sustainability
Article
CSR Influence on Brand Image and Consumer Word of
Mouth: Mediating Role of Brand Trust
Imran Khan * and Mobin Fatma
Citation: Khan, I.; Fatma, M. CSR
Influence on Brand Image and
Consumer Word of Mouth:
Mediating Role of Brand Trust.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043409
Academic Editor: Sungjoon Yoon
Received: 16 January 2023
Revised: 6 February 2023
Accepted: 9 February 2023
Published: 13 February 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043409
Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration, Prince Sultan University,
Riyadh 12435, Saudi Arabia
* Correspondence: imrankaifi@gmail.com
Abstract: The current study aims to empirically explore consumer perceptions of corporate social
responsibility (CSR) programs and their effects on brand image, brand trust, and positive consumer
word of mouth in the context of Indian banking. A non-random sample technique was used, and
328 valid responses were obtained for the study. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural
equation modeling (SEM) were used to analyze the proposed model. According to the study’s findings,
consumer perception of CSR positively, significantly, and directly affects brand trust. In the association
between CSR and brand image and consumer word of mouth, brand trust has a partial mediating effect.
By identifying links between CSR, brand image, and word of mouth by using consumer trust as a crucial
mediator, this study aims to advance existing knowledge. As a result, this research adds to the body of
CSR literature and investigates CSR’s various implications for marketing outcomes.
Keywords: brand image; brand trust; CSR; word of mouth; corporate social responsibility
1. Introduction
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has progressively gained recognition as an
effective strategic marketing tool in recent years. There are two reasons for the growing
interest in CSR. On the one hand, customers demand more from businesses than merely a
high-quality item at a reasonable price, and when evaluating similar products, they choose
well-known brands. On the other hand, by concentrating on non-economic aspects, a
corporation may gain competitive advantages. CSR may contribute to enhancing brand
perception and encouraging positive consumer word of mouth, which might make it a
substantial source of competitive advantages [1,2]. Consumers are concerned about CSR
and have high expectations for businesses to uphold social and ethical obligations [3].
According to previous studies, consumers are curious about how businesses manage
CSR activities [4]. As a result, marketers began placing more value on CSR programs [5].
The company’s aggressive marketing approach may have caused the change in brand
image, or it may have been a reaction to a shift in the social and marketing environment.
The difficulties that other businesses (such as Nike child labor conflicts) encounter when
the reputations of their brands are questioned should be considered. In order to achieve a
sustainable competitive advantage from the perspective of their target consumers, busi-
nesses have paid close attention to CSR strategies. The fierce competition in today’s service
market environment has influenced consumers to have great scrutiny for and skepticism
of brand image and brand trust [6]. Companies are more likely to effectively manage the
relationship between shifts in public attitude and their impact on the brand image if they
manage their brands proactively, in accordance with changing societal norms, and take
into consideration larger stakeholder objectives. In the last few decades, CSR has emerged
as a complex, multifaceted notion comprising many responsibilities, which become central
to complex decision-making. Within the spectrum of CSR, it is asserted that trust plays an
important role in consumer responses that affect many business activities.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 2 of 10

The concern for sustainability and CSR is growing in popularity, and many academics
have conducted an increasing number of studies pertaining to these ideas. Given that,
based on the findings of our longitudinal analysis, CSR is a necessary step before achieving
sustainability; the crucial question is how CSR and consumer responses are related. Despite
the strategic importance of CSR, previous researchers have raised questions regarding the
impact of CSR on various consumer responses [7]. Although there is substantial research
on consumer responses to CSR [8,9], there is still a gap in our understanding of the complex
impact of CSR on brand image and positive consumer word of mouth [10]. Based on data
from Indian bank customers, we analyze the direct and indirect relationships between
CSR, brand image, and positive consumer word of mouth by introducing brand trust
as a mediator. Brand trust is crucial because it boosts consumers’ responses, including
purchasing intentions, favorable attitudes, and advocacy behavior, and also lessens the
impact of unfavorable customer reviews [11]. CSR involvement by a business is viewed as
an excellent marketing strategy to build a trustworthy relationship with customers [12]. In
order to link consumer perception of CSR with brand image and favorable consumer word
of mouth, we added brand trust as a mediating variable. This fills the aforementioned
gaps in the existing literature. The current study aims to empirically explore consumer
perceptions of CSR programs and their effects on brand image, brand trust, and positive
consumer word of mouth in the context of Indian banking.
The study’s remaining sections are organized as follows: The following section presents the
theoretical foundation of the study and the formulation of the hypotheses. Next, a description
of the research methodology employed in the study is presented, followed by the findings and
analysis. The discussion presents the results of the study, its theoretical contribution, and its
managerial implication. The article ends with the conclusion of the study.

2. Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Development

Businesses participate in CSR initiatives because they believe that by doing so, society
as a whole and their customers will reward them. The social contract rationale, which
maintains that businesses have an ethical and moral obligation to do good for society, is
the foundation of the instrumental approach to stakeholder theory. CSR engagement is the
process by which businesses identify and publicize the CSR-related activities in which they
are engaging in order to produce business results. CSR, as defined in the Green Paper issued
by the European Commission in July 2001, “is a concept, whereby companies voluntarily
integrate social, environmental, and ethical concerns into their operations and interactions
with stakeholders to contribute to a cleaner environment and a better society” (Commission
of the European Communities, 2001, p. 6) [13]. The definition of CSR engagement used
in this study is based on the Sampaio et al. [14] approach. It is a broad term that covers
all company reactions to social and environmental issues, as well as their justifications for
putting such measures into place. Academics encourage businesses to practice CSR and
sustainability in order to be responsible and sustainable. Additionally, as both CSR and
sustainability are regarded as bases of action in the corporate sector, these decisions must be
in alignment with the needs of the client. The value of CSR participation is becoming more
and more evident in the literature. Building trust has been proven to require the traits of
honesty, justice, and goodness. CSR initiatives produce favorable opinions by demonstrating
the company’s ethics and values to customers [15]. As companies believed to be involved
in CSR are likely to be regarded as “trustees” who act in the interests of all stakeholders,
including customers, the signaling theory states that the positive signals could result in
an increase in customer trust. Brand trust is defined as “the willingness of the average
consumer to rely on the ability of the brand to perform its stated function” [16] (p. 82).
Positive WOM refers to the positive feedback that customers are eager to spread about
a business [17]. It is commonly known that WOM plays a positive role in attracting new
customers [18,19]. More specifically, it has been demonstrated that WOM has an impact on
attitudes, awareness, perceptions, expectations, behavior intention, and actual purchasing
behavior in both offline and online environments [20]. WOM is, therefore, crucial for busi-
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 3 of 10

nesses [21], especially those that can use positive WOM to boost the effectiveness of their
marketing and promotions [22]. According to Anderson [23] (p. 6), word of mouth refers
to “informal communications between private parties concerning evaluations of goods and
services rather than formal complaints to firms and/or personnel.” Through direct brand
interaction, exposure to advertising and promotion, packaging, and even observation of the
types of individuals who use the brand and the occasions and places in which it is utilized,
the consumer constructs the brand image. Consumers generate subjective judgments about
how well various brands operate across a range of functional and non-functional features
by using brands which they consider to be essential for assessment reasons. These arbitrary
judgments are organized by the consumer into a brief impression of the brand that will
affect their purchasing decisions.
CSR initiatives are viewed as pro-social corporate activities that advance both the inter-
ests of the company and the welfare of society as a whole, fostering consumer trust [24,25].
Customers have a high level of trust in businesses that they believe to be socially responsi-
ble [26]. A company’s socially and ethically responsible initiatives reveal information about
the company’s personality and ideals that aid in fostering customer trust [27]. According
to [28], ethical standards should be taken into account while making strategic decisions by
businesses in order to foster stakeholder confidence. According to this point of view, [29]
(p. 5) claimed that one of the most direct results of a company’s social performance was
consumer trust in its ethical standards, which had a substantial impact on how consumers
reacted to CSR [30]. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:
H1. CSR has a positive and significant influence on brand trust.
Morgan and Hunt [31] state that trust is a significant variable in the formation of an
enduring desire to maintain a long-term relationship with a brand. Strong customer focus
and a focus on developing consumer-valued innovation can boost brand image. A good
brand image is a key driver of brand equity, which is referred to herein as improved brand
trust, brand loyalty, and brand commitment [32,33]. A strong brand image encourages
consumers to trust the quality of the products they are buying, helps them make decisions,
and allows them to feel at ease while doing so [34]. Brand equity can be acquired during
the process of building a brand’s image [8]. When differentiating a product on the basis
of tangible attributes is challenging, brand equity derived from the brand image is even
more crucial. Last but not least, customers’ positive perceptions of a brand are a sign of
a high level of trust in that brand. In reality, brand trust is the primary factor influencing
brand image, as it is thought to be the route leading to certain marketing benefits and
outcomes [35,36]. Thus, we state:
H2. Brand trust has a positive and significant influence on brand image.
According to Morgan and Hunt [31], trust is said to be a key component of all long-term
relationships and is the main motivator for favorable word of mouth. Although the rela-
tionship between brand trust and word of mouth has not yet been studied, some academics
have theorized that trust directly influences consumers’ positive word of mouth [29,37].
Positive WOM, in both offline and online environments, is one of the main goals of current
marketing initiatives due to the growing impact of peer evaluations and recommendations
on consumers’ purchasing decisions [22]. Research has not yet fully explained how brand
trust encourages consumers’ positive word of mouth, despite the fact that WOM is a result
of brand trust. Thus, we state the following hypothesis:
H3. Brand trust has a positive and significant influence on positive word of mouth.

The Mediating Role of Brand Trust

The reputation of a business is a crucial asset that must be favorable and well-known,
since it affects how customers perceive the business’ operations [38]. Therefore, CSR
perceptions are essential for creating valuable material that fosters the development of
a company’s image. Participating in CSR fosters a positive reputation [39]. According
 since it affects how customers perceive the business’ operations [38]. Therefore, CSR
ceptions are essential for creating valuable material that fosters the development of a
pany’s image. Participating in CSR fosters a positive reputation [39]. According to
CSR serves as a tool to build both brand loyalty and brand image, but its impact on im
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 4 of 10
is more significant. Numerous studies have shown that CSR and brand image are stro
correlated. A company participates in CSR initiatives at least in part to improve s
holder perception of the business and enhance its reputation [41]. Engagement in
to [40], CSR serves as a tool to build both brand loyalty and brand image, but its impact on
makes a company more visible [42], resulting in more interactions among stakehol
image is more significant. Numerous studies have shown that CSR and brand image are
However,
strongly because
correlated. people have
A company varying
participates views
in CSR on CSR,
initiatives it in
at least can
partbe
to difficult
improve to for
whether aperception
stakeholder company’s CSR
of the efforts
business andwould
enhancegenerate positive
its reputation or negativeincomments.
[41]. Engagement CSR
tomers’ positive perceptions of the firm as a whole are shaped by CSR engagement
makes a company more visible [42], resulting in more interactions among stakeholders.
However, becauseimpressions
these positive people have varying
have views on CSR,on
an impact it can
how be difficult
customers to forecast whether
evaluate the compa
a company’s CSR efforts would generate positive or negative comments. Customers’
goods and services. Customers are, therefore, more inclined to speak positively ab
positive perceptions of the firm as a whole are shaped by CSR engagement, and these
business’s
positive CSR efforts
impressions asimpact
have an well asonits
howgoods and services,
customers evaluate the which increases
company’s goodspositive
and wo
mouth. Building moral capital should be the goal of CSR, according
services. Customers are, therefore, more inclined to speak positively about a business’s CSR to Vo et al. [1],
emphasized
efforts the
as well as itsimportance of using
goods and services, trust
which to measure
increases positivethe effectiveness
word of CSR. We pr
of mouth. Building
moral capital should be the goal of CSR, according to Vo et al. [1],
that trust will play a mediating role in this relationship between customers’ who emphasized thepercepti
importance of using trust to measure the effectiveness
CSR and brand image and positive word of mouth. of CSR. We predict that trust will
play a mediating role in this relationship between customers’ perception of CSR and brand
image and positive word of mouth.
H4 Brand trust mediates the positive relationship between CSR and (a) brand image and (b)
tive Brand
H4. trust
word of mediates the positive relationship between CSR and (a) brand image and (b)
mouth.
positive word of mouth.
The
Theproposed conceptual
proposed framework
conceptual is shown
framework is in Figurein
shown 1. Figure 1.

Figure Conceptual
Figure1.1. framework.
Conceptual framework.
3. Research Design
3. Research Design
The data were collected through the survey method using a structured questionnaire.
The data were
The respondents collectedpersonally
were contacted throughat the
thesurvey method
bank during using
working a structured
days. Respondents questionn
included individuals who had had a bank account for more than a year
The respondents were contacted personally at the bank during working days. Resp with that bank.
Bank
ents branches
includedlocated in Delhi,
individuals the had
who capital
hadof aIndia,
bankwere selected
account fortomore
reach than
out toa the
year with
respondents. People from varied socio-cultural backgrounds reside in Delhi, which should
bank. Bank branches located in Delhi, the capital of India, were selected to reach o
aid in generalizing the results of the study. A non-probabilistic sampling technique was
the respondents.
used. People
Before giving the from varied
questionnaire to thesocio-cultural backgrounds
participants, it was checked andreside in Delhi, w
examined,
should
and aid in generalizing
respondents’ consent wasthe results
taken of the
in order for study.
them toAparticipate
non-probabilistic sampling
in the survey. The techn
was used. Before
respondents receivedgiving the regarding
assurance questionnaire to theofparticipants,
the privacy it wasAchecked
the data they gave. total of and e
328 filled
ined, andquestionnaires
respondents’ were utilizedwas
consent for the analysis
taken of thefor
in order data. Some
them to of the question-
participate in the su
naires were discarded as they had missing or incomplete responses. The
The respondents received assurance regarding the privacy of the data they gave. A final sample size
for this study was 328. The sample can be described as follows. Of the sample, 37 percent
of 328 filled questionnaires were utilized for the analysis of the data. Some of the q
of responders were female, while 63 percent were male. The respondents’ ages ranged from
tionnaires
18 to 65, withwere discarded
the majority (44.32as they had
percent) missing
falling between orthe
incomplete responses.
ages of 40 and The
65. In terms of final sa
size for this
educational study was
background, 328.
more The
than sample
32.23 can behad
of consumers described
completed asintermediate-level
follows. Of the sampl
percent of 50%
coursework, responders were female,
were graduates, and 14.45%while
held63 percent
master’s were male. The respondents’
degrees.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 5 of 10

Scale Items
The present study utilized the existing scale items to measure the constructs. All scale
items used in the study were reliable and validated. The 7-point Likert scale was used to
collect the responses for each scale item. A description of the scale items used in the present
study is given in the Appendix A. Consumer perception of CSR was measured using the
four-item scale adapted from the work of [43] and [44]. Brand trust is measured with the
four-item scale taken from the work of [31] and [45]. Brand image refers to the consumer’s
overall impression of the brand and is measured using the three-item scale adapted from
the work of [46]. Consumer word of mouth refers to the tendency to speak positively about
the company or brand with others. The three-item scale is adapted to measure consumer
word of mouth taken from the study of [47].

4. Results and Analysis

To analyze the data, we used the CFA for the measurement model and SEM for the
structural model. Testing the measurement model was the prerequisite for testing the
SEM. The results of the measurement model showed a good model fit (χ2 = 167.67 (84),
GFI= 0.937, CFI = 0.978, and NFI = 0.957, RMSEA = 0.05). The reliability of the scale was
demonstrated by the fact that all of the constructs had Cronbach alpha coefficients above 0.6.
The fact that the composite reliability of all the constructs was higher than 0.5 was another
sign of the scale’s internal consistency (Table 1). The average extracted variance values for
all the constructs that met the criteria of Hair et al. [48] (2019) for convergent validity varied
from 0.6 to 0.8. Table 2 illustrates that for all constructs that met the criteria for discriminant
validity, the square root of AVE was greater than their squared correlation [49] (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981).

Table 1. CFA results.

Constructs Scale Items Factor Loadings α

CSR CSR1 0.73 0.847
CSR 2 0.81
CSR 3 0.78
CSR 4 0.74
Brand trust BT1 0.89 0.931
BT2 0.95
BT3 0.91
BT4 0.78
Brand image BImage1 0.84 0.928
BImage2 0.93
BImage3 0.85
BImage4 0.90
Word of mouth WOM1 0.85 0.934
WOM2 0.96
WOM3 0.91

Table 2. Discriminant validity.

CR AVE CSR Bimage Btrust WOM

CSR 0.848 0.583 0.764
Bimage 0.932 0.775 0.168 0.880
Btrust 0.933 0.779 0.249 0.309 0.882
WOM 0.935 0.828 0.027 0.110 0.274 0.910
CR Composite Reliability, AVE Average Variance Extracted.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 6 of 10

The estimation of the proposed linkages between constructs included the examination
of the structural model. At a significance level of 0.05, the estimated path coefficient
values empirically supported all of the direct effects in our suggested model. All the direct
hypotheses in the path relationship were found significant (Table 3). The results suggest
that consumer perception of CSR has a positive and significant impact on brand trust
(β = 0.38, p ≤ 001); hence, H1 is supported. The path relationship between brand trust and
brand image was found to be positive and significant (β = 0.27, p ≤ 001), supporting H2.
H3 states the direct and positive relationship between brand trust and consumer positive
word of mouth, and the findings were significant (β = 0.27, p ≤ 001), supporting H3.

Table 3. SEM Results.

Hypothesis Path Coefficient t Value Results

H1 0.383 4.102 Supported
H2 0.271 5.499 Supported
H3 0.274 4.874 Supported
p-value < 0.001.

We employed the SEM approach with 5000 bootstrap samples and a 95% confidence
interval through AMOS 22.0 to investigate the mediating effect of brand trust. Estimates
of the indirect influence were obtained using bootstrapping techniques, and confidence
intervals were used to confirm the significance of the influence. If there a zero was not
present between the lower and upper bounds of the 95% confidence interval, the mediation
effect was considered significant. The results demonstrate that both direct and indirect
influence are significant in the relationship between CSR to brand image (β = 0.104, p < 0.001,
[L= 0.044; U = 0.186]); thus, partial mediation was observed since both direct and indirect
significant effects were observed. Thus, H4a is supported. The findings demonstrate that
both direct and indirect influence are significant to the relationship between CSR and word
of mouth (β = 0.105, p < 0.001, [L = 0.046; U = 0.191]); thus, partial mediation was observed
since both direct and indirect significant effects were observed. Thus, H4b is supported.
Given that there was no zero between the confidence intervals’ lower and upper bounds,
we can infer that brand trust mediates the link between CSR and word of mouth. Thus,
partial mediation is observed.

5. Discussion and Implications

There has been an increased focus on CSR and sustainability due to societal concerns
and demands for enterprises to be held accountable; businesses have stopped concentrating
solely on financial gain and have started integrating them into their societal cultures. The
current study examined the relationship between brand trust and customer perceptions of
CSR. The hypothesis test’s findings confirmed that CSR has a positive impact on consumer
trust in brands. In addition, we examined the impact of brand trust on brand image and
consumer word of mouth. We examined how brand trust affected the link between CSR,
brand image, and word of mouth. By identifying links between CSR, brand image, and word
of mouth by using brand trust as a crucial mediator, this study aimed to advance our existing
knowledge. Although CSR is one of the most efficient forms of marketing, little research has
been conducted on how CSR affects marketing results. As a result, this research adds to the
body of CSR literature and investigates CSR’s various implications on marketing outcomes.
The theoretical model based on direct and indirect path linkages between CSR and brand
image and word of mouth was first proposed and tested in this study. This study adds to the
body of CSR literature by exploring the crucial role of trust, which was unrecognized in the
Indian banking context. By committing to socially and environmentally responsible actions,
businesses may bolster their financial sustainability. However, practically all of the literature
that has addressed this topic so far has concentrated on developed economies. Analyzing
the case of emerging economies such as India’s is extremely interesting, given that economic
growth, production, and consumption patterns can lead to negative externalities such as
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 7 of 10

income inequality, pollution, and the depletion of natural resources. It is crucial to understand
how customers in emerging economies view and value businesses’ sustainable initiatives
as consumers. Our findings are insightful because they demonstrate that, as is consistent
with the body of literature, consumers in these economies have a favorable view of the CSR
initiatives carried out by banking companies.
These findings imply that bank managers could accomplish some significant and
desirable outcomes by concentrating on CSR initiatives, most notably by increasing brand
trust among consumers. Given that consumers prefer to support and reward businesses
that are seen as socially responsible by building trust towards them, these findings suggest
that managers should invest more in socially responsible projects. These findings have
significant managerial implications for organizations that currently engage in CSR activities
and those that plan to do so. Through CSR initiatives, a firm is more likely to create
and sustain relationships with its customers that will lead to beneficial outcomes, such as
positive brand image and word of mouth marketing. It has been discovered that customer
trust mediates the link between CSR efforts and marketing outcomes.

6. Conclusions
This research examined how customer perceptions of CSR impact corporate brand
trust, brand image, and word of mouth. All three hypotheses were supported by the results.
We found that in the relationship between customer perception of CSR, brand image, and
word of mouth, brand trust plays a partial mediation role. Consumer perception of firms’
CSR programs has become a crucial instrument for establishing trust with customers. This
shows that customers who have trust in the business engage in more voluntary behavior,
speaking positively about the company with others. Apart from the significant contribution
of this study, some limitations exist which can be avenues for future research: First, future
studies might examine the effects of brand level (such as brand category and brand position
in the marketplace) and consumer demographic variables to anticipate the relationship
between consumer perception of CSR and corporate marketing outcomes. Second, to
generalize the findings, future studies could test this model using samples from diverse
contexts, such as various business subsectors. Third, future research may incorporate more
social exchange variables, such as consumer commitment, brand love, and brand passion
to create a more inclusive framework and offer more details on the origins and advantages
of CSR.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, I.K.; Methodology, I.K.; Formal analysis, I.K.;

Writing—review & editing, I.K. and M.F.; Project administration, M.F. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Prince Sultan University
for paying the Article Processing Charges (APC) of this publication.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 8 of 10

Appendix A
Construct Scale Item Source
Brown and Dacin, [43] and Klein and
CSR “this bank is socially responsible”
Dawar [44]
“this bank contributes to the welfare of society”
“this bank contributes to the donation program”
“this bank doesn’t harm the environment”
Morgan and Hunt, [31] and
Brand trust “I trust on the quality of this banking company”
Sirdeshmukh et al., [45]
“is interested in its customers”
“is honest with its customers”
“make me feel a sense of security”
Brand image “This bank provides good value for money” Martinez and de Chernatony [46]
“The bank is interesting”
“There is a reason to associate with the bank instead
of others”
“This bank is different from competing banks”
How likely are you to say positive things about YOUR
Positive word of mouth Choudhury, [47]
BANK to others?
“How likely are you to recommend YOUR BANK to
someone who seeks your advice?”
“How likely are you to encourage friends and relatives
to do business with YOUR BANK?”

References
1. Vo, T.T.; Xiao, X.; Ho, S.Y. How does corporate social responsibility engagement influence word of mouth on Twitter? Evidence
from the airline industry. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 157, 525–542. [CrossRef]
2. He, Y.; Lai, K.K. The effect of corporate social responsibility on brand loyalty: The mediating role of brand image. Total Qual.
Manag. Bus. Excell. 2014, 25, 249–263. [CrossRef]
3. Contini, M.; Annunziata, E.; Rizzi, F.; Frey, M. Exploring the influence of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) domains on
consumers’ loyalty: An experiment in BRICS countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 247, 119158. [CrossRef]
4. Fatma, M.; Khan, I.; Rahman, Z.; Pérez, A. The sharing economy: The influence of perceived corporate social responsibility on
brand commitment. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2020, 30, 964–975. [CrossRef]
5. Durand, R.; Paugam, L.; Stolowy, H. Do investors actually value sustainability indices? Replication, development, and new
evidence on CSR visibility. Strateg. Manag. J. 2019, 40, 1471–1490. [CrossRef]
6. Ramesh, K.; Saha, R.; Goswami, S.; Dahiya, R. Consumer’s response to CSR activities: Mediating role of brand image and brand
attitude. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, 26, 377–387. [CrossRef]
7. Fatma, M.; Khan, I.; Kumar, V.; Shrivastava, A.K. Corporate social responsibility and customer-citizenship behaviors: The role of
customer–company identification. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2022; ahead of print.
8. Bello, K.B.; Jusoh, A.; Nor, K.M. Relationships and impacts of perceived CSR, service quality, customer satisfaction and consumer
rights awareness. Soc. Responsib. J. 2020, 17, 1116–1130. [CrossRef]
9. Kim, Y.; Park, H.; Kim, J.K. Corporate association strategies and consumer responses: The relative effectiveness of CA versus CSR
communication strategy by industry type. J. Mark. Commun. 2019, 25, 204–227. [CrossRef]
10. Chu, S.C.; Chen, H.T. Impact of consumers’ corporate social responsibility-related activities in social media on brand attitude,
electronic word-of-mouth intention, and purchase intention: A study of Chinese consumer behavior. J. Consum. Behav. 2019, 18,
453–462. [CrossRef]
11. Le, L.H.; Ha, Q.A. Effects of negative reviews and managerial responses on consumer attitude and subsequent purchase behavior:
An experimental design. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021, 124, 106912. [CrossRef]
12. Islam, T.; Islam, R.; Pitafi, A.H.; Xiaobei, L.; Rehmani, M.; Irfan, M.; Mubarak, M.S. The impact of corporate social responsibility
on customer loyalty: The mediating role of corporate reputation, customer satisfaction, and trust. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021, 25,
123–135. [CrossRef]
13. Commission of the European Communities: 2001b, Green Paper “Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility”,
COM (2001) 366 final; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2001.
14. Sampaio, A.R.; Thomas, R. Why are some engaged and not others? Explaining environmental engagement among small firms in
tourism. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2012, 14, 235–249. [CrossRef]
15. Rupp, D.E.; Ganapathi, J.; Aguilera, R.V.; Williams, C.A. Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: An organizational
justice framework. J. Organ. Dyn. 2006, 12, 537–543. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 9 of 10

16. Chaudhuri, A.; Holbrook, M.B. The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: The role of brand
loyalty. J. Mark. 2001, 65, 81–93. [CrossRef]
17. Lacey, R.; Kennett-Hensel, P.A. Longitudinal effects of corporate social responsibility on customer relationships. J. Bus. Ethics
2010, 97, 581–597. [CrossRef]
18. Zeithaml, V.A.; Berry, L.L.; Parasuraman, A. The behavioral consequences of service quality. J. Mark. 1996, 60, 31–46. [CrossRef]
19. Khan, I.; Fatma, M.; Shamim, A.; Joshi, Y.; Rahman, Z. Gender, loyalty card membership, age, and critical incident recovery: Do
they moderate experience-loyalty relationship? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 89, 102408. [CrossRef]
20. Ward, M.R.; Lee, M.J. Internet shopping, consumer search and product branding. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2000, 9, 6–20. [CrossRef]
21. Solis, B. The End of Business as Usual: Rewire the Way You Work to Succeed in the Consumer Revolution; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA,
2011.
22. Chen, Y.; Xie, J. Online consumer review: Word-of-mouth as a new element of marketing communication mix. Manag. Sci. 2008,
54, 477–491. [CrossRef]
23. Anderson, E.W. Customer satisfaction and word of mouth. J. Serv. Res. 1998, 1, 5–17. [CrossRef]
24. Sen, S.; Bhattacharya, C.B. Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility.
J. Mark. Res. 2001, 38, 225–243. [CrossRef]
25. Khan, I.; Fatma, M. Online destination brand experience and authenticity: Does individualism-collectivism orientation matter?
J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2021, 20, 100597. [CrossRef]
26. Hur, W.M.; Moon, T.W.; Kim, H. When does customer CSR perception lead to customer extra-role behaviors? The roles of
customer spirituality and emotional brand attachment. J. Brand Manag. 2020, 27, 421–437. [CrossRef]
27. Fatma, M.; Khan, I.; Rahman, Z. Striving for legitimacy through CSR: An exploration of employees responses in controversial
industry sector. Soc. Responsib. J. 2018, 15, 924–938. [CrossRef]
28. Hosmer, L.T. Strategic planning as if ethics mattered. Strateg. Manag. J. 1994, 15 (Suppl. S2), 17–34. [CrossRef]
29. Pivato, S.; Misani, N.; Tencati, A. The impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer trust: The case of organic food. Bus.
Ethics: A Eur. Rev. 2008, 17, 3–12. [CrossRef]
30. Fatma, M.; Khan, I. An investigation of consumer evaluation of authenticity of their company’s CSR engagement. Total Qual.
Manag. Bus. Excell. 2022, 33, 55–72. [CrossRef]
31. Morgan, R.M.; Hunt, S.D. The commitment- trust theory of relationship marketing. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 20–38. [CrossRef]
32. Khan, I.; Fatma, M.; Kumar, V.; Amoroso, S. Do experience and engagement matter to millennial consumers? Mark. Intel. Plan.
2021, 39, 329–341. [CrossRef]
33. Khan, I. Do brands’ social media marketing activities matter? A moderation analysis. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 64, 102794.
[CrossRef]
34. Raza, A.; Saeed, A.; Iqbal, M.K.; Saeed, U.; Sadiq, I.; Faraz, N.A. Linking corporate social responsibility to customer loyalty through
co-creation and customer company identification: Exploring sequential mediation mechanism. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2525. [CrossRef]
35. Khan, I.; Fatma, M. Understanding the Influence of CPE on Brand Image and Brand Commitment: The Mediating Role of Brand
Identification. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2291. [CrossRef]
36. Fatma, M.; Rahman, Z. An integrated framework to understand how consumer-perceived ethicality influences consumer hotel
brand loyalty. Serv. Sci. 2017, 9, 136–146. [CrossRef]
37. Iglesias, O.; Markovic, S.; Singh, J.J.; Sierra, V. Do customer perceptions of corporate services brand ethicality improve brand
equity? Considering the roles of brand heritage, brand image, and recognition benefits. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 154, 441–459.
[CrossRef]
38. Diab, A.; Metwally, A.B.M. Institutional complexity and CSR practices: Evidence from a developing country. J. Account. Emerg.
Econ. 2020, 10, 655–680. [CrossRef]
39. Ahmed, I.; Nazir, M.S.; Ali, I.; Nurunnabi, M.; Khalid, A.; Shaukat, M.Z. Investing in CSR pays you back in many ways! The case
of perceptual, attitudinal and behavioral outcomes of customers. Sustain. 2020, 12, 1158. [CrossRef]
40. Martínez, P.; Herrero, Á.; García-de los Salmones, M.D.M. Determinants of eWOM on hospitality CSR issues. In Facebook we
trust? J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 28, 1479–1497. [CrossRef]
41. Nurunnabi, M.; Alfakhri, Y.; Alfakhri, D.H. Consumer perceptions and corporate social responsibility: What we know so far. Int.
Rev. Public Nonprofit Mark. 2018, 15, 161–187. [CrossRef]
42. Lee, E.M.; Park, S.-Y.; Rapert, M.I.; Newman, C. Does perceived consumer fit matter in corporate social responsibility issues?
J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 1558–1564. [CrossRef]
43. Brown, T.J.; Dacin, P.A. The company and the product: Corporate association and consumer product responses. J. Mark. 1997, 61,
68–84. [CrossRef]
44. Klein, J.G.; Dawar, N. Corporate social responsibility and consumers attributions and brand evaluation in a product harm crises.
Int. J. Res. Mark. 2004, 21, 203–217. [CrossRef]
45. Sirdeshmukh, D.; Singh, J.; Sabol, B. Consumer trust, value and loyalty in relational exchanges. J. Mark. 2002, 66, 15–37. [CrossRef]
46. Martinez, E.; De Chernatony, L. The effect of brand extension strategies upon brand image. J. Consum. Mark. 2004, 21, 39–50.
[CrossRef]
47. Choudhury, K. Service quality and word of mouth: A study of the banking sector. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2014, 32, 612–627. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3409 10 of 10

48. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage
Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2016.
49. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics.
J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 382–388. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.