Abstract

How do consumers evaluate corporate generosity? This dissertation examines how both the structure and communication of firms’ charitable initiatives shape consumer judgments, revealing that consumers are highly sensitive to cues about consistency, authenticity, and responsibility embedded in corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts. In Chapter One, “Consumers Prefer that Corporations Donate Periodically,” I examine how the temporal consistency of corporate giving influences consumer evaluations. Across seven preregistered studies (N = 150,563), including two large-scale field studies and five online experiments, I demonstrate that making a series of periodic contributions, e.g., donating $20,000 per month for 12 months, rather than donating an equivalent aggregate amount, e.g., donating $240,000 in a year, improves outcomes for donor companies. More specifically, periodic donations enhance company reputation, increase customer engagement, and raise purchase likelihood. These benefits arise primarily due to heightened judgments of the donor’s authentic prosocial motivation, which affect outcomes in two pathways. First, the consistency inherent in periodic giving signals genuine prosocial motives, which in turn enhances favorable evaluations of the firm. Second, when donors are perceived as authentically motivated, the donation is perceived as having a greater impact, which boosts favorable evaluations. Additional studies demonstrate when and why periodic donations may benefit—or, in some cases, even harm—evaluations of the donor. Overall, this chapter highlights consumers’ sensitivity to cues of consistency and emphasizes the importance of perceived authentic prosocial motivation when granting charitable credit in CSR contexts. In Chapter Two, “The Join-Us Penalty: Companies Get Less Credit for CSR When They Ask Customers to Help,” I examine how consumer involvement in CSR initiatives affects consumer evaluations, particularly when companies invite their customers to participate in charitable campaigns. Across five (N = 3,197) preregistered experiments, I find that when companies invite customers to participate in their CSR efforts, consumers evaluate the company less favorably and share less positive word-of-mouth about the company than when no such invitation is made. This effect stems from perceptions that the company is shirking their prosocial responsibility. Specifically, because consumers tend to perceive entities with greater resources as bearing greater prosocial obligations, inviting consumers to donate can be seen as the company shirking their prosocial responsibility. I further identify key boundary conditions of the join-us penalty, showing that 1) who the company invites and 2) what the company requests in their donations moderate the effect. Together, these two chapters show that consumers evaluate not only whether firms give, but also how consistently they give and whether they assume appropriate responsibility for prosocial action. Corporate generosity is rewarded more when firms signal sustained, authentic commitment and penalized when their actions suggest shirking prosocial responsibility. This dissertation contributes to the literature on prosocial behavior, CSR, altruism, and responsibility, while offering practical guidance for firms seeking to design and present charitable initiatives more effectively.

Committee Chair

Cynthia Cryder

Committee Members

Elanor Williams; Fausto Gonzalez; Margaret Echelbarger; Stephen Nowlis

Degree

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Author's Department

Marketing

Author's School

Olin Business School

Document Type

Dissertation

Date of Award

5-5-2026

Language

English (en)

Download

Included in

Marketing Commons

Share

COinS