Search results

The paper aims to examine whether CSR communication about a company’s support for climate change created using different content framing categories (positive vs negative) can lead climate change-sceptical audiences to positively influence their evaluations of the credibility of CSR communication, of a company and its actions, and lead to higher purchase intentions.

The paper used an experimental design. About 266 respondents recruited via the Prolific platform were invited to participate in an online study. A between-subject design was used, and data was analysed using the bootstrapping technique, allowing to identify moderators of the relationship between CSR communication framing and different evaluations of a company.

The paper provides empirical support for the role of political preferences and climate change beliefs in predicting the preference for positive attribute framing among climate change sceptical audiences. It is argued that climate change sceptics are still in the process of deliberation about whether climate change is occurring.

The research findings may not be generalizable to countries where support for climate change is low, and a technique like attribute framing may not lead to noticeable differences in message reception.

The paper underscores the impact of the type of attribute framing in CSR communication on different aspects of company evaluations depending on beliefs in climate change. Commercial communicators should additionally invest in climate change education to address the climate change challenge.

Addressing climate change effectively requires support from companies to communicate their CSR efforts purposefully and to address climate change sceptical audiences.

The paper identifies beliefs in climate change as an important moderator of CSR communication attribute framing effectiveness.

For better mapping the path of intellectual capital (IC) research, the purpose of this paper is to selectively review empirical studies of IC published, and identify theories, components and three dimensions of analysis: national IC (NIC), regional IC (RIC) and organizational IC (OIC).

The systematic literature review (SLR) subject to analysis is based on empirical studies made between 1960 and 2016, and focuses on three dimensions of analysis: NIC, RIC and OIC. Four research questions were designed, using the following databases, namely, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar, for data collection purposes.

The SLR unveils a multidimensional taxonomy for measuring and classifying the type of IC applicable to the different levels of analysis and provides some recommendations for future studies of NIC, RIC and OIC, by outlining the need for clear definitions of components and measures of IC and identifying strengths, limitations and future research avenues.

In order to fill the gap found in the literature and the non-existence of a study clarifying the multiple dimensions of analysis of IC, this SLR makes a twofold, original contribution to the literature on management: providing an SLR of the main empirical studies dealing with different units of analysis; and identifying a multidimensional taxonomy for measuring and classifying the type of IC applicable to the different levels of analysis.