in Marketing from Durham University, an MBA and a BA in
Marketing. Zaid is currently an Associate Professor in Marketing in the University of Jordan. His work
focuses on Consumer Rights, Consumer Behavior, Misbehavior, and the Online Context. His main
interest lies in Consumer Online Revenge Behaviors and the variables that affect and encourages
these Behaviors. He works in the University of Jordan, teaching International Marketing, Consumer
Behavior, and Marketing Management & Research. His work has been published in well respected
International Journals & Conferences such as Computers in Human Behavior, Psychology and
Marketing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer services, IJBR, EJBR, and EMAC.
Muhammad Turki Alshurideh is working for the College of Business Administration, University of
Sharjah, UAE as a full-time faculty member and for the School of Business at the University of Jordan
in Jordan. Regarding the teaching, he has the responsibility to teach a wide range of Marketing and
Business topics for both undergraduate and postgraduate students. He has more than 40 published
papers in different Marketing and Business topics mainly CRM and Customer Retention areas.
Mohammd Abuhashesh is currently working as an Assistant Professor in the E-Marketing and Social
Media Department at PSUT; also he worked as a President Assistant of PSUT in 2017–2018. In
addition to being a Regional Trainer for Speedway LLC in USA since 2006, he served as a General
Manager at the same company in 2006–2016. His research interests are mainly in E-Marketing, Social
Media, and Consumer Behaviour.
Mahmoud Maqableh is an Associate Professor of Information Systems at the University of Jordan,

Jordan. He received his Ph.D. degree in Information Technology Management from Durham
University, United Kingdom, in 2012. He received his Master degree in Computer Science from
Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang–Malaysia and Bachelor in Computer Science from Al Albayt
University–Jordan in 2006 and 2004, respectively. His current research focuses on Information
Systems, Information Security, Electronic Commerce, Social Networks, and Digital Watermarking
Ra’ed Masa’deh is a Professor of Management Information Systems at the University of Jordan,
Jordan. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Nottingham, UK. Prof. Masa’deh served as an
Honor Professor at the University of Warwick, UK, 2018-2019. Currently he acts as the Dean of the
School of Business at the University of Jordan in Aqaba branch. Prof. Ra’ed Masa’deh research
interests include Knowledge Economy, IT-Business Strategic Alignment, Information Management,
Knowledge Management Capabilities; IT-based Competitive Advantages; Quantitative Methods,
and Structural Equation Modeling. His research has been published in journals including
Computers in Human Behavior, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, VINE Journal of
Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Journal of Management Development,
Management Research Review, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, Interdisciplinary Journal of Information,
Knowledge, and Management, International Journal of Technology Diffusion, International Journal
of Knowledge Management Studies, and International Journal of Business Innovation and Research.
ORCID
Zaid Mohammad Obeidat http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3710-6901
Muhammad Turki Alshurideh http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7336-381X
Mahmoud Maqableh http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2376-7143
Ra’ed Masa’deh http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9070-3732
References
Aboud, A., and A. Diab. 2018. “The Impact of Social, Environmental and Corporate Governance
Disclosures on Firm Value: Evidence from Egypt.” Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies 8
(4): 442–458. doi:10.1108/JAEE-08-2017-0079.
Achua, J. K. 2008. “Corporate Social Responsibility in Nigerian Banking System.” Society and Business
Review 3 (1): 57–71. doi:10.1108/17465680810852748.
Alalwan, A. A., N. P. Rana, Y. K. Dwivedi, and R. Algharabat. 2017. “Social Media in Marketing:
A Review and Analysis of the Existing Literature.” Telematics and Informatics 34 (7): 1177–1190.
doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.05.008.
Alamro, A., and J. Rowley. 2011. “Antecedents of Brand Preference for Mobile Telecommunications
Services.” Journal of Product & Brand Management 20: 475–486.
Anderson, M. A. 2019. “The Business Case for CSR: A Supply Chain Management Strategy.” ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses, Capella University. 121. Order No. 13426558. https://search.proquest.
com/docview/2185919561?accountid=53260
Anselmsson, J., and U. Johansson. 2007. “Corporate Social Responsibility and the Positioning of
Grocery Brands: An Exploratory Study of Retailer and Manufacturer Brands at Point of Purchase.”
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 35 (10): 835–856. doi:10.1108/
09590550710820702.
Arıkan, E., and S. Güner. 2013. “The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility, Service Quality and
Customer-company Identification on Customers.” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 99:
304–313. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.498.
Arli, D. I., and H. K. Lasmono. 2010. “Consumers’ Perception of Corporate Social Responsibility in
a Developing Country.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 34 (1): 46–51. doi:10.1111/
ijc.2010.34.issue-1.
Aro, K., K. Suomi, and S. Saraniemi. 2018. “Antecedents and Consequences of Destination Brand
Love – A Case Study from Finnish Lapland.” Tourism Management 67: 71–81. doi:10.1016/j.
tourman.2018.01.003.
Baek, T. H., J. Kim, and J. H. Yu. 2010. “The Differential Roles of Brand Credibility and Brand Prestige in
Consumer Brand Choice.” Psychology & Marketing 27 (7): 662–678. doi:10.1002/mar.v27:7.
Bagozzi, R. P., and Y. Yi. 2012. “Specification, Evaluation, and Interpretation of Structural Equation
Models.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 40 (1): 8–34. doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0278-x.
Barnett, M. 2011. “The New CSR: This Time It’s Profitable.” Marketing Week 34: 15.
Barone, M. J., A. D. Miyazaki, and K. A. Taylor. 2000. “The Influence of Cause-related Marketing on
Consumer Choice: Does One Good Turn Deserve Another?” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 28 (2): 248–262. doi:10.1177/0092070300282006.
Beaudoin, C. E., and E. Thorson. 2005. “Credibility Perceptions of News Coverage of Ethnic Groups:
The Predictive Roles of Race and News Use.” The Howard Journal of Communications 16 (1): 33–48.
doi:10.1080/10646170590915844.
Beckmann, S. C. 2007. “Consumers and Corporate Social Responsibility: Matching the
Unmatchable?” Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) 15 (1): 27–36. doi:10.1016/S1441-3582(07)
70026-5.
Ben Ammar, H., F. B. Naoui, and I. Zaiem. 2015. “The Influence of the Perceptions of Corporate Social
Responsibility on Trust toward the Brand.” International Journal of Management, Accounting &
Economics 2: 499–516.
Berman, S. L., A. C. Wicks, S. Kotha, and T. M. Jones. 1999. “Does Stakeholder Orientation Matter? the
Relationship between Stakeholder Management Models and Firm Financial Performance.”
Academy of Management Journal 42: 488–506.
Bhattacharya, C. B., D. Korschun, and S. Sen. 2009. “Strengthening Stakeholder-company
Relationships through Mutually Beneficial Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives.” Journal of
Business Ethics 85 (2): 257–272. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9730-3.
Bhattacharya, C. B., and S. Sen. 2003. “Consumer-company Identification: A Framework for
Understanding Consumers’ Relationships with Companies.” Journal of Marketing 67 (2): 76–88.
doi:10.1509/jmkg.67.2.76.18609.
Bohdanowicz, P., and P. Zientara. 2009. “Hotel Companies’ Contribution to Improving the Quality of
Life of Local Communities and the Well-being of Their Employees.” Tourism and Hospitality
Research 9 (2): 147–158. doi:10.1057/thr.2008.46.
Borgerson, J. L., J. E. Schroeder, M. Escudero Magnusson, and F. Magnusson. 2009. “Corporate
Communication, Ethics, and Operational Identity: A Case Study of Benetton.” Business Ethics:
A European Review 18 (3): 209–223. doi:10.1111/beer.2009.18.issue-3.
Boulding, W., A. Kalra, R. Staelin, and V. A. Zeithaml. 1993. “A Dynamic Process Model of Service
Quality: From Expectations to Behavioral Intentions.” Journal of Marketing Research 30 (1): 7–27.
doi:10.1177/002224379303000102.
Bruner, G. C., P. J. Hensel, and K. E. James. 2001. Marketing Scales Handbook. 3rd ed. Chicago: GCPII
Productions. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Bruun, C. B. 2016. “An Explorative Study of ‘Google Green’s’ CSR Communication and the Extent to
Which It Reflects Normative Theories on CSR Communication.” Unpublished Dissertation, Aarhus
University, Aarhus.
Bulut, D., and C. Yumrukaya. 2009. “Corporate Social Responsibility in Culture and Art.” Management of
Environmental Quality: an International Journal 20 (3): 311–320. doi:10.1108/14777830910950702.
Carroll, A. B. 1979. “A Three-dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance.” Academy of
Management Review 4 (4): 497–505. doi:10.5465/amr.1979.4498296.
Carroll, A. B. 1991. “The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management
of Organizational Stakeholders.” Business Horizons 34 (4): 39–49. doi:10.1016/0007-6813(91)
90005-G.
Chin, W. W. 1998. “The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling.” Modern
Methods for Business Research 295: 295–336.
Chomvilailuk, R., and K. Butcher. 2010. “Enhancing Brand Preference through Corporate Social
Responsibility Initiatives in the Thai Banking Sector.” Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics 22 (3): 397–418. doi:10.1108/13555851011062296.
Chouthoy, S., and R. Kazi. 2016. “En Route to a Theory-building Consumer Brand Commitment
through CSR Reputation.” Global Business & Management Research 8: 67–82.
Clarkson, M. E. 1995. “A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social
Performance.” Academy of Management Review 20 (1): 92–117. doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9503271994.
Creyer, E. H., and W. T. Ross Jr. 1997. “Tradeoffs between Price and Quality: How a Value Index
Affects.” Journal of Consumer Affairs 31 (2): 280–302. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.1997.tb00392.x.
Dahlsrud, A. 2008. “How Corporate Social Responsibility Is Defined: An Analysis of 37 Definitions.”
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 15: 1–13. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1535-
3966.
Dewberry, C. 2004. Statistical Methods for Organizational Research: Theory and Practice. 1st ed.
New York: Routledge.
Dichter, E. 1966. “How Word-of-mouth Advertising Works.” Harvard Business Review 44: 147–160.
Dreheeb, A. E., N. Basir, and N. Fabil. 2016. “Impact of System Quality on Users’ Satisfaction in
Continuation of the Use of E-learning System.” International Journal of e-Education, e-Business,
e-Management and E-learning 6 (1): 13–25. doi:10.17706/ijeeee.2016.6.1.13-20.
Dummett, K. 2006. “Drivers for Corporate Environmental Responsibility (CER).” Environment,
Development and Sustainability 8 (3): 375–389. doi:10.1007/s10668-005-7900-3.
Eraqi, M. I. 2010. “Social Responsibility as an Innovative Approach for Enhancing
Competitiveness of Tourism Business Sector in Egypt.” Tourism Analysis 15 (1): 45–55.
doi:10.3727/108354210X12724734223595.
Erdem, T., and J. Swait. 2004. “Brand Credibility, Brand Consideration, and Choice.” Journal of
Consumer Research 31 (1): 191–198. doi:10.1086/383434.
Erdem, T., J. Swait, and J. Louviere. 2002. “The Impact of Brand Credibility on Consumer Price
Sensitivity.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 19 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1016/S0167-
8116(01)00048-9.
Erdiaw-Kwasie, M. O., K. Alam, and M. Shahiduzzaman. 2017. “Towards Understanding Stakeholder
Salience Transition and Relational Approach to ‘Better’ Corporate Social Responsibility: A Case for
A Proposed Model in Practice.” Journal of Business Ethics 144 (1): 85–101. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-
2805-z.
Esmaeilpour, M., and S. Barjoei. 2016. “The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility and Image on
Brand Equity.” Global Business & Management Research 8: 55–66.
Falk, R. F., and N. B. Miller. 1992. A Primer for Soft Modeling. USA: University of Akron Press.
Fatma, M., and Z. Rahman. 2016. “The CSR’s Influence on Customer Responses in Indian Banking
Sector.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 29: 49–57. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.008.
Foote, J., N. Gaffney, and J. R. Evans. 2010. “Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications for
Performance Excellence.” Total Quality Management 21 (8): 799–812. doi:10.1080/
14783363.2010.487660.
Forcadell, F. J., and E. Aracil. 2017. “European Banks’ Reputation for Corporate Social Responsibility.”
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 24 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1002/csr.v24.1.
Freeman, R. E., and S. Dmytriyev. 2017. “Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Theory:
Learning from Each Other.” Symphonya 1: 7–15.
Gefen, D., D. Straub, and M. C. Boudreau. 2000. “Structural Equation Modeling and Regression:
Guidelines for Research Practice.” Communications of the Association for Information Systems 4 (1):
7. doi:10.17705/1CAIS.00407.
Genedy, A. S., and A. Sakr. 2017. “The Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and
Corporate Financial Performance in Developing Countries. Case of Egypt.” International Journal of
Business and Economic Development (IJBED) 5: 59–73.
Ha, D. 2017. “The Effect of Foodservice Company’s Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities on
Value through Customer Satisfaction.” Korean Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 26 (6): 103–122.
doi:10.24992/KJHT.2017.08.26.06.103.
Hair, J. F., G. T. M. Hult, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2016. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications.
Hair, J. F., M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, and J. A. Mena. 2012. “An Assessment of the Use of Partial Least
Squares Structural Equation Modeling in Marketing Research.” Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 40 (3): 414–433. doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6.
Heesup, H., Y. Jongsik, and K. Wansoo. 2019. “Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility and the
Strategy to Boost the Airline’s Image and Customer Loyalty Intentions.” Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing 36 (3): 371–383. doi:10.1080/10548408.2018.1557580.
Hess, D. 2001. “Regulating Corporate Social Performance: A New Look at Social Accounting,
Auditing, and Reporting.” Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (2): 307–330. doi:10.2307/3857751.
Hoeffler, S., and K. L. Keller. 2002. “Building Brand Equity through Corporate Societal Marketing.”
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 21 (1): 78–89. doi:10.1509/jppm.21.1.78.17600.
Jahdi, K. S., and G. Acikdilli. 2009. “Marketing Communications and Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR): Marriage of Convenience or Shotgun Wedding?” Journal of Business Ethics 88 (1): 103–113.
doi:10.1007/s10551-009-0113-1.
Jamali, D. 2007. “The Case for Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries.”
Business and Society Review 112 (1): 1–27. doi:10.1111/basr.2007.112.issue-1.
Kao, E. H., C. C. Yeh, L. H. Wang, and H. G. Fung. 2018. “The Relationship between CSR and
Performance: Evidence in China.” Pacific-Basin Finance Journal 51: 155–170. doi:10.1016/j.
pacfin.2018.04.006.
Kaul, A., and J. Luo. 2018. “An Economic Case for CSR: T He Comparative Efficiency of For-profit Firms
in Meeting Consumer Demand for Social Goods.” Strategic Management Journal 39 (6):
1650–1677. doi:10.1002/smj.2018.39.issue-6.
Kim, S. 2017. “The Process Model of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Communication: CSR
Communication and Its Relationship with Consumers’ CSR Knowledge, Trust, and Corporate
Reputation Perception.” Journal of Business Ethics 1–17. doi:10.1007/s10551-017-3433-6.
Klimkiewicz, K., and V. Oltra. 2017. “Does CSR Enhance Employer Attractiveness? the Role of
Millennial Job Seekers’ Attitudes.” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management 24 (5): 449–463. doi:10.1002/csr.v24.5.
Lafferty, B. A. 2007. “The Relevance of Fit in a Cause–brand Alliance When Consumers Evaluate
Corporate Credibility.” Journal of Business Research 60 (5): 447–453. doi:10.1016/j.
jbusres.2006.09.030.
Lai, C. S., C. J. Chiu, C. F. Yang, and D. C. Pai. 2010. “The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on
Brand Performance: The Mediating Effect of Industrial Brand Equity and Corporate Reputation.”
Journal of Business Ethics 95 (3): 457–469. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0433-1.
Laroche, M., J. Bergeron, and G. Barbaro-Forleo. 2001. “Targeting Consumers Who are Willing to Pay
More for Environmentally Friendly Products.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 18 (6): 503–520.
doi:10.1108/EUM0000000006155.
Lee, S., and S. Y. Park. 2009. “Do Socially Responsible Activities Help Hotels and Casinos Achieve
Their Financial Goals?” International Journal of Hospitality Management 28 (1): 105–112.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.06.003.
Liu, M., I. Wong, R. Chu, and T.-H. Tseng. 2014. “Do Perceived CSR Initiatives Enhance Customer
Preference and Loyalty in Casinos?” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management 26 (7): 1024–1045. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-05-2013-0222.
Luo, X., and C. B. Bhattacharya. 2006. “Corporate Social Responsibility, Customer Satisfaction, and
Market Value.” Journal of Marketing 70 (4): 1–18. doi:10.1509/jmkg.70.4.001.
Maignan, I., and O. C. Ferrell. 2003. “Nature of Corporate Responsibilities: Perspectives from
American, French, and German Consumers.” Journal of Business Research 56 (1): 55–67.
doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00222-3.
Maignan, I., and O. C. Ferrell. 2004. “Corporate Social Responsibility and Marketing: An Integrative
Framework.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 32 (1): 3–19. doi:10.1177/
0092070303258971.
Maignan, I., O. C. Ferrell, and G. T. M. Hult. 1999. “Corporate Citizenship: Cultural Antecedents and
Business Benefits.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27 (4): 455–469. doi:10.1177/
0092070399274005.
Majoch, A. A., A. G. Hoepner, and T. Hebb. 2017. “Sources of Stakeholder Salience in the Responsible
Investment Movement: Why Do Investors Sign the Principles for Responsible Investment?”
Journal of Business Ethics 140 (4): 723–741. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3057-2.
Marin, L., and S. Ruiz. 2007. ““I Need You Too!” Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers and
the Role of Social Responsibility.” Journal of Business Ethics 71 (3): 245–260. doi:10.1007/s10551-
006-9137-y.
Marin, L., S. Ruiz, and A. Rubio. 2009. “The Role of Identity Salience in the Effects of Corporate Social
Responsibility on Consumer Behavior.” Journal of Business Ethics 84 (1): 65–78. doi:10.1007/
s10551-008-9673-8.
Martínez, P., A. Pérez, and I. R. Del Bosque. 2014. “Exploring the Role of CSR in the Organizational
Identity of Hospitality Companies: A Case from the Spanish Tourism Industry.” Journal of Business
Ethics 124 (1): 47–66. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1857-1.
Mazin, I. I., D. J. Singh, M. D. Johannes, and M. H. Du. 2008. “Unconventional Superconductivity with
a Sign Reversal in the Order Parameter of LaFeAsO 1− X F X.” Physical Review Letters 101 (5): 1–4.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.057003.
Mohr, L. A., and D. J. Webb. 2005. “The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility and Price on
Consumer Responses.” Journal of Consumer Affairs 39 (1): 121–147. doi:10.1111/j.1745-
6606.2005.00006.x.
Mohr, L. A., D. J. Webb, and K. E. Harris. 2001. “Do Consumers Expect Companies to Be Socially
Responsible? the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Buying Behavior.” Journal of
Consumer Affairs 35 (1): 45–72. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00102.x.
Moussetis, R. C., A. Abu Rahma, and G. Nakos. 2005. “Strategic Behavior and National Culture: The
Case of the Banking Industry in Jordan.” Competitiveness Review: an International Business Journal
Incorporating Journal of Global Competitiveness 15 (2): 101–115. doi:10.1108/
10595420510818759.
Murray, K. B., and C. M. Vogel. 1997. “Using a Hierarchy-of-effects Approach to Gauge the
Effectiveness of Corporate Social Responsibility to Generate Goodwill toward the Firm:
Financial versus Nonfinancial Impacts.” Journal of Business Research 38 (2): 141–159.
doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(96)00061-6.
Naményi, J. 2012. “A pénzügyi válság hatása központi bankok szabályozására [Impacts of the
Financial Crisis on Central Banks’ Regulation].” In Verseny és szabályozás. MTA KRTK
Közgazdaság-tudományi Intézet, 167–219.
Obeidat, Z. M. 2014. “Beware the Fury of the Digital Age Consumer: Online Consumer Revenge:
A Cognitive Appraisal Perspective.” Doctoral dissertation, Durham University.
Obeidat, Z. M., M. Obeidat, S. H. Xiao, and A. M. Obeidat. 2016. “Jordanian’s Economic Challenges &
Aspirations: An Empirical Examination.” International Journal of Business and Economics Research 3
(5): 29–37. doi:10.11648/j.ijber.20160503.11.
Obeidat, Z. M., S. H. Xiao, Z. Al Qasem, R. Aldweeri, and A. Obeidat. 2018. “Social Media Revenge:
A Typology of Online Consumer Revenge.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 45:
239–255. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.09.010.
Obeidat, Z. M., S. H. Xiao, G. R. Iyer, and M. Nicholson. 2017. “Consumer Revenge Using the Internet
and Social Media: An Examination of the Role of Service Failure Types and Cognitive Appraisal
Processes.” Psychology & Marketing 34 (4): 496–515. doi:10.1002/mar.21002.
Oliver, R. L. 1980. “A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction
Decisions.” Journal of Marketing Research 17 (4): 460–469. doi:10.1177/002224378001700405.
Osterhus, T. L. 1997. “Pro-social Consumer Influence Strategies: When and How Do They Work?”
Journal of Marketing 61 (4): 16–29. doi:10.1177/002224299706100402.
Pallant, J., and S. S. Manual. 2010. A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS. Berkshire UK:
McGraw-Hill Education.
Parasuraman, A., V. A. Zeithaml, and L. L. Berry. 1988. “Servqual: A Multiple-item Scale for Measuring
Consumer Perc.” Journal of Retailing 64: 12.
Pedersen, O. W. 2010. “Environmental Principles and Environmental Justice.” Environmental Law

Review 12 (1): 26–49. doi:10.1350/enlr.2010.12.1.074.
Peloza, J., and J. Shang. 2011. “How Can Corporate Social Responsibility Activities Create Value for
Stakeholders? A Systematic Review.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 39 (1): 117–135.
doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0213-6.
Planken, B., C. Nickerson, and S. Sahu. 2013. “CSR across the Globe: Dutch and Indian Consumers’
Responses to CSR.” International Journal of Organizational Analysis 21 (3): 357–372. doi:10.1108/
IJOA-Jan-2012-0551.
Poolthong, Y., and R. Mandhachitara. 2009. “Customer Expectations of CSR, Perceived Service
Quality and Brand Effect in Thai Retail Banking.” International Journal of Bank Marketing 27 (6):
408–427. doi:10.1108/02652320910988302.
Porter, M. E., and M. R. Kramer. 2006. “The Link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate
Social Responsibility.” Harvard Business Review 84: 78–92.
Pratihari, S. K., and S. H. Uzma. 2018. “CSR and Corporate Branding Effect on Brand Loyalty: A Study
on Indian Banking Industry.” Journal of Product & Brand Management 27 (1): 57–78. doi:10.1108/
JPBM-05-2016-1194.
Preacher, K. J., and A. F. Hayes. 2004. “SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Effects in
Simple Mediation Models.” Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 36 (4): 717–731.
doi:10.3758/BF03206553.
Preacher, K. J., and A. F. Hayes. 2008. “Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and
Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models.” Behavior Research Methods 40 (3):
879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879.
Rahbar, E., and N. Abdul Wahid. 2011. “Investigation of Green Marketing Tools’ Effect on Consumers’
Purchase Behavior.” Business Strategy Series 12 (2): 73–83. doi:10.1108/17515631111114877.
Ramasamy, B., M. C. Yeung, and A. K. Au. 2010. “Consumer Support for Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR): The Role of Religion and Values.” Journal of Business Ethics 91 (1): 61–72.
doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0568-0.
Ramlugun, V. G., and W. G. Raboute. 2015. “Do CSR Practices of Banks in Mauritius Lead to
Satisfaction and Loyalty?” Studies in Business and Economics 10 (2): 128–144. doi:10.1515/sbe-
2015-0025.
Rhee, T., C. M. Ryu, and P. H. Yoon. 2006. “Self-consistent Formation of Electron κ Distribution: 2.
Further Numerical Investigation.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 111 (A9): 1–8.
doi:10.1029/2006JA011682.
Ricks, J. M. 2005. “An Assessment of Strategic Corporate Philanthropy on Perceptions of Brand
Equity Variables.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 22 (3): 121–134. doi:10.1108/
07363760510595940.
Salloum, S. A., M. Al-Emran, A. A. Monem, and K. Shaalan. 2018a. “Using Text Mining Techniques for
Extracting Information from Research Articles.” Intelligent Natural Language Processing: Trends
and Applications 111: 373–397.
Salloum, S. A., W. Maqableh, C. Mhamdi, B. Al Kurdi, and K. Shaalan. 2018b. “Studying the Social
Media Adoption by University Students in the United Arab Emirates.” International Journal of
Information Technology and Language Studies 2: 83–95.
Schmeltz, L. 2012. “Consumer-oriented CSR Communication: Focusing on Ability or Morality?” Corporate
Communications: An International Journal 17 (1): 29–49. doi:10.1108/13563281211196344.
Sekaran, U., and R. Bougie. 2016. Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. New York,
NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Sen, A. K., J. Darabi, D. R. Knapp, and J. Liu. 2006. “Modeling and Characterization of a Carbon Fiber
Emitter for Electrospray Ionization.” Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering 16 (3): 620.
doi:10.1088/0960-1317/16/3/018.
Titus, P. A., and J. L. Bradford. 1996. “Reflections on Consumer Sophistication and Its Impact on
Ethical Business Practice.” Journal of Consumer Affairs 30 (1): 170–194. doi:10.1111/j.1745-
6606.1996.tb00730.x.
Turker, D. 2009. “Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility: A Scale Development Study.” Journal of
Business Ethics 85 (4): 411–427. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9780-6.
Uusitalo, O., and R. Oksanen. 2004. “Ethical Consumerism: A View from Finland.” International
Journal of Consumer Studies 28 (3): 214–221. doi:10.1111/ijc.2004.28.issue-3.
Van Marrewijk, M. 2003. “Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between
Agency and Communion.” Journal of Business Ethics 44 (2–3): 95–105. doi:10.1023/
A:1023331212247.
Vanhamme, J., and B. Grobben. 2009. “Too Good to Be True! the Effectiveness of CSR History in
Countering Negative Publicity.” Journal of Business Ethics 85 (2): 273–304. doi:10.1007/s10551-
008-9731-2.
Visser, W. 2007. “Corporate Sustainability and the Individual: A Literature Review.” Cambridge
Programme for Sustainability Leadership Paper Series, No. 1, 1–18.
Vlachos, P. A., A. Tsamakos, A. P. Vrechopoulos, and P. K. Avramidis. 2009. “Corporate Social
Responsibility: Attributions, Loyalty, and the Mediating Role of Trust.” Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 37 (2): 170–180. doi:10.1007/s11747-008-0117-x.
Walker, M., and A. Kent. 2009. “Do Fans Care? Assessing the Influence of Corporate Social
Responsibility on Consumer Attitudes in the Sport Industry.” Journal of Sport Management 23
(6): 743–769. doi:10.1123/jsm.23.6.743.
Wang, L., and H. Juslin. 2013. “Corporate Social Responsibility in the Chinese Forest Industry:
Understanding Multiple Stakeholder Perceptions.” Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management 20 (3): 129–145. doi:10.1002/csr.v20.3.
Wei, C. F., C. T. Chiang, T. C. Kou, and B. C. Lee. 2017. “Toward Sustainable Livelihoods: Investigating
the Drivers of Purchase Behavior for Green Products.” Business Strategy and the Environment 26
(5): 626–639. doi:10.1002/bse.1942.
Werther, W. B., Jr, and D. Chandler. 2005. “Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility as Global Brand
Insurance.” Business Horizons 48 (4): 317–324. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2004.11.009.
Yoo, B., and N. Donthu. 2001. “Developing and Validating a Multidimensional Consumer-based Brand
Equity Scale.” Journal of Business Research 52 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(99)00098-3.

Corporate Social Responsibility and Patronage Intentions: The Mediating Effect of Brand Credibility

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Corporate Social Responsibility and Patronage Intentions: The Mediating Effect of Brand Credibility

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Marketing Communications

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmc20

Corporate social responsibility and patronage

Hala Mohammed Abu Zayyad, Zaid Mohammad Obeidat, Muhammad Turki

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2020.1728565

Published online: 14 Feb 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 821

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 22 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Corporate social responsibility and patronage intentions: The

and Ra’ed Masa’deh d

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

CONTACT Ra’ed Masa’deh r.masadeh@ju.edu.jo Department of Management Information Systems, School of

2. Literature review and theoretical framework

activities related to environmental practices, including pollution prevention, energy con-

2.1.1. CSR in the banking industry

H1: CSR positively impacts patronage intentions.

2.1.2. CSR to stakeholders

attitude, aﬀecting the quality of productivity which directly impacts customers

H2: Stakeholders CSR positively impacts brand credibility.

2.1.3. CSR to society

H3: Society CSR positively impacts brand credibility.

2.1.4. CSR to environment

H4: Environmental CSR positively impacts brand credibility.

2.2. Brand credibility

H5: Brand credibility positively impacts patronage intentions.

2.3. Patronage intentions

3.1. Data collection

4. Findings and discussion

4.1.1. Convergent validity

4.1.2. Discriminant validity

Table 3. Cross-loading results.

Table 4. Fornell-Larcker scale.

Table 5. Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio (HTMT).

4.1.3. Coeﬃcient of determination R2

Table 6. R2 of the endogenous latent variables.

4.1.4. Test of the hypotheses – path coeﬃcient

Figure 2. Path coeﬃcient results (Signiﬁcant at p** ≤0.01, p* <0.05).

5. Discussion and conclusion

6. Implications, limitations and future research

Mahmoud Maqableh is an Associate Professor of Information Systems at the University of Jordan,

Pedersen, O. W. 2010. “Environmental Principles and Environmental Justice.” Environmental Law

You might also like