<%BANNER%>

Effects of the Tobacco Industry's Corporate Social Responsible Practices

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0022761/00001

Material Information

Title: Effects of the Tobacco Industry's Corporate Social Responsible Practices Focusing on Philip Morris
Physical Description: 1 online resource (85 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Kim, Yeon
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: attitudes, behavioral, csr, identity, motivation, philipmorris, publicrelations, smoking, tobacco
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Mass Communication thesis, M.A.M.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Certain types of corporate social responsible activities such as tobacco-related CSR conducted by tobacco companies have engendered controversy in regard to their ulterior motives. This study aimed to examine the effects of CSR activities of tobacco companies depending on CSR-type, with a central focus on Philip Morris. This study investigated the effects of CSR on perceived motivation, attitudes toward CSR and the corporation, evaluation of corporate identity, and behavioral intentions. Additionally, smoking status and national differences were factored as variables. Online surveys were conducted. The results showed that the effects of CSR activities on perceived motivation were differentiated depending on smoking status and nationality. As people perceived motivation of CSR as mutually beneficial, they evaluated the corporation as socially responsible and showed more favorable attitudes toward CSR and the corporation. The evaluation of CI and attitudes were also closely related with behavioral intentions relating to Philip Morris.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Yeon Kim.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.M.C.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Choi, Youjin.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2010-12-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0022761:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0022761/00001

Material Information

Title: Effects of the Tobacco Industry's Corporate Social Responsible Practices Focusing on Philip Morris
Physical Description: 1 online resource (85 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Kim, Yeon
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: attitudes, behavioral, csr, identity, motivation, philipmorris, publicrelations, smoking, tobacco
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Mass Communication thesis, M.A.M.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Certain types of corporate social responsible activities such as tobacco-related CSR conducted by tobacco companies have engendered controversy in regard to their ulterior motives. This study aimed to examine the effects of CSR activities of tobacco companies depending on CSR-type, with a central focus on Philip Morris. This study investigated the effects of CSR on perceived motivation, attitudes toward CSR and the corporation, evaluation of corporate identity, and behavioral intentions. Additionally, smoking status and national differences were factored as variables. Online surveys were conducted. The results showed that the effects of CSR activities on perceived motivation were differentiated depending on smoking status and nationality. As people perceived motivation of CSR as mutually beneficial, they evaluated the corporation as socially responsible and showed more favorable attitudes toward CSR and the corporation. The evaluation of CI and attitudes were also closely related with behavioral intentions relating to Philip Morris.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Yeon Kim.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.M.C.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Choi, Youjin.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2010-12-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0022761:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

EFFECTS OF THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY S CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES: FOCUSING ON PHILIP MORRIS By YEONSOO KIM A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN MASS COMMUNICATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2008 1

PAGE 2

2008 Yeonsoo Kim 2

PAGE 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS page LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........5 LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................................6 ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................7 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. ...8 2 LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................................12 The Concept of CSR...............................................................................................................12 Two Approaches to CSR........................................................................................................14 Marketing Approaches....................................................................................................15 Public Relations Approaches...........................................................................................16 Philip Morriss CSR Activities and the Types.......................................................................17 Philip Morriss CSR Activities........................................................................................17 Controversial Aspects of Philip Morriss CSR...............................................................18 Perceived CSR Motivation.....................................................................................................22 Cognitive Working Mechanism of Perceived Motivation......................................................23 Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors.........................................................................................24 Discounting and Augmentation Principles......................................................................25 Suspicion, Prior Reputation and Attribution Process......................................................26 Types of Tobacco Industrys CSR and Attribution Tendency........................................28 Smoking Status................................................................................................................. ......29 Effects of Perceived CSR Motivation.....................................................................................30 Corporate Identity............................................................................................................3 0 Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions related to Philip Morris..........................................32 South Koreas Tobacco Industry.....................................................................................33 Hypothesis and Research Question........................................................................................36 3 METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................4 1 Participants and procedure..................................................................................................... .41 Stimuli........................................................................................................................ .............41 Measurement.................................................................................................................... .......42 Perceived CSR Motivation..............................................................................................42 Evaluation of CSR Values..............................................................................................42 Attitudes toward Philip Morriss CSR and Attitudes toward the Corporation................42 Behavioral Intentions toward Philip Morris....................................................................43 Smoking Status................................................................................................................4 4 Demographics..................................................................................................................44 3

PAGE 4

Data Analysis..........................................................................................................................44 4 FINDINGS..................................................................................................................... .........46 Demographics.........................................................................................................................46 Test of Hypotheses.................................................................................................................47 Effects of Type of CSR on Perceived Motivation...........................................................47 Effects of Perceived CSR Motivation on Evaluation of Corporate Identity-CSR values Dimension.........................................................................................................48 Effects of Attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and Philip Morris on Behavioral Intentions......................................................................................................................50 Effects of Smoking Status...............................................................................................53 Interaction Effects of Different Nations..........................................................................55 Model Testing..................................................................................................................57 5 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................... ....62 Discussion of Findings......................................................................................................... ..62 Effects of CSR Type on Perceived Motivation...............................................................62 Effects of Perceived Motivation on Eval uation of CSR Values, Attitudes, and Behavioral Intentions...................................................................................................65 Effects of Attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and the Corporation............................66 Limitations, Suggestions for Futu re Research, and Implications...........................................66 APENDEX A STIMULI...................................................................................................................... ..........69 B QUESTIONNAIRE................................................................................................................ 73 LIST OF REFERENCES...............................................................................................................78 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.........................................................................................................85 4

PAGE 5

LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1. Smoking status, Nation, and Gender.....................................................................................47 4-2. Analysis of covariance for the influen ce of CSR-type on perceived CSR motivation..........48 4-3. Multiple regression analysis for evaluation of social value..................................................49 4-4. Multiple regression analysis for attitude toward Philip Morriss CSR.................................50 4-5. Multiple regression for attitude toward Philip Morris...........................................................50 4-6. Multiple regression for beha vioral likelihood for behavioral willingness to communicate...51 4-7. Multiple regression for Behavior al likelihood for seeking employment...............................52 4-8. Multiple regression for behavioral li kelihood for investing in Philip Morris.......................52 4-9. Analysis of covariance for perceived motivation..................................................................53 4-10. Interaction effects of smoking status and CSR type............................................................54 4-11. Analysis of covariance for per ceived Philip Morriss CSR motivation..............................56 4-12. Interaction effects of nation and CSR type..........................................................................56 4-13. Constructs, Indicator s, and Key Statistics...........................................................................61 5

PAGE 6

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2-1. Proposed research questions and hypotheses........................................................................40 4-1. Interaction effects of smoking status and CSR type..............................................................55 4-2. Interaction effects of different nation and CSR type.............................................................57 4-3. Initial Model............................................................................................................ ..............59 4-4. Final Model.............................................................................................................................60 6

PAGE 7

7 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Mast er of Arts in Mass Communication EFFECTS OF THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY S CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES: FOCUSING ON PHILIP MORRIS By Yenosoo Kim December 2008 Chair: Youjin Choi Major: Mass Communication Certain types of corporate social responsib le activities such as tobacco-related CSR conducted by tobacco companies have engendered controversy in regard to their ulterior motives. This study aimed to examine the effects of CSR activities of tobacco companies depending on CSR-type, with a central focus on Philip Morris. This study investigated the effects of CSR on perceived motivation, attitudes towa rd CSR and the corpor ation, evaluation of corporate identity, and behavioral intenti ons. Additionally, smoking status and national differences were factored as variables. Online surveys were conducted. The results showed that the effects of CSR activities on perceived motiv ation were differentiated depending on smoking status and nationality. As people perceived motivation of CSR as mutually beneficial, they evaluated the corporation as soci ally responsible and showed mo re favorable attitudes toward CSR and the corporation. The evaluation of CI and attitudes were also closely related with behavioral intentions rela ting to Philip Morris.

PAGE 8

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Over the course of the 20th century, tobacco is estimated to have caused the death of over 100 million people (American Cancer Soci ety, 2007). By the end of the 21st century, this number is projected to exceed 1 billion. In the U.S. alone, more than 430,000 people die from cigarette-related diseases each year (Armour, Woollery, Malarcher, Pechacek, & Husten, 2005). This means that one of every five deaths is caused by tobacco use (Centers for disease control and prevention, 2006). Thanks to growing awaren ess of the severe problems caused by tobacco use, the U.S. government has made significant strides in tobacco control since the mid-1990s (McDaniel, Smith, & Malone, 2006). Public health initiatives have since translated into a series of intensive anti-smoking campaigns (McDaniel et al, 2006). Beginning in the mid-1990s, tobacco companies unexpectedly followed suit, making the controversial decision to launch anti-smoking campaigns of their ow n. One of the most visible of these campaigns was a youth smoking prevention campaign conducted by the worlds largest cigarette manufacturer, Philip Morris. Entitle d, Think. Dont Smoke, the campaign consisted of over 130 programs, conducted simultaneously in more than 70 countries beginning in 2001(Landman et al, 2002). To promote its campa ign, Philip Morris now spends nearly $300 million annually and has stressed strongly that th e goal of the campaign is to protect underage children and teenagers from smoking (Tugend, 2002). Some scholars and media have interpreted these activities in a positive way as charitable works meant to create a socially responsible corporate image by giving back to society (Metzler, 2001). Nonetheless, this groundbreaking type of anti-smoking campaigning led by tobacco companies has generated controversy over possible ulterior motives behind its campaigns. 8

PAGE 9

Most scholars and public health activist groups have labeled such campaigns as a sophisticated means of increasi ng profit (Landman et al, 2002; McDaniel et al, 2006; When Dont Smoke Means Do, 2006). This was claimed to occur when tobacco companies attempted to transform their unfavorable imag e into a socially responsible one to create favorable attitudes toward their products. Critics (Landman et al, 200 2; Farrely et al, 2002) further argue that the industry-driven anti-smoking campaigns are aime d at generating a customer base from youths rather than showing social commitment. As a matte r of fact, multiple studies have revealed that industry-driven anti-smoking campaigns are ge nerally ineffective in altering youth attitudes toward smoking (Landman et al 2002; Farrely et al, 2002). In addition to anti-smoking campaigns, tobacco companies have conducted multiple charitable works in areas unrelated to tobacco. For example, Philip Morris has supported local community-building, conducted recycling campai gns for the environment (Philip Morriss annual report, 2007), and has donated over $100 million over the past 40 years to fight poverty in the U.S. (Business wire, 1999). Considering these different types of corporate social responsibility (CSR), it is difficult to conclude that all of the tobacco industrys corporate social responsible trials are mere ly thinly-veiled a ttempts to generate profits as some researchers argue (McDaniel et al., 2006; Fa rrelly et al., 2002). The tobacco industrys charitable CSR practices could instead be explained by current business trends. Over the past ten years, CSR practices have pr oliferated at an extraordinary rate, now reaching a global scale. Corporati ons have expended greatly for CSR practices, exceeding $1 billion annually (Barone, Miyazaki, & Taylor, 2000). Regardless of industry type, conducting CSR activities has been one of the dis tinguished trends for corporations during this century (David, Kline, & Dai, 2005). This may explain why in addition to Philip Morris, most 9

PAGE 10

big tobacco companies such as British American Tobacco have followed Philip Morris lead in the tobacco industry in the name of CSR (McDaniel et al, 2006). Peoples evaluation and attitude s toward a corporation may depend on the type of CSR. Many researchers point out that wh en people face CSR activities, the effects of CSR differentiate depending on peoples perceived motivation behind the CSR (Webb & Mohr,1998; Bae & Cameron,2007; Baron, Miyazaki & Taypor, 2000; E llen, Mohr & Webb, 2000). Thus, this study aims to examine the effects of a tobacco co mpanys CSR practices on perceived motivation behind the CSR, as well as corporate identity, attitudes toward Philip Morris and behavioral intention of information-seeking and discussi on of the CSR activities. Phillip Morris was selected as the focus of this study, as the larges t tobacco company and leader in the industry. This study will recruit college st udents in the U.S. and Korea and test their attitudes and behavioral intentions toward Ph illip Morris CSR programs. Ph illip Morris li ke other global corporations runs their anti -smoking prevention campaigns and other socially responsible programs on a global scale. In order to test whether the effects of Phillip Morris CSR programs are universal across different nations, responses from college students in the U.S. will be compared to those from Korean college students. To date, few studies have addr essed what kinds of CSR aff ects corporations that sell harmful products and whether thei r CSR practices are perceived as socially responsible. As a result, this research aims to provide greater insight and a deeper understanding of tobacco industry CSR. By examining the effects of tobacco indus try CSR based on CSR-type, this study is anticipated to uncover information on the concrete effects of each CSR type (tobacco-related/ tobacco-unrelated). This information would thus provide useful information for public health 10

PAGE 11

11 practitioners who work closely with anti-smoking campaigning.

PAGE 12

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW To most adequately discuss the critical factors in relation to the effects of tobacco industry CSR, both the concept of CSR and various approach es toward it must first be addressed. Based on the above discussion, tobacco in dustry CSR will be typified. The Concept of CSR From the 19th century through the early 20th century, maximizing corporate profit as a companys sole objective was widely regarded as a legitimate goal in the absence of any perceived obligation to share soci al responsibility with society. However, beginning in the early 1920s, the concept of CSR first made its presence felt in the corporate world. At that time, CSR was primarily conducted through charity by certai n wealthy individuals, such as Henry Ford (Clark, 2000). Following the close of the Firs t World War, social business environments had transformed dramatically, and were accomp anied by growing public expectations of corporations. As corporations were forced to adjust to these new and ever-changing business environments, many corporations began to seriou sly reconsider once sta ndard business practices to better handle new and complex situations. It was from this se tting that discussion of the need for CSR from a social system perspective na turally arose in the 1920s. Sheldon (1924) examines this concept of social responsibility in his work The Social Responsibility of Management. Here, Sheldon argues that co rporations necessarily regard the business environment as a complex organism. Consequentl y, the purposes of a corp oration were not only for servicing economic wealth but also for a ddressing social and mora l issues by practicing social responsibility. This perspective differs markedly with the classic approach, which regards the function of business as that of solely pr oviding goods and services. However, practicing 12

PAGE 13

social responsibility gradually came to be view ed as necessary to succeed in a dynamic social system. By contrast, Bowen (1954) conte nds that CSR might better be explained from an ethical perspective. In his book, entitled Social Respon sibility of Businessman Bowen contends that CSR is the responsibility of a businessman to meet ethical obligations and follow the ethical demands of society. His attempts to associat e classic corporate respons ibility with maximizing profits by serving goods with an ethical obligation had far-reaching implications. Bowens work ultimately extended CSR to include an ethical perspective (Yoon, 2006). Several definitions of CSR have since been proposed and debated in th is area of discussion. As McGuire (1963) and Davis (1973) insist, corp orations have obligations that ex tend beyond narrow economic and legal requirements. From yet another perspective, Davis a nd Bloomstrom (1975) define CSR as the responsibility of management for both organizational interests and the well being of society as a whole. Woods (1991) furthers th is notion, asserting that the basic idea of corporate social responsibility is that business and society are inte rwoven rather than distin ct entities; therefore, society has certain expectations for appropriate business behavior and outcomes (p.695). In his view, businesses do not need to s houlder responsibility for all soci al issues but instead must at least in some way try to resolve all relevant soci al issues. In a similar fashion, De George (2006) depicts CSR as a corporations ethical concerns toward society. Put succinctly, the concept of CSR has broade ned considerably from the classic view which held that businesses need only function to provide goods and services. In its modern context, CSR now necessarily includes ethical responsibility as a cruc ial, if not central, component. 13

PAGE 14

This broadened concept is best and most comprehensively captured by Carrolls (1979) conceptual discussion. According to Carroll (1979), the concept of CSR consists of fourdimensions: economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary responsibilities. Among these, economic responsibility ranks as the most fundamental and pr imary social responsibility of corporations, as they are obligated to produce goods and services that conform to social expectations, and are also expected to sustain the socioeconomic system. Corporations must also fulfill their economic and social responsibilities by adhering to appropriate standards, wh ether laws or ethics. Based on these social responsibilities, corp orations are expected to perform discretionary responsibilities. Discretionary responsibilities, also known as philanthropic respons ibilities, reflect societys desire to see businesses participate actively in the betterment of society, beyond the minimum standards set by the economic, legal and ethical responsibilities (Ca rroll 1979, p. 505). Based on these conceptual definitions, it may be presumed that socially responsible corporations are responsible not only for legal and ethical operations of business, but also for actively exhibiting philanthropic responsibility. Depending on which responsibility will be more stressed, there are two different approaches to ward CSR; marketing approaches and public relations approaches. Two Approaches to CSR There are two different approaches toward CSR; marketing approaches and public relations approaches. As David et al.(2001) e xplains, although researchers in marketing and public relations both recognize the importance of corporate iden tity, the two camps focus on different immediate outcomes that accrue from CSR activities (p. 293). Here David et al. (2001) explains that marketing researchers try to focus on the po ssible financial profits to be gained by conducting CSR activitie s, whereas public relations re searchers focus on creating and maintaining long-term, mutually beneficial relati onships between the corporation and the public. 14

PAGE 15

Marketing Approaches Barone and his colleagues (2000) studied the effects of CSR activities with the perspective that CSR is a strategy designed to promote the achievement of marketing objectives (e.g. brand sales) via company support of social causes (p.248). From a marketing standpoint, Barones perspective toward CSR is representative. Many scholars in the marketing field note that CSR activities are treated as popular market ing tools to maximize cor porate financial profits through increasing corporate consciousness and creating and positioning the company or brand in a positive way (Arnott, 1994; Carringer, 1994; Garfield, 1993; Lantos 2001; Barone, et al., 2000). This largely confirms the vast amount of research on CSR effects on consumer purchasing intent as well as the general conclu sion that CSR stimulates public consumption by improving corporate image (Arnott, 1994; Carr inger, 1994; Garfield, 1993; Lantos, 2001). Furthermore, studies also show that CSR is capable of positivel y affecting public opinion of new products (Brown, & Dacin, 1997; Creyer, &Ros s, 1997; Ellen, Mohr, & Webb, 2000). However, because the purpose of the marketi ng perspective of CSR activities is primarily to increase profit, researchers in this field warn of potential backlash effects of CSR. Sen and Bhattachary (2001) question CSRs function to solely improve financial profits, c oncluding that in some cases CSR can decrease public purchasin g intentions toward ce rtain products. They suggest backlash effects may be derived from public perceptions that there are u lterior motives behind CSR. Thus, because these marketing approaches toward CSR are focused on achieving profits by utilizing goodwill activities, main research streams are seeking to maximize the effects of CSR and minimize possible backlash effects of CSR. In sum, the marketing perspective focuses more so on economic responsibility as the most fundamental and primary social responsibi lity of corporations. Other dimensions of CSR 15

PAGE 16

such as performing ethical responsibilities or discretionary responsibilities are regarded as supporting strategies for operating bu sinesses more effectively. Public Relations Approaches Unlike the marketing perspectives menti oned above, the field of public relations addresses primarily the CSR pr actices of philosophical and no rmative activities expected by society (David, Kline, & Dai, 2005) In dealing with the public relations perspective of CSR, Davids analysis is perhaps the most embracing and comprehensive. Here, David suggests that CSR in the field of public relations is treated as a function with mora l, ethical, and social obligations that provide the scaffolding for mutually beneficial exchanges between an organization and its publics (p.293). It is beyond short-term profitability, focusing instead on a corporations commitment to avoiding harm a nd improving societys well-being (p.293). In other words, in public relations, CSRs ultimate goal is to create and maintain long-term, mutually beneficial relations hips between the corporation and the public by strategic communication. Its goal is not to maximize financ ial profits, but instead to create and maintain trustworthy, transparent, mutually bene ficial, and long-term relationships. A recent study by Clark (2000) offers a more defi nitive view of public relations and CSR. Following a comparison of the origins of both di sciplines theories, mechanisms, purpose and functions, Clark concludes both are quite similar in each respect. By comparing the character of CSR to public relations, Clark asserts that CS R is best understood with in a public relations framework. This is because both fields deal with interwoven and reci procal relationships between publics and communities and because the best practices of CSR may be through twoway symmetrical public relations which Grunig (1984) suggests as ideal. The purpose of public relations is not only concerned with reputation management, but also a pursuit of mutual interests through two-way symmetrical commun ication with publics. This encompasses 16

PAGE 17

communities, creating credibility, maintaining solid relationships, and effective issue management. This holds especially true in the ethical and discretiona ry dimension, where the function and purpose of CSR activities is closely aligned with public rela tions functions, and not the mere profit aims of the marketing function. This partially explai ns why the potential for backlash arises when corporations implement CSR marketing tools to increas e profits, instead of recognizing the importance of a public relations perspective. Summarily, there are two practical approaches to CSR: mark eting approaches and public relations approaches. Marketing approaches treat CSR as a strate gy to increase financial profits, whereas public relations approaches interpret CSR as mutually beneficial activities expected by society. Based on this broad discussion of CSR, a closer examination of tobacco industry CSR is warranted. Philip Morriss CSR Activities and the Types Philip Morriss CSR Activities Over the past decade, tobacco companies have faced numerous problems and setbacks, from FDA regulatory actions targeting tobacco to publics challenges posed by nonprofit public health organizations (Mcdaniel et al,2006; Kluger, 1996). Public health activists too, have attempted to increase awareness of the harmful ef fects of smoking and seek enactment of further regulation on smoking. In recent years, tobacco co mpanies have also experienced a dramatic rise in litigation related to the harmful effects of smoking, and an increasingly unfavorable and widespread public perception of smoking (Mcd aniel et al,2006; Kluge r, 1996). Consequently, tobacco companies have been forced to confront these challenges. As McDaniel et al. (2006) notes, Philip Morris first initiate d its CSR practices during this period, with their CSR activities primarily delegated to the Sunrise Project. In hi s evaluation of the projec t, McDaniel criticizes the corporation for seeking to only generate increased revenue and gain public credibility 17

PAGE 18

(McDaniel et al., 2006). Here, some representative CSR activ ities of Philip Morris are introduced to help better understand the companys CSR. Controversial Aspects of Philip Morriss CSR Landman et al. (2002) criticize the controvers ial aspects of the tobacco industrys CSR activities by noting that when pe ople visit cigarette manufacturers websites, they may initially believe the websites are owned by public health promotion service organizations. This is because the tobacco industry namely Philip Morri s as the industry leader voluntarily provides information on the harmful effects of smoking and encourages abstinence from smoking through corporate websites to develop an imag e of corporate social responsibility. Like most corporate sites that advertise CSR efforts among their primary web content (Esrock, S.L.& Leichty, G.B., 1998), Philip Morris also provides intensive information of its CSR activities through its website. Specifically, the corporation has established the Philip Morris International website for the purpose of publicizing its CSR activities. The site covers a variety of topics including the corporations mission, warnings and information on the harmful effects of smoking, as well as public relations trials toward publics, youth smoking prevention campaigning as a primary CSR activit y, and social issues such as child labor. Consequently, the websites announced purpose of promoting public he alth quickly drew wi despread criticism. Moreover, Philip Morris U.S. website offers even more detailed information regarding CSR activities. It not only emphasi zes community relationships such as its employee community fund and employee volunteerism, but also environmental relationships such as solid waste recycling, cigarette litter preven tion, cessation support, and youth smoki ng prevention. On both websites, Phillip Morris youth smoking prevention is treated as one of their major CSR activities. Whereas other programs such as the Cigarette L itter Prevention Program are introduced as subcategories, the youth smoking preven tion project is designated as one of the primary categories 18

PAGE 19

of CSR activities. Specifically, information is provided that includes their approaches, research relating to youth smoking, resources for parents, and its campaign project entitled Talk. Theyll listen. However, Mcdaniel et al. (2006) expresses concern about Philip Morriss CSR activities on key stakeholders. Here, he asserts the following: Among tobacco companies, Philip Morris has re sponded uniquely to its de-legitimization by developing its own initiatives aimed at restoring its credibility and achieving a more favorable place in public and policymaker opinion. Corporate philanthropy, social responsibility programmes, public messages ab out the risks of smoking, and partnerships with public organizations are pa rt of these efforts. These types of outreach threaten to undermine de-legitimization messages and sugge st to the public, market analysts, and policymakers that PM has genuinely changed and is a worthy partner in public health. (p.216) Many other scholars also agree wi th this critical perspective that Philip Morris utilizes CSR activities as key marketing tools to achie ve financial success (Chapman, 2004; Hirschhorn, 2004; McDaniel et al., 2006). They argue the co rporations bottom line is to achieve financial success through manipulation of public opinion and pe rception of tobacco products. As a result, people should be cautious to embrace its CSR act ivities and remain awar e of potential underlying motives. However, the hesitance and refusal to lend credibility to Phillip Morris CSR activities may depend on CSR-type. To better understand the controversy behind Phillip Morris' CSR activities, these types must first be discussed in greater detail. Tobacco Related-CSR Activities In helping to understand Philip Morris CSR activities, McDaniel et al.(2006) offers an insightful analysis of the comp anys Sunrise strategies by anal yzing Philip Morris internal documents retrieved through its documentary libra ry website. They note that among the most important targets were moderate tobacco cont rol organizations (p. 217), studies on public health issues, smokers, and adolescents. Among moderate organizations, researchers, and 19

PAGE 20

smokers, one of the most important elements of Sunrise was the fair pl ay strategy. The goal of the fair play strategy was to limit the effectiveness of the t obacco control movement (p.216). In reaching this goal, four sub-strategies were devised: supporting resear ch relating to tobacco control, building positive relationships with moderate anti-smoking groups, reducing funding for tobacco control, and gaining public credibility. Another vitally important goal of the project was the repositioning of Philip Morris. In order to enhance the position of Philip Morris as the reasonable/responsible industry leader and work to give the company a legitimate seat at the table, (sic) (McDan iel et al., 2006, p.218), the company ha s made efforts to raise public awareness about its CSR trials. These facts seem to indicate Philip Morris has actually conducted CSR as highly orchestrated and sophistic ated marketing tools, meant to better their reputation as a socially responsib le corporation, and ultimately, to increase their profits. It is thus difficult to ascribe Philip Morris CSR to an ethical public relations perspective. In fact, some research supports these evaluations, rais ing suspicion over the motives behind Philip Morris CSR activities and raising c oncern over its potential effects. Among Philip Morriss various forms of CSR activities, tobacco-related activities have generated by far the greatest controversy. Perhaps most representative of this problem is Philip Morris youth smoking prevention campaign, which has been conducted by Philip Morris worldwide. In 2001, the corporation announced it would conduct youth smoking prevention campaigning in over 70 countries through over 130 programs (Landman et al, 2002). Regardless of the many public health professions questioni ng the appropriateness of the campaign, Philip Morris continued to conduct its campaigns until only recently. In examining the campaign, some researchers have evaluated these trials in a positive light, by noting that Philip Morris has worked hard to take social responsibil ity as a corporation that sells harmful products (Metzler, 2001). 20

PAGE 21

However, the results of other studies (M atthew et al, 2002; Landman et al, 2002; Farrely et al, 2002; Biener, 2002) show that the Philip Morris youth smoking prevention campaign failed to influence formation of anti smoking attitudes and beliefs. A recent study by Farrely et al. (2002) reveals that unlike the positive effects of other anti smoking advertisements, which engender antismoking attitudes or beliefs, Philip Morris advertisements generally have no positive effect on antismoking. The results of Bieners (2002 ) study also show that Philip Morriss advertisements for youth smoking prevention have no positive influence. Rather, many studies point out the ironic effects of Philip Morris anti-smoking advertisements. Ferrely et al.(2002) concludes that exposure to Philip Morris advertisements actually makes adolescents more receptive to the idea of smoking. This is because Philip Morris advertisements actually shape favorable attitudes among youth toward the t obacco industry instead of helping to prevent youth smoking. Biener (2002) has also found similar resu lts, showing that the corporations campaigns create a more favorable attitude towa rd the company among youth. In this respect, Landman et al(2002) criticizes Philip Morris, arguing the following: the purpose of the industrys youth smoking pr evention programs is not to reduce youth smoking but rather to serve the industrys pol itical needs by preven ting effective tobacco control legislation, marginaliz ing public health advocates, pr eserving the industrys access to youths, creating allies w ithin policymaking and regulatory bodies, defusing opposition form parents and educators, bolstering industr y credibility, and preserving the industrys influence with policy makers (p. 917). However, in the case of Philip Morris, it is im portant to note that CSR activities are not strictly confined tobacco-related CSR activities. Instead, Philip Morris has conducted numerous tobacco-unrelated CSR activities such as em ployee community funds, employee volunteerism, solid waste and recycling, and donations to the meals on wheels program. For these tobaccounrelated CSR activities, controversy is lack ing because tobacco-unrelated CSR activities generate little speculation over potential ulterior motives. Accordingly, the effects of tobacco 21

PAGE 22

industrys CSR practices must be examined based on the type of CSR tobacco-related CSR and tobacco-unrelated CSR. In doing so, this raises important implications regarding the ulterior motivation behind Phillip Morris CSR activities. What then, are important factors in examining the effects of tobacco industry CSR practices ot her than the two CSR-typestobacco-relations vs. tobacco-unrelated CSR activities? Many scho lars suggest perceived motivations of CSR as an important factor when considering the effect s of CSR on public attitu des or beliefs toward CSR and the corporation itself (David et al,2005; An. & Kwon., 2005) Perceived CSR Motivation Though the nature of pro-social activities under the name of CSR activities is positive, CSR activities are not always perceived favorab ly. By examining skeptical public responses toward CSR activities, researchers have attempte d to explain this tendency by using the concept of perceived motivation (Webb& Mohr,1998; Bae & Cameron,2007; Baron, Miyazaki & Taypor, 2000; Ellen, Mohr & Webb, 2000). Webb and Mohr (1998) note that people do not always perceive CSR activities as positive in nature since publics often question the motivation of CSR activities such as whether companies provide CSR activities simply to re alize hidden benefits. Thus, even though people face similar CSR activities, there will be differe nt interpretations of th ese activities depending on public perception of the motivations behind CS R activities. Research conducted by Baron (2000) shows that public percepti on of why corporations conduct charitable activities is a determinant factor in anticipati ng the effects of CSR activities. More specifically, the study shows that when people perceive motivation positively for example, to support social development and a socially beneficial cause CSR activities engender positive customer attitudes toward both product and company. Conversely, when peopl e perceive the motivation as self-interested, the reaction toward CSR is not positive. 22

PAGE 23

In a similar respect, Ellen et al.(2000) warns of socially charitable programs sponsored by corporations by using the concept of perceived motivation. According to this study, once people perceive CSR activities as self-interested, there are invariably negative outcomes. To reduce the potential negative impacts of CSR activities, corporations must in fluence publics to interpret the motivation behind CSR activities as meant to achie ve mutually beneficial ends. Supporting this assertion were findings from research conducted by Elabach & Sutton (1992) Here it was found that the attitude or suppor t toward a Reebok campaign diffe red markedly among individuals, depending on the consumers perception of the companys underlying motive behind the campaign. They emphasize that the influence of CSR activities directly depends upon the perceived motivation. Thus, examining the e ffects of CSR requires a crucial and careful consideration of perceived CSR motivations. In describing this t ype of perceived CSR motivation, Webb (1998) characterizes publics as sk eptics, balancers, attribution-oriented, and socially concerned. An and Kwon (2005) further utilizes and modifies Webbs typologies (Self interested activity, mutually beneficial activity) to examine perceived CSR motivation. Consequently, based on the sum of these findings, it is proposed that perceived motivations may be characterized as either self-int erested or mutually beneficial. Cognitive Working Mechanis m of Perceived Motivation The attribution theory provides a useful framework of how people analyze causes of events and how those attributions influence th eir attitudes and behavi ors (Kelly, 1973). This theory has also been successfully adopted fo r explaining the cognitive mechanism of perceived motivation (Ellen et al, 2000; Bae & Camer on, 2006; An. & Kwon.,2005; Fein et al, 1990; Rifon et al, 2004; Szykman et al, 2004). This study will therefore use the attribution theory as a theoretical framework to explain the cognitive mechanism of perceived motivation and to anticipate the effects of perceived mo tivation behind tobacco industry CSR. 23

PAGE 24

In its most basic form, the attribution theory is about how people make causal explanations" (Kelly, 1973, p.107). The theory is based on the assumption that people are social perceivers who analyze the causes of certain even ts they experience to form their attitudes or behaviors (Rifon et al, 2004). Th is theory deals specifically w ith the following topics; (1) making causal inferences, determining what info rmation shall be used, and (2) using certain information to assess how people make causal inferences (Kelly, 1973). In reference to the first topic, the attribution theory suggests two importa nt concepts: intrinsic factors, and extrinsic factors. For the second topic, two major principles are suggeste d: the discounting principle and the augmentation principle. To facilitate a d eeper understanding of the cognitive mechanism of perceived motivation, these factor s (intrinsic/extrinsic) and prin ciples (discounting principle/ augmentation principles) will be discussed. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors Regarding the type of information to be used for making causal inferences, the attribution theory utilizes Hider(1958)s typologies of causal attribution. Heider (1958) divides the attribution factors that people use to infer causes of certain events into two types: intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors. Intrinsic factors refer to a subjects pers onal and internal motivations to engage in certain behaviors, whereas extrinsic fa ctors indicate situational factors that compel people to act. For example, Kelly (1973) suggest s, that in a case wh ere a person advocates a certain political position (p.107), people may analy ze the reason that he/she selects the political position as personal opinion (intrinsic factor) or as his/her companys pressure (extrinsic factor). Accordingly, based on which information or factors people will use for their causal inference, the attribution tendency may be divi ded into intrinsic attribution and extrinsic attribution. In the case of Tobacco industry CS R, people can assign CSR motivation to intrinsic nature, such as a corporations altruistic charact er. Alternatively, people can infer that extrinsic 24

PAGE 25

situations like government regulations toward tobacco industry compel corporations which market harmful products to share social respon sibility. Yet, when do people exhibit a tendency to attribute either extrinsic or intrinsic motives ? Regarding these attribution processes, Kelly (1973) suggests two principles for attribut ing causes behind some events: the discounting principle and augmentation principle. Discounting and Augmentation Principles According to Kelly (1973), discounting principles indicate that pe ople discount intrinsic motivations (e.g. personal belief) when there are other plausible ex trinsic factors (e.g. government regulations). More specifically, in situations wh ere there are several plausible intrinsic (e.g. personal belief) and extrinsic factors behind cert ain events, plausible extrinsic factors (e.g. government regulations) will be ev aluated as primary reasons by discounting or minimizing the function of personal factors. On the other hand, the augmentation principle explains situations where extrinsic factors function as inhibitory factors (e.g. monetary loss) of a certain event and where intrinsi c factors exist as facilitative factors(e .g. corporate ethical standard). In this scenario, people are most likely to augment the functions of intrinsic factors of the events. Among these two principles, discounting principles were most commonly used for investigating the effectiveness of advertising (Mizer ski, 1978; Calder & Burnkrant, 1977; Sparkman, 1982). Representatively, Sparkman (1982) examines consumers perceptions of advertisements by adopting discounting principles. For example, Sparkman explains situations where a celebrity advocates a produ ct in advertising. In this s cenario, there are typically two plausible reasons: the spokesperso ns belief of the qualities of product or paid sponsorship. Sparkmans research effectively confirms this be lief, showing that people are likely to infer the spokespersons monetary incentive (extrinsic factor) from advertising as the primary motivating 25

PAGE 26

reason rather than personal favorable beliefs toward the products (intrinsic factor). This result proves especially true given th at a persons causal inferences are often affected by information readily available (Heide r, 1958). For example, if there is no mention that a person has not received a monetary incen tive (no plausible extrin sic factors), people tend to evaluate the motivation of a certain situation ba sed on previous similar situations. However, if the spokesperson stated the product is not worth it s price despite the risk of monetary loss or legal liability (extrinsic factors as inhibitory factors), people would attribute the reason as a personal belief (intrinsic factors as facilitator factors) Thus, as a result people would trust his or her opinion relying on augm entation principles. However, when people are not given clear info rmation on intrinsic or extrinsic factors, they tend to rely on previous knowledge to make judgment of a given situation. One of the examples is that consumers use prior reputati on to evaluate social activities of business organizations when they cannot estimate ulterior motives behind the practices (Bae & Cameron, 2006; Fein, 1996; Szykman, Bloo m & Blazing, 2004). Thus, consum ers perceptions about organizations reputation can make an impact on attribution tendencies. Suspicion, Prior Reputation and Attribution Process When people experience difficulty in clea rly inferring motivations behind a certain situation, they typically become suspicious and minimize potential attribution errors (Carroll, 1979; An & Kwon, 2005). This aroused suspicion has a strong impact on leading people to focus on extrinsic motives (Bae & Cameron, 2006; Fein, 1996), and generally has the effect of negatively influencing peoples overall opini ons (Campbell & Kirmani, 2000; Fein, 1996). In other words, suspicions let people attribute extr insic factors in a skeptical and negative way by amplifying the tendency of discount ing intrinsic factors. (Bae & Cameron, 2006; Szykman et al, 2004). 26

PAGE 27

In a business context, Bae and Cameron point out (2006) that people inherently maintain a skeptical attitude toward cor porate advertisements or philanthr opic activities and so routinely question the motivations behind such activities. That is because people often have conclusory beliefs that corporations are driven solely by profit-seeking (Bae & Cameron, 2006). Szykman et al. (2004) explains that thes e situations induce people to thin k of further possible ulterior motives of the corporation. Once suspicion is ar oused, people tend to enga ge in a sophisticated attribution process by which they attempt to uncover underlying, ulteri or motives. These attributions ultimately tend to result in less fa vorable evaluations of the corporation (Fein, Hilton, & Miller, 1990; Vonk, 1998, 1999). These negative attributions to extrinsic fact ors are related to prio r corporate reputation (Bae & Cameron, 2006; An. & Kwon., 2005; D ean, 2003). Bae and Cameron (2006) investigated the relationships between suspicion, prior-repu tation of a corporation, and philanthropic CSR activities. They found that although pro-social activit ies can be regarded favorably, when a company has a prior negative reputation, the public suspects their motivation, inferring CSR activities as a self-interested activ ity rather than mutually beneficial (Bae& Cameron, 2004). Dean (2003) also discovered that when corporations have negative past reputations, people strongly attempt to uncover a hidden motive behind the given CSR activity. This imputes that a corporation s prior reputation is a crucial factor in determining how to attribute corporate pro-soci al activities (Bae &Cameron, 2004; Szykman, Bloom & Blazing, 2004). Based on these scenarios, it may be anticipated that if people face pro-social CSR activities that are conduc ted by companies with negative prio r reputations such as tobacco industry CSR, people will seek to link ulterior mo tivations with corporate extrinsic factors such 27

PAGE 28

as monetary incentives. However, depending on CSR-type (tobacco-related/unrelated), public perception of the ulterior motive behind the CSR activities may differentiate. Types of Tobacco Industrys CSR and Attribution Tendency When people face CSR activities which have pl ausible inhibitory extrinsic factors (e.g. monetary loss) and facilitative intrinsic factors (e. g. corporate ethics), people will regard the role of the facilitative factor in a more credible and amplified way according to the augmentation principle (Kelly, 1973). Yet, by this logic, it is necessary to c onsider what types of extrinsic factors people will regard most importantly among the many possible extrinsic factors. If people regard monetary loss as a primar y inhibitory extrinsic factor in the case of tobacco-related CSR (e.g. youth smoking prevention campaigns, supporti ng smoking cessation), it may be possible to adopt the augmentation principle to explain pub lic perception of the motivation behind those CSR activities. However, there may be many other plausible extrinsic/intrinsic factors, such as an attempt to improve corporate image and increase profit. Wolberg (2006) demonstrates that college smokers react very negatively to youth antismoking campaign messages sponsored by the tob acco industry. Regardless of message-type, college smokers tend to deny a nd reject anti-smoking messages and instead rationalize their smoking habits. These strong sk eptical attitudes toward smok ing cessation messages suggest that tobacco-related CSR is not likely to be rega rded by college students as a mutually beneficial activity in contrast to the logic behind the augmentation prin ciple. However, there is nonetheless some research yielding results sim ilar to when the augmentation principle is adopted. Several studies show that through th e process of exposure to industry sponsored tobacco-related CSR, people tend to form favorable and positive attitudes toward the corporation and even its products. (Matthew et al, 2002; Landman et al, 2002; Farrely et al, 2002; Biener, 2002). Put simply, these findings reveal the inco nsistencies in publics perception of motivation 28

PAGE 29

behind the tobacco-related CSR activities. The resu lts of this research therefore necessitate a research question regarding pub lics perception of motivations behind tobacco industry CSR based on CSR type (tobacco-related CSR/ tobacco-unrelated CSR). Consequently, both CSR types (Tobacco-rel ated CSR/tobacco-unrelated CSR) and perceived CSR motivation (self in terested/mutually beneficial) were suggested as necessary factors to consider when examining the effects of tobacco industry CSR activities. This research anticipates factors that may in fluence public attitude toward the particular corporation. Additionally, this research proposes smoking status as an additional variable to test the varied perceptions on CSR types and CSR motivation. Smoking Status Depending on an individuals smoking status, attitudes toward tobacco issues can vary drastically (David et al., 2005; Wolburg, 2006). David et al. (2005) identifies the tendency of a positive relationship between perceived corporate social values of Phillip Morris and purchasing intentions, explaining that the positive link is perhaps an endors ement of the CSR practices of Philip Morris by the smokers in the sample (p.309). However, Wolburgs research (2006) demonstrates the opposite reactions from smokers. He found attitudinal differences between smokers and nonsmokers toward messages of antismoking campaigns of cigarette companies. One of his studies reveals smokers reactions to anti-smoking advertisements developed by the cigarette company Lollilard. When shown antismoking advertisements of Lollilard, nonsmokers generally reacted approvingly, but smokers questioned the motivation behind the advertisements Thus, these findings reveal inconsistencies between smokers reaction toward cigarette companies and thei r anti-smoking campaigns. This study will examine how smokers perceive the motivation behind Phillip Morris various CSR practices. 29

PAGE 30

Effects of Perceived CSR Motivation Corporate Identity Generally, the corporate identity (CI) indicates corporate distinctive and central characters (Dacin &Brwon, 2002, David et al, 2005). CI is strongly involved with a series of questions regarding corporate i ndividuality including who they are, business-type, and ethostype. Therefore, CI is essentially derived from organizational culture, business aims, and values they wish to pursue (Balmer 2001). For exampl e, non-profit organizations are more likely to have ethical identities. The best corporation in terms of pure profit is likely to be identified with business expertise. CI is the corporate individuality can help to differentiate the corporation with its competitive environments(Balmer, 2001). CI is different from corporate image, which typically indicates the overall impression of a certain corporation (Bernstein, 1992; Dichter, 1985; Gray, 1986; Kennedy, 1977). Additionally, it differs with corporate reputati on as an aggregation of a single stakeholder's perceptions of how well organizational responses are meeti ng the demands and expectations of many organizational stakeholders (Wartick,1992). In ot her words, unlike CI, corporate reputation is the evaluation of corporate abilities and whethe r the corporation meets publics expectations (Nguyen & Leblanc, 2001). However, different concepts of CI, image, and reputation are interrelated in the respect that they are all influenced by publ ics perception and evaluation of the corporation. CI is created, developed, and maintained through continuous interactions between internal publics, corporations and external publics (Hooghiemstra, 2000; Van Riel, & Balmer, 1997). Due to these interactive characters, CI is not always formed the way the corporation would like to promote their publics. A well-mainta ined identity allows a corporation to keep and develop its legitimacy and reputation in the most desirable way so corporations invariably seek 30

PAGE 31

to establish their own solid and distinctive id entity (Cheney & Christensen, 2001; Van Riel, & Balmer, 1997). Thus, corporations continuously strive to promot e and manage CI in line with how they want to position their identity among publics. To accomplish this, organizations frequently conduct CSR. CSR activities are recognized as an important means of managing CI in the field of both marketing and public relations (David et al ., 2005). Although each field emphasizes the importance of CI and CSR, the cruc ial point in terms of expected be nefits from CSR is different. As David et al. (2005) notes, whereas marketin g researchers tends to focus on the impact of CI on financial outcomes, such as premium prici ng and competitive advantage, public relations researchers focus on less tangible variables, such as goodwill capital and strength of relationships between a corporation and its constituents (p.293). David suggests that in order to capture th is difference between marketing and public relations, the concept of corporate identity mu st include at least two dimensions: corporate expertise and corporate social responsibility (p.293). Here, he proposes that corporations manage dual identities relating to CSR activi ties, including marketi ng and public relations perspectives. Specifically, these identities incl ude the corporate expert ise dimension and the Corporate identity-CSR values dimension. The corporate expertise dime nsion is reflected in organizations that have developed a high ability to assess social trends, adjust quickly, and satisfy customers as a leader of business. This means that corporati ons are generally highly proficient in both managerial and practical dime nsions such as products and services. On the other hand, the Corporate identity -CSR values dimension is more closely aligned with a public relations perspective, and may be defined as mor al, ethical, and social obligations that provide 31

PAGE 32

the scaffolding for mutually beneficial exchan ges between an organization and its publics (p.293). Based on this discussion, this study will utilize the dual CI dimensions as dependent variables, focusing especially on the Corporate identity-CSR values dimension. Perceived CSR motivation (self-interested/ mutually beneficial) w ill have a different effect on evaluations of the Corporate identity-CSR values dimension. In the Corporate identity-C SR values dimension, people are likely to evaluate the dimension mo re highly when they perceive CSR motivation more mutually-beneficial than self-interested. For instance, if people perceive Philip Morris CSR motivation as mutually-beneficial, they will tend to evaluate Philip Morris as a corporation having a higher level of CSR values than wh en people perceive CSR motivation as selfinterested. Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions related to Philip Morris Since the evaluation of identity implies onl y how people position th e corporation along corporate expertise dimensions or Corporate iden tity-CSR values dimensions, it is difficult to determine whether people perceive the corporatio n with favorable or unfavorable opinions. Through these attempts, att itudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and attitudes toward corporations, which contain some value of how people feel favorable or positive, will be examined. For example, if people perceive Philip Morris CSR motivation as self-interested, they may express unfavorable attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and the corporation despite believing it is highly adept at conducting its business. Researchers have suggested that attitudes a nd behavioral intentions generally exhibit a strong relationship (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1970, 1972, 1980; Kahle & Berman, 1979; Andrews & Kandel, 1979). Ajzen and Fishbein posited attitude as an important 32

PAGE 33

factor in predicting behavioral intentions, noting empirically st rong relationships between each factor (Fishbein & Ajzen 1970, 1972, 1977, 1980). Kim and Hunter (1993) conducted metaanalysis to determine whether attitudinal rele vance substantially affects the magnitude of the correlation between attitudes and behavior, a nd whether the effects are content-free (p.101). This research too, revealed a str ong relationship between attitude and behavior intenti ons overall. In regard to attitudes toward the tobacco industry, some studies showed that Philip Morris youth anti smoking campaign not only influenced youth attitudes favorably toward the company, but also resulted in an increase of youths behavioral in tention to smoke in the near future (Farrelly et al, 2002). Based on these di scussions, this study will examine the behavioral intentions concerning Philip Morriss CSR and Philip Morris. For example, if people have favorable attitudes toward Philip Morris, they will be likely to show positive behavioral intentions toward Philip Morriss CSR and Philip Morris such as a willingness to discuss Philip Morriss CSR with friends and search for more information. South Koreas Tobacco Industry Phillip Morris has conducted anti-smoking pr evention campaigns and other socially responsible programs on a global scale. In Sout h Korea, Philip Morris Korea Inc. now offers several youth smoking prevention programs. These programs include the dist ribution of stickers and brochures to retailers for promoting the me ssage that selling tobacco to persons under 19 years old is prohibited by law with an added clause relati ng to youth smoking prevention when contracting with retailers. Moreover, Philip Morris Korea Inc. has supported a wide range of socially responsible programs, ranging from art and cultural programs to charitable works projects such as hunger relief programs and donations to womens shelters. In other words, Philip Morris has intensively conducted CSR activities in Korea in ways quite similar to its approach in the U.S. 33

PAGE 34

However, given that South Koreas tobacco industry contrasts markedly with the U.S., it is possible that the effects of CS R can be differentiated depending on the nation. In order to test whether the effects of Phillip Morris CSR programs are universal across different nations, it is necessary to consider the differi ng situations relating to tobacc o issues. Here, several main differences between the tobacco industry in South Korea and the U.S. will be introduced. In the 1980s, the majority of South Korean men were smokers, at a rate approaching 80% (Lee, 2007). The rate of smoking in S outh Korea saw little d ecline through the 1990s, consistently remaining above 70%. However, since 2000, the rate of smoking among men has steadily declined to its current ra te of 52.3%, thanks to recent government trials of intensive antismoking campaigning (Lee, 2007; OECD health da ta, 2007). However, South Korea still maintains the highest rate of smoking among OE CD countries (OECD health data, 2007). Researchers point out that the r eason Korea has maintained such unusually high statistics as an industrialized nation may be attributable to the so cial structure of Korea s tobacco industry (Lee, 2007; Bae, 2000; Son, 2002). First, few anti-smoking campaigns existed in Korea before 2001. Namely because until 2001, the Korean Tobacco and Ginseng (KT&G) Government Corporation held a monopoly on the right to manufacture and se ll tobacco products to the public. Moreover, a tobacco tax was imposed and constituted a significant source of income for local governments, averaging approximately 30% (Son, 2002; Lee, 2007). Instead of anti-smoking campaigning, local governments had until this point conducted campaigns to encourage Korean tobacco consumption in the name of helping local tob acco farmers and to maximize tobacco-based tax revenues (Son, 2002; Bae,2000). Although the South Korean governme nt eventually opened its tobacco market to U.S. tobacco companies beginning in 1988, the majority of the industry 34

PAGE 35

remained monopolized by the KT&G Government Corporation, due to rest rictions on market shares available to foreign tobacco companie s (Son, 2002). In other words, the manufacturing and selling of tobacco remained one of the primary government businesses in South Korea. Aside from what amounted to government spons orship of tobacco use, activist groups and political parties historically had little interest in anti-sm oking campaigning or regulation of tobacco products (Son, 2002). This may explain w hy, prior to the Asian financial crisis of 1997, there was little pressure to privatize KT&G and a noticeable absence of government-sponsored anti-smoking campaigns. Rather, the most visibl e step against smoking was to label cigarette packages with smoking is not good for your health. Only recently has the South Korean government made concerted efforts to raise publics awareness of issues like the harmful effects of smoking, youth smoking prevention, and smoking cessation through systemic supports and trials. Many researchers attribut e the sudden initiation of government-sponsored anti-smoking campaigns and support for smoking cessation medical treatment to the privatizati on of KT&G in 2001 (Son, 2002). Given the relatively short history of antis moking campaigns in Korea compared to the U.S., Korea noticeably lacks developed strategi es for antismoking campaigns. For example, there have been no anti-smoking campaigns that st rategically attack tobacc o corporations selling harmful tobacco products, such as Floridas Truth campaign (Healton, 2001). As a result, tobacco-related campaigns conducted by foreign tobacco companies such as a British America Tobacco and Philip Morris are widely seen as so cially responsible activi ties by the Korean news media. Although KT&Gs market share remains at nearly 70 %, multinational tobacco companies have experienced continued growth in Korea, with a market share approaching 30% 35

PAGE 36

(Kim, 2007). Perhaps the greatest differen ce between KT&G and multinational tobacco companies is that multinational tobacco compan ies conduct CSR intensively, and regardless of CSR-type. By contrast, KT&G has attempted to project images of public enterprise (despite now being a private corporation) th rough its continued use of government names. Maintaining this image has proven useful for competing with fore ign tobacco companies, as it has enabled KT&G to project a nationalistic and public enterprise image. KT&G has also conducted tobaccounrelated CSR activities including familiar socially charitable activities such as hunger relief programs and helping the poor (Kim, 2007). On the other hand, tobacco-related campai gns by multinational tobacco companies are new to Koreans. Several major news media outle ts have introduced and praised their work as respectable and socially re sponsible (Hangyere 21, 2001; Economy 21, 2007; Lee, 2005). Moreover, the South Korean media has criticized KT&G as ethically inferior to multinational tobacco companies, going so far as to recommended that KT&G learn from their example by conducting tobacco-related CSR activities such as youth smoking prevention campaigns (Park, 2007). To date, there are few artic les addressing the tobacco indus trys sophisticated strategies to expand their market in Korea, especially in re lation to CSR activities. This contrasts markedly from the U.S. Unlike U.S. citizens, Koreans lack exposure to information on tobacco industry CSR activities, and have not developed informed opinions on the matter. Thus, this study will investigate the effects of tobacco industrys CSR activities while considering the situational differences between each nation. Hypothesis and Research Question Based on the above theoreti cal backgrounds and discussi ons, the following hypotheses and research questions are proposed to examine th e effects of Phillip Morris CSR activities. 36

PAGE 37

Although the attribution theory provides some theoretica l foundations regarding the effects of CSR-type on publics perception of motivations behind CSR, research suggests many other potential factors a ffect the attribution process. Namel y, these include skepticism and prior corporate reputation. In fact, th ere are inconsistent findings regarding formation of perception toward tobacco companys anti-smoking campaigns. Therefore, to inves tigate the effects of CSR-type on perceived motiva tion, this study suggests the following research questions: RQ 1: Are there any differences in college st udents perceived motivation of Phillip Morris CSR activities when exposed to to bacco-related CSR from when exposed to tobacco-unrelated charitable CSR? In attempting to correlate the type of perc eived CSR motivation to corporate identity, it is expected that the evaluation of corporate identity as CSR will vary depending on perceived CSR motivation. When people percei ve CSR motivation as mutually beneficial, people will be more likely to evaluate the CSR value highly. On the other hand, when people perceive CSR motivation as a self-interested activity, people will be unlikely to evaluate the corporate expertise highly. Based on these expectations, th e following hypotheses are derived: H1: As college students perceive CSR motivat ion as mutually-beneficial, they are more likely to associate the corporation with higher CSR values. As mentioned above, the evaluation of identity reveals only how people will position the corporation in terms of social values. Thus, to examine how favorably and positively people will feel toward a corporation, both attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and attitudes toward the corporation must be examined. H 2-1: As college students perceive Philip Morriss CSR motivation as mutually beneficial, they are more likely to show positive attitudes to ward Philip Morriss CSR. 37

PAGE 38

H 2-2: As college student perceive Philip Morriss CSR motivation as mutually beneficial, they are more likely to show po sitive attitudes toward Phillip Morris. Many studies have suggested that attitudes a nd behavioral intentions generally exhibit a strong relationship. As researchers point out (Sen & Korchun, 2006; Turban & Greening, 1997), a companys CSR activities would be associated with stakeholders likelihood of seeking employment and a greater likelihood of investi ng in the company aside from a willingness to communicate on the issue. Thus, behavioral intentions toward Philip Morris were assessed by the behavioral likelihood seeking employment, the likelihood of investing, and the behavioral willingness to communicate with their friends about Phillip Morriss CSR activities. To examine how attitudes toward Philip Morris would relate with behavioral intentions relating Philip Morriss CSR activities, the following hypotheses are suggested: H 3-1: As college students show positive at titudes toward Philip Morriss CSR they are more likely to show positi ve behavioral intentions to a) work for Phillip Morris, b) invest in Phillip Morris, and c) communicate about Phillip Morriss CSR activities. H 3-2: As college students show positive attitudes toward Philip Morris, they are more likely to show positive behavi oral intentions to a) work fo r Phillip Morris, b) invest in Phillip Morris, and c) communicate about Phillip Morris CSR activities. Although the tobacco industry has gradually acq uired a negative image as a profiteer and distributor of harmful products, research suggests inconsistent findings on smokers attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR practices of cigarette compan ies and the companies themselves. Thus, this research aims to investigate the func tion of smoking status on the effects of tobacco industry CSR. To investigate the effects of smok ing status between CSR types and perception of the motivation, the following rese arch question is suggested: 38

PAGE 39

39 RQ2: How will publics smoking status af fect perceived motivation behind the two types of CSR practices and atti tudes toward Phillip Morris? Because the tobacco industrys CSR activit ies and tobacco related CSR have been conducted worldwide, it is first necessary to inve stigate whether the effects can be differentiated between South Korea and the States with different tobacco industries. Only then may the effects of tobacco industry CSR be adequately examine d. Accordingly, the following research question is proposed in regard to different nations: RQ3: How do Koreans differ from Ameri cans in perceived CSR motivations, CSR values identity, attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and Phillip Morris across tobaccorelated and tobacco-unrelated CSR activities? Additionally, for testing furt her relationships between pe rceived CSR motivation and attitudes, evaluation of CSR valu es, and behavioral intentions a nd estimating causal relationships between them, the following research question is proposed: RQ4: What kinds of relationships ex ist between perceived CSR motivation and attitudes, evaluation of CSR value s, and behavioral intentions?

PAGE 40

Different nation Korea U.S. R.Q.3. H 1. Evaluation of corporate identityCSR values dimension Perceived CSR motivation 40 Figure 2-1. Proposed research questions and hypotheses Type of CSR Self-interested -Tobacco related Mutually beneficial -Tobacco unrelated R.Q.1. R.Q.2. H 2. Attitude toward CSR and the corporation Smoking status Behavioral intentions relating to the corporation H 3.

PAGE 41

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Participants and procedure For this research, online surveys were conducted, to be completed by college students. Participants were recruited from several courses: Principles of Microeconomics, Principles of Public Relations, and Principles of Advertis ing (University of Fl orida); Accounting and Financial Management (Sungkyunkwan University in Seoul, Korea); Princi ples of Economics (Sunmoon University in Chunan, Korea). Particip ants in each country were randomly assigned to one of two conditions by using the last digit of their student ID number: one group was exposed to an online news release about tobacco -related CSR activities, and the other group was exposed to another online news release about to bacco-unrelated CSR activities. Participants were e-mailed a link to a web surv ey. When they agreed to participate, they were asked to read an assigned stimulus (tobacco-related CSR activities or tobacco-unrelated CSR activities) and complete an online questionnaire. Upon reading the stimulus news coverage, each participant was asked about smoking status, perceived CS R motivation, evaluation of CSR values, and attitude toward Phillip Morris. Students were given extra credit for their participation. Stimuli To select appropriate stimulus topics, Philip Morris international websites and U.S. homepage were first searched to examine its ex tensive database of info rmation concerning their CSR practices. There were several CSR activity topics such as helping to reduce underage tobacco use, supporting smoking cessation, inve sting in our communities, reducing our environmental impact, engaging with our busine ss partner, and governme nt relationships. Among these CSR activities, two ap propriate topics were selected for each stimulus. For the topic of tobacco-related CSR activities, smoki ng prevention campaign fo r youth was selected. 41

PAGE 42

For the topic of tobacco-unrelated CSR activitie s, donation for feeding the poor was selected. Both topics were selected because yout h smoking prevention campaign and hunger relief programs have been conducted in both countries. Four news releases (Korean and English versions for each topic) were created as stimuli based on real news releases. The Korean versi on was created by referencing the English version to reduce any possible differences such as tone or length between English and Korean stimuli. Measurement Perceived CSR Motivation Perceived CSR motivation was measured by one seven-point questi on (self-interested-1, mutually beneficial-7). This question has been used in othe r studies to measure perceived motivation regarding CSR practices (Rifon, C hoi, Trimble, & Li, 2004; An, B.S. & Kwon, K.,2005). Evaluation of CSR Values CSR social value was measured with four items, seven-point bipolar adjective scales. For assessing Corporate identity -CSR values dimension, compassionate, activist, sincere, and trustworthy were asked ( = .89). The average of respondents ratings were calculated and used for a Corporate identity-CSR values dimension. This question has been used in other studies (David, Kline& Y., 2005). Attitudes toward Philip Morriss CSR a nd Attitudes toward the Corporation Two types of attitudes were evaluated: attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR, and attitudes toward the corporation. Each attitude was evaluated by a set of three items that have often be used in research, seven-point bipolar adjective scales; good/ bad, pleasant/unpleasant, and favorable/unfavorable (MacKenzie & Luts, 1989; Biener, 2002). The following different questions were asked for attitudes toward Phillip Morris For me, Philip Morriss corporate 42

PAGE 43

social responsible activity (Hunger relief or youth smoking prevention campaign) is for evaluating attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR, and For me, Philip Morris is for evaluating attitudes toward the co rporation. The mean of attitude s toward CSR was 5.00(SD= 1.61) and Cronbachs was .90. The mean of attitudes towa rd Philip Morris was 3.84 (SD= 1.74) and Cronbachs was .95. Behavioral Intentions toward Philip Morris Participants were asked six que stions to examine their beha vioral likelihood of seeking employment, their likelihood of i nvesting, and their behavioral wi llingness to communicate, on a seven-point scale that has been used in research with high reli abilities (Morga n & Miller, 2002; Sen & Korchun, 2006; Greening & Turban, 2000). Fo r behavioral willin gness to communicate, following two questions were used; I am willing to discuss Philip Morris smoking prevention campaign (or hunger relief project) with my friends (strongly disagree-1, st rongly agree-7), I am willing to search more information on Philip Morris smoking prevention campaign (or hunger relief project) (strongly disa gree-1, strongly agree-7). For behavioral likelihood investing in the company, If you had money to inve st, how likely would you to invest in Philip Morris? (very unlikely-1, very likely-7) was used (mean= 11.53, SD=4.95). For behavioral likelihood seeking employment, following three que stions were used; How likely are you to seek employment with Philip Morris within next two years? (very unlikely-1, very likely-7), In the future, how likely are you talk-up Philip Morris to your friends as a good organization to work for? (very unlikely-1, very likely-7), a nd I would very much like to work for Philip Morris (very unlikely-1, very likely-7). The reli ability analysis of the items for behavioral likelihood seeking employment and behavioral w illingness to communicate variable turned out 43

PAGE 44

to be very reliable: likelihood seekin g employment, (mean=2.55, SD=1.42, Cronbachs =.93), and willingness to communicate (mean=3.60, SD=1.48, coefficient=.65). Smoking Status As individual characteristics, smoking st atus was assessed using four response categories: current everyday smoker, current occasional smoker, former smoker, and never smoked (National Health Interview Survey, 2005). If a respondent repo rts he/she has smoked almost everyday, the respondent was considered as an everyday smoker. If respondents answered they have smoked at least one cigarette in th e past month, but not every day, those respondents were considered as occasional smokers. Former smokers indicate those who have smoked in the past but have not smoked fo r at least one month. Demographics Basic demographics such as gender, race, age, and academic level were assessed. These were used as control variables because they co uld affect smoking status and attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and the corporation itself (Debon, M. & Kleges, RC., 1996; Johnston et al., 2005; Lantz, 2003; Rigotti et al. 2000; Robinson, L. A., Klesges, R. C.,& Zbikowski, S. M, 1998). Data Analysis The statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) and software of analysis of moment structures (AMOS) 7 were utilized to conduct statistical data analysis. For RQ1, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to test th e influence of CSR-t ype on perceived CSR motivation while controlling for the effects of demographic variables and smoking status. To test H1, a regression test was conducte d to analyze the effe cts of perceived CSR motivation on CSR values, controlling for the effects of demographic variables and smoking status. To test H2, a multiple regression test was conducted to an alyze the effects of perceived 44

PAGE 45

45 CSR motivation on attitude toward CSR and attitude toward Philip Morris. To test H3, a multiple regression test was conducted to analyze the effects of attitude toward CSR and Philip Morris on behavioral intentions re lating the corporation. For RQ2, another ANCOVA test was conducted to investigate any differences in the influence of CSR-type on CSR motivation and a ttitudes toward Phillip Morris by smoking status. That is, interaction effects of smoking status and CSR type will be examined on the dependent variables. For RQ3, an ANCOVA test was conduc ted to test any interaction effects between different countries and CSR t ype on perceived CSR motivation and attitudes toward Phillip Morris. For RQ4, a structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to investigate the relationship between variables and to suggest a comprehensive model.

PAGE 46

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS Demographics Among all 519 respondents, 367 (70.7%) were from the U.S., and 152 (29.3%) from South Korea. Of respondents in the U.S., 163(44.4%) were male and 204 (55.6%) were female. In Korea, 67 (44.1%) were male and 85 (55.9 %) were female. When asked about ethnicity, among the 367 U.S. respondents, 244 (66.5 %) repor ted themselves as Caucasian, 48 (13.1%) as African American, 36 (9.8 %), Asian, 35 (9.5%) as Hispanic, and 4 (1.1%) as other ethnic affiliation. The respondents age ranged from 17 to 39, with an average age of 21.41 years. Because the experimental survey s were conducted to target colle ge students in both countries, the education level remained c onsistent. When asked about smoking status in the U.S., among females, 69(81.2%) reported themselves as nonsmokers, 4(4.7%) as former smokers, 9(10.6%) as occasional smokers and 30(44.8%) as everyday smokers. When asked about smoking status in the U.S., among males, 25(37.3%) reported th emselves as nonsmokers, 11(16.4%) as former smokers, 1(1.5%) as occasional smokers and 30 (44.8%) as everyday smokers. When asked about smoking status in South Korea., among females, 159(77.9%) reported themselves as nonsmokers, 17(8.3%) as former smokers, 19( 9.3%) as occasional sm okers and 9(4.4%) as everyday smokers. When asked about smoking status in South Korea., among females, 119(73.0%) reported themselves as nonsmokers, 20(12.3%) as former smokers, 19(11.7%) as occasional smokers and 5(3.1%) as everyday smokers. 46

PAGE 47

Table 4-1. Smoking stat us, Nation, and Gender nonsmoker former smoker occasional smoker everyday smoker Total Male 25(37.3%) 11(16.4%) 1(1.5%) 30(44.8%) 67(100%) South Korea Female 69 (81.2%) 4(4.7%) 9(10.6%) 3(3.5%) 85(100%) Male 119(73.0%) 20(12.3%) 19(11.7%) 5(3.1%) 163(100%) U.S.A Female 159(77.9%) 17(8.3%) 19(9.3%) 9(4.4%) 204(100%) Participants in each country were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions by entering the last digit of th eir student ID number. In the U.S., among 367 respondents, 186 (50.7%) were exposed to an online news releas e about tobacco-relate d CSR activities, and 181(49.3%) were exposed to an online news releas e about tobacco-unrelated CSR activities. In South Korea, among 152 respondents, 76 (50.0%) and 76 (50 %) were exposed to each online news release. Test of Hypotheses Effects of Type of CSR on Perceived Motivation RQ 1: Are there any differences in college st udents perceived mo tivation of Phillip Morriss CSR activities when exposed to tobacco-related CSR from when exposed to tobacco-unrelated charitable CSR? It was explored how the respondents perceived Philip Morris CSR activities (1-for selfinterested, 7-for mutually beneficial) depending on a particular CSR type. An ANCOVA test was performed to examine the influence of CSR-type on perceived CSR motivation while controlling for the effects of demographic variables a nd smoking status. The difference in perceived motivation of Philip Morriss CSR activities depending on CSR type was not statistically significant. 47

PAGE 48

Table 4-2. Analysis of covariance for the infl uence of CSR-type on perceived CSR motivation Source df F p Sex 1 6.90* 009 Smoking status 1 1.73 189 Ethnicity 1 .51 475 Age 1 3.45 064 Nation 1 4.62** 032 CSR type 1 .16 691 Note. *p < .01, ** p <.05 However, the difference in perceived mo tivation of Philip Morriss CSR activities depending on nationality and gende r was statistically significant. In the U.S., the mean of perceived motivation was 3.81 (SD=1.64) and in South Korea the mean was 4.14 (SD=1.59). The mean differences were statistically significant ( F (1,518) =4.62, p<.05). Among female respondents, the mean of perceived motivati on was 4.11(SD=1.61) and among males, the mean was 4.11 (SD=1.61). The mean differences were statistically significant ( F (1,518) =6.90, p<.001). Thus, there were no significant differences in college students perceived motivation of Phillip Morriss CSR activities when exposed to tobacco-related CSR from when exposed to tobacco-unrelated charitable CSR. However, th ere was a tendency for Koreans to be more likely to think Philip Morriss CSR as more mutually beneficial than respondents in the U.S. Males were also more likely to view CSR as mo re mutually beneficial than females. Effects of Perceived CSR Motivation on Eval uation of Corporate Identity-CSR values Dimension Hypothesis 1: As college students perceive CSR motivation as mutually-beneficial, they are more likely to associate the co rporation with higher CSR values. To examine the correlation between perc eived CSR motivation and CSR values, a regression test was performed, using perceived CS R motivation as an independent variable and 48

PAGE 49

evaluation of corporate identity-CSR values dimension as a dependent variable while controlling for the effects of demographic variables and smoking status. The results show significant and positiv e effects of perceived CSR motivation on evaluation of corporate identity-CSR values dimension. There was a significant positive relationship between perceived CSR motiv ation and evaluation of CSR values ( =.51, p <. 000). The regression was a good fit ( R 2= 36%), and the relatio nship was significant ( F (1,517) =292.46, p < .001 ). Thus, the first hypothesis was supported. Table 4-3. Multiple regression analysis for evaluation of social value Variable B Perceived motivation .49 .58* Smoking status .01 .01 Sex .06 .02 Ethnicity -.01 -.01 Age -.04 -.11** Nation .38 .13** Note: *p < .001, ** p < .01. R2=.61, F (6, 518) =51.60, p<.001 Effects of Perceived CSR Motivation on Attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and Philip Morris Hypothesis 2-1: As college students perc eive CSR motivation as mutually beneficial, they are more likely to show pos itive attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR Hypothesis 2-2: As college students perc eive CSR motivation as mutually beneficial, they are more likely to show positive attitudes toward Phillip Morris. A multiple regression analysis was performed to analyze the effects of perceived CSR motivation on attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR while controlling for the effects of demographic variables and smoking status. Anot her multiple regression analysis was conducted to analyze the effects of perceived CSR motivation on attitudes toward Philip Morris. For 49

PAGE 50

regression analyses, perceived CS R motivation was used as an i ndependent variable and each attitude was used as a dependent variable while controlling for the effects of demographic variables and smoking status. The results showed significant and positive effects of perceived CSR motivation on both attitudes. There were significant positive relationships between perceived CSR motivation and attitude toward Philip Morriss CSR ( =.37, p <. 000), and attitude toward Philip Morris ( = .43, p < .001 ). The regressions were a good fit, and the relationships were both significant as Table 4 and Table 5 demonstrate. Thus, the results support H2 Table 4-4. Multiple regression analysis for attitude toward Philip Morriss CSR Variable B Perceived motivation .33 .37* Smoking status -.04 -.03 Sex .22 .08** Ethnicity -.03 -.02 Age -.02 -.03 Nation -.09 -.03 Note: *p < .001, ** p < .01 R2=.16, F (6, 518) =15.67, p<.001 Table 4-5. Multiple regression for attitude toward Philip Morris Variable B Perceived motivation .44 .43* Smoking status -.02 -.01 Sex .17 .05 Ethnicity -.01 -.01 Age -.10 -.20* Nation .35 .10 Note: *p < .001 R2=.25, F (6, 518) =28.00, p<.001 Effects of Attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and Philip Morris on Behavioral Intentions Hypothesis 3-1: As college students show positive attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR, they are more likely to show positive behavioral intentions to a) work for Phillip Morris, b) invest in Phillip Morris, and c) communicate about Phillip Morris CSR activities. 50

PAGE 51

Hypothesis 3-2: As college students show positive at titudes toward Philip Morris, they are more likely to show positive behavioral inte ntions to a) work for Phillip Morris, b) invest in Phillip Morris, and c) communicate about Phillip Morris CSR activities. Three multiple regression tests were conduc ted; both used attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and attitudes toward Philip Morris as independent variables while controlling for the effects of demographic variables and smoking status. Three types of behavioral intentions were used as dependent variables: a) working for Phillip Morris, b) investing in Phillip Morris, and communicating about Phillip Morris CSR activities. As Table 6 reflects, attitudes toward Philip Mo rriss CSR were strongly associated with behavioral willingness to communicate ( =.31, p < .001). However, there were no significant relationships between attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and behavioral intentions to work for and invest in Phillip Morris. Thus, H3-1 was partially supported. Table 4-6. Multiple regression for behavioral likelihood for behavioral willingness to communicate Variable B Attitudes toward Philip Morris .07 .07 Attitudes toward CSR .31 .31* Smoking status -.02 -.02 Sex .01 .00 Ethnicity -.08 -.06 Age -.02 -.04 Nation .18 .04 Note: *p < .001 R2=.14, F (7, 518) =11.44, p<.001 As Table 7 and Table 8 show, there were strong positive relationships between attitudes toward Philip Morris and a behavioral likelihood for seeking employment ( =.45, p < .001) and for investing in the company ( =.48, p < .001). Among control variables for the behavioral likelihood for seeking employment, age and nation showed significant relationships. Age had a negative relationship with seeking employment ( =-.09, p < .05) and South Korea showed a more positive relationship w ith seeking employment ( =.37, p < .001). Regarding behavioral 51

PAGE 52

likelihood for investing in Phil ip Morris, among control vari ables smoking status showed significant positive relationship with behavioral likelihood for investing in Philip Morris ( =.08, p < .05). However, there was no significant relati onship between attitudes toward Philip Morris and behavioral willingness to communicat e. Thus, H 3-2 was partially supported. Table 4-7. Multiple regression for Behavi oral likelihood for seeking employment Variable B Attitudes toward Philip Morris .41 .45** Attitudes toward CSR -.05 -.05 Smoking status .06 .04 Sex -.14 -.05 Ethnicity .02 .02 Age -.04 -.09* Nation 1.18 .37** Note: p < .05, ** p < .001 R2=.33, F (7, 518) =36.66, p<.001 Table 4-8. Multiple regression for behavioral likelihood for investing in Philip Morris Variable B Attitudes toward Philip Morris .47 .48** Attitudes toward CSR .03 .03 Smoking status .13 .08* Sex -.13 -.04 Ethnicity .01 .01 Age .00 .01 Nation .46 .13 Note: p < .05, ** p < .001, R2=.27, F (7, 518) =26.49 p<.001 In sum, as respondents showed more favorable and positive attit udes toward Philip Morris s CSR, they responded they would be more likely to communicate about Phillip Morris CSR activities with friends. When respondent s showed more favorable and positive attitudes toward the corporation, they showed a strong like lihood to work for the company and to invest in the company. 52

PAGE 53

Effects of Smoking Status RQ2: How will publics smoking status affect perceived motivation behind the two types of CSR practices and att itudes toward Phillip Morris? For RQ2, ANCOVA tests were conducted to inve stigate any differences in the influence of CSR-type on CSR motivation, attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and the corporation by smoking status while controlling other demographic factors. Intera ction effects between smoking status and CSR type on perceived CS R motivation and on attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and Philip Morris were examined. There was a significant interaction effect between smoking status and CSR types on percei ved CSR motivation (F (3,518) = 2.93, p<.05). Table 4-9. Analysis of covariance for perceived motivation Source df F p Sex 1 6.74 .010 Ethnicity 1 .48 .487 Age 1 3.73 .054 Nation 1 4.01* .046 CSR Type 1 1.58 .209 Smoking status 3 1.47 .221 CSR Type smoking status 3 2.93* .033 Note. **p <.05 53

PAGE 54

Table 4-10. Interaction effects of smoking status and CSR type CSR type n Mean SD df F Never 187 4.03 .12 Former smoker 28 3.34 .30 Current occasional smoker 27 3.04 .31 Tobacco related CSR Current everyday smoker 20 4.27 .36 Never 185 3.94 .12 Former smoker 24 4.04 .33 Current occasional smoker 21 4.04 .35 Tobacco unrelated CSR Current everyday smoker 27 3.70 .33 3/518 2.93* *p <.05 Regarding tobacco-related CSR, this mean s current everyday smokers and non-smokers responded they believed Philip Morris conducted youth smoking prevention campaigns for mutual benefit more so than former smokers or current occasional smokers. In the case of tobacco-unrelated CSR, the opposite trends we re revealed. Former smokers and current occasional smokers responded they perceived the motivation of hunger-relief CSR as more mutually beneficial than current everyday smokers and non-smokers. Among respondents who were exposed to tobacco-unrelated CSR, the m ean of perceived motivation of former smokers (mean=4.04, SD=.33), that of current occasional smokers (mean=4.04, .35), and that of nonsmokers (mean= 3.94, SD=.12) were above average (mean=3.91, SD=1.60). The mean of perceived motivation of current everyday smokers (mean=3.70, SD=.33) was the lowest. However, unlike respondents who were exposed to tobacco-related CSR, current everyday smokers and non smokers responded they thought th e motivation of Philip Morriss hunger relief campaign was more self-interested than former smokers or current occasional smokers. Figure 2 below shows this interaction effect between smoking status and CSR type on perceived CSR motivation clearly. 54

PAGE 55

CSR typeTobacco unrelated CSR Tobacco related CSR Mean Perceived motivation4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 current everyday smoker current occasional smoker former smoker neversmoking status Figure 4-1. Interaction effects of smoking status and CSR type There were no significant interaction effects between sm oking status and CSR types on attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and the corporation. Interaction Effects of Different Nations RQ3: How do Koreans differ from American s in perceived CSR motivations, CSR values, attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and Phillip Morris across tobacco-related and tobacco-unrelated CSR activities? For RQ3, ANCOVA tests were conducted to te st any interaction e ffects of different nation and CSR type on perceived CSR motivation and attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and Phillip Morris. Interaction effects of different nations and CSR types on perceived CSR motivation and on attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and Philip Morris were examined. There was a significant interaction effect between nation and CSR types on perceived CSR motivation (F (1,518) = 4.61, p<.05). The resu lts showed very different tendencies of perceived motivation depending on nation and CSR t ype (as Figure 3 shows). Overall, Korean respondents evaluated the motivation of CSR activ ities as more mutually beneficial (mean=4.14, 55

PAGE 56

S.D. =1.59) than respondents in the U.S.(m ean=3.81, S.D.=1.64). In the U.S., respondents evaluated the motivation of hunger relief CSR as mo re mutually beneficial than that of youth smoking prevention CSR. On the other hand, when asked about perceived motivation in Korea, respondents evaluated tobacco-related CSR as more mutually beneficial than tobacco-unrelated CSR. Among control variables, sex and age showed a significant positive relationship: sex ( F (1,518) =6.90, p<.01), age ( F (1,518) = 2.96, p <.01). Older respondents were more likely than younger respondents to perceive Phi lip Morriss CSR motivation as more mutually beneficial. Women were more likely than men to perceive Philip Morriss CSR motivation as more mutually beneficial. Table 4-11. Analysis of covariance for pe rceived Philip Morriss CSR motivation Source df F p Sex 1 6.90* .009 Ethnicity 1 .63 .426 Age 1 2.96* .086 Smoking 1 1.38 .241 CSR Type 1 .29 .593 Nation 1 4.12** .043 CSR Type Nation 1 4.61** .032 Note. *p <.01, ** p <.05 Table 4-12. Interaction effects of nation and CSR type CSR type N Mean SD df F Tobacco related CSR 186 3.69 1.68 U.S.A. Tobacco unrelated CSR 181 3.93 1.60 Tobacco related CSR 76 4.39 1.54 South Korea Tobacco unrelated CSR 76 3.88 1.61 5/518 4.61* *p<.05 56

PAGE 57

CSR typeTobacco unrelated CSR Tobacco related CSR Mean Perceived motivation4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 South Korea USANation Figure 4-2. Interaction effects of different nation and CSR type There were no significant interaction eff ects between nation and CSR types on attitude toward CSR and the corporation. Model Testing RQ4: What kinds of relationships would ex ist between perceived CSR motivation and attitudes, between attitudes and evaluation of corporate identity-CSR values dimension, and between evaluation of corporate identity-CSR values dimension and behavioral intentions? Additionally, SEM was performed to analyze relationships between variables and to suggest a comprehensive model. SEM is a co mprehensive statistical methodology for testing a model and estimating causal relationships. This method may also include factor analysis, path analysis and multiple regression analysis. Th rough demonstrating the causal relationships between variables, the model of research can be strengthened. For this analysis, five constructs were used: perceived motivation, attitude toward CSR, attitude toward Philip Morris, the evaluation of corporate identity-CSR values dimension, and likelihood seeking employment, since nominal vari ables and variables co nsisted of two items 57

PAGE 58

could not be utilized for conduc ting SEM analysis. To create a more comprehensive model, several possible paths were added to the initial model that was previously suggested through the hypotheses. Additional paths included relatio nships between perceived CSR motivation and attitudes, between attitudes and evaluation of corporate identity-CSR values dimension, and between evaluation of corporate identity-CSR values dimension and behavioral intentions. Nine total paths were checked with modification indice s. First, for the suggested model, goodness-offit was estimated. In the study, the X 2 (316.88)/df(96) ratio was 3.30, the comparative fit index(CFI ) was .97, and the non-normed fit inde xt(NNFI) was .96. Based on these measures, the model fit very well. The significance of regression weights for all constructs was investigated, finding that 8 relationships were statistically significant (a s Figure 4 shows). Perceived motivation was positively related to attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR ( = .39, p < .001), attitudes toward the corporation ( = .47, p < .001), and an evaluation of CSR values ( = .33, p < .001). Attitude toward the corporation was positively related to perceived motivation ( = .47, p < .001). Both attitudes positively influenced an evaluation of CSR values: attitude toward Philip Morris CSR ( = .12, p < .01), attitude toward the corporation ( = .56, p < .001). Both attitudes influenced likelihood seeking employment: attit ude toward Philip Morris CSR ( = -.18, p < .001), attitudes toward the corporation ( = .32, p < .001). Contrary to expectations, a negative influence was found in regard to the relati onship between attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and likelihood seeking employment. Evaluation of CSR values positively affected likelihood of seeking employment ( = .35, p < .001). In sum, this modeling reveals several addi tional findings in add ition to supporting the following hypotheses. Attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and toward the corporation were 58

PAGE 59

59 linked to an evaluation of corpor ate identity-CSR values dimension, which in turn led to more positive likelihood seeking employment. However, direct attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR had a negative influence on the likelihood seeking employment. Different nation Type of CSR Perceived CSR motivation Smoking status Attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR /the corporation Evaluation of a corporate identity Behavioral intentions Figure 4-3. Initial Model

PAGE 60

.47** -.18** .35** .32** .56** .33** .47** .39** Different nation Type of CSR Perceived CSR motivation Smoking status Evaluation of a corporate identity Attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR Behavioral intentions Attitudes toward the corporation 60Figure 4-4. Final Model CMIN=316.884, df=96 CMIN/df=3.30 CFI=.97 NNFI=.96 RMSEA=.067 *p<.01, **<.001

PAGE 61

Table 4-13. Constructs, Indi cators, and Key Statistics Constructs Indicators M SD Confirmatory Factor Loadings To me, Philip Morriss socially responsible p ractices are: Unfavorable/favorable Bad/Good Unpleasant/Pleasant 5.16 5.15 4.67 1.64 1.58 1.60 .87 b .92 a .82 a Attitudes toward Philip Morriss CSR Index 4.99 1.61 Cronbach =.90 To me, Philip Morriss corporate image are: Unfavorable/favorable Bad/Good Unpleasant/Pleasant 3.89 4.01 3.63 1.78 1.76 1.66 .94 b .95 a .89 a Attitudes toward Philip Morris Index 3.84 1.73 Cronbach =.95 I think Philip Morris is very compassionate. I think Philip Morris is a very activist. I think Philip Morris is very sincere. I think Philip Morris is very trustworthy. 3.82 4.08 3.66 3.57 1.55 1.69 1.56 1.54 .86 b .78 a .83 a .81 a CSR values Index 4.23 1.59 Cronbach =.89 How likely are you to seek employment with Philip Morris within next two years? How likely are you to seek information about j obs at Philip Morris in the future? In the future, how likely are you talk-up Philip Morris to your friends as a good organization to work for? I would very much like to work for Philip Morris. 2.20 2.48 2.64 2.60 1.54 1.64 1.65 1.66 .86 a .90 a .86 a .88 a Likelihood of seeking employment Index 2.55 1.63 Cronbach =.93 61

PAGE 62

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION Discussion of Findings Effects of CSR Type on Perceived Motivation Many scholars have criticized Philip Morri ss CSR activities by arguing that Philip Morris utilizes CSR activities as key marketing tools to increase corporate profits (Chapman, 2004l Hirschhorn, 2004; McDaniel et al.,2006; Landman et al, 2002). These scholars argue that people should be cautious before interpreting Phili p Morris CSR favorably. This was especially true in the case of smoking related CSR activitie s where such activities engendered much greater controversy most namely, in the case of Philip Morris youth smoking prevention campaigns. Multiple studies have also shown that Philip Morris CSR campaign led people to form positive attitudes toward Philip Morris and increase the likelihood of youth smoking, instead of formation of anti-smoking attitudes and behavioral inten tions to quit smoking as would be expected. However, Philip Morriss CSR activities are not only confined to tobacco related CSR, but also to numerous tobacco-unrelated CSR. This research aims to examine which types of CSR would engender more favorable perceptions of why Philip Morris conducts CSR activities. As the results of R.Q.1 show there were no overall differe nces of perceived motivation depending on CSR-type. However, the results of R.Q.2 indicated that the effects of CSR-type on the perception of the motivati on that the tobacco corporati on conducts CSR activities were dramatically differentiated depending on smoking status. Nonsmokers generally showed the most ge nerous reaction toward both CSR types. They thought tobacco-related CSR was more for mu tual benefit than other types of CSR. This may be because, as other researchers note (Wolburg, 2006), nonsmokers generally react approvingly toward anti-smoking messages. In terestingly, everyday sm okers showed similar 62

PAGE 63

patterns with nonsmokers in terms of interpre ting motivation behind CSR. Everyday smokers interpreted tobacco-related CSR in a more favorab le way than tobacco-unrelated CSR. On the other hand, former smokers and cu rrent occasional smokers exhibited skeptical reactions toward tobacco-related CSR. They perceived tobacco un related-CSR as more favorable than tobaccorelated CSR. These unique results were helpful in discovering the inconsistencies in the results of previous research David et al.( 2005) notes that groups of smokers perceive Philip Morris CSR practices in a very positive way. However, Wolburgs research (2006) points out that smokers are differentiable from non-smokers in that the form er have a strong suspicion of the motivation behind tobacco companies antismoking advertisements. This research revealed the positive relationship between heavy smokers and Philip Mo rris anti-smoking campaigns as David et al. (2005) suggests. However, people who overc ome smoking addiction or people who are not addicted to smoking showed a much greater tendency to be skeptic al toward Philip Morriss antismoking campaigns. These results partially supported previous re search in terms of skeptical reactions. These different effects of CSR t ypes on perceived motiva tion depending on smoking status can be understood through attribution theories that resear ch explains as a theoretical background. Everyday smokers usually responded negatively to anti-smoking messages that appeared to threaten their right to smoke (Wolburg, 2006) Because smokers tended to hold strongly defensive attitudes toward tobacco issues in cluding tobacco companies themselves, anti-smoking campaigns must generally be perceived in very skeptical and critical way (Wolburg, 2006). However, once smokers noticed that the anti-smoking campaign was conducted by a tobacco company, their reaction to the campaign was susceptible to change according to augmentation 63

PAGE 64

principles (Kelly, 1973). When everyday smoke rs were faced with tobacco-related CSR activities which could en gender monetary loss for the company, it might happen that they were more likely to cite the role of the intrinsic factors (e.g. corporate ethi cs) in a credible and amplified way. Unlike heavy smokers, former smokers who succeeded in overcoming smoking addiction, or occasional smokers who were not fully addicted to smoking to have defensive attitudes toward smoking issues, would potentially be more receptive to discounting principles (Kelly, 1973). However, because this study did not examine the attribution tendency precisely, it is difficult to reach a conclusion based solely on this study. Further st udies will first be necessary. Different effects of CSR-type on percei ved motivation depending on nation were revealed through this study. When asked the pe rceived motivation in Korea, college students evaluated tobacco-related CSR as more mutually beneficial than tobacco-unrelated CSR. When U.S. respondents were asked, college students perceived tobacco-unrelated CSR as more mutually beneficial than tobacco-related CSR. This may be because, in South Korea, unlike the U.S., a government corporation had monopoly rights to manufacture and sell tobacco, and for many years, there were few anti-smoking campaigns to provide an opportunity for publics to develop their views on the tobacco industry. Of further importance, there were no counter marketing anti-smoking campaigns that used stra tegies which attacked tobacco industries strategies to sell harmful products, such as Fl oridas Truth campaigns (Healton, 2001). Also, Philip Morriss youth smoking prevention campaigns marked the first time Koreans faced antismoking campaigns conducted by tobacco-companies much unlike the U.S. As a result, Koreas situation engendered even favorab le media attention toward the youth smoking 64

PAGE 65

prevention campaigns. This would perhaps explai n why Koreans show more favorable reactions toward new tobacco-related campaigns than tobacco-unrelated campaigns. That respondents in the U.S. exhibited more skeptical responses toward tobaccounrelated CSR can also be understood as a result of the U.S.s particular situation. In the U.S., there have been several different types of tob acco-related CSR activities that were supported by big tobacco companies. Moreover, counter marketing campaigns, which are anti-smoking campaigns designed to attack tobacco industry ma rketing practices, have also been conducted (Healton, 2001). These anti-smoking campaigns coul d play an important role in raising public awareness of tobacco industrial trials. This could explain why people perceived tobaccounrelated CSR activities as more mutually beneficial. Effects of Perceived Motivation on Evaluation of CSR Values, Attitudes, and Behavioral Intentions The results of this study support the notion that people are more likely to evaluate CSR value dimensions of CI more highly wh en they perceive CSR motivati on as more mutually-beneficial than self-interested. This means, that when people perceive their CSR activities as mutually beneficial, people are likely to position the or ganization in line with socially responsible organizations. These results imply that when or ganizations try to develop and manage their CSR value dimensions of CI, conducting appropriate CSR activities is an effective option. This research confirms the results of previ ous research that perceived motivation of CSR activities is a determinant factor in anticipati ng the effects of CSR activities on formation of attitudes, and further formation of behavior al intentions (Webb & Mohr, 1998; Baron, 2000, Ellen, 2000; Elabach & Sutton, 1992). The research showed that when people perceive the motivation behind CSR activities as for mutual be nefit, and not for increasing corporate profits, the attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and attitudes toward the corporation are more positive 65

PAGE 66

and favorable. That is, the influence of CS R activities is differentiable depending upon the perceived motivation. This offers some clues as to why CSR activities are not always perceived favorably despite CSRs pro-social nature. Effects of Attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and the Corporation The effects of attitudes toward Philip Morris CSR and the corporation were investigated through H3 and RQ4. In accordance with what many studies had previously suggested (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1970, 1972, 1980; Kahle & Berman, 1979; Andrews & Kandel, 1979), there were generally strong pos itive relationships be tween attitudes and behavioral intentions. This study reveals very interesting eff ects of attitudes on behavioral intentions. First, attitudes toward Philip Morr is CSR activities directly affect behavioral willingness to communicate Philip Morris CS R activities. Second, attitudes toward the corporation are closely related w ith behavioral intentions for s eeking employment or investing in the corporation. Through SEM analysis, it was also found that ev aluation of CSR values dimension of CI can also play an important role in anticipating be havioral intentions. Al so, there were indirect relationships between attitudes a nd behavioral intentions throu gh an evaluation of CSR values dimension of CI. There are, however, inconsistent findings regarding attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and likelihood for seeking employment. Thus, it is necessary to analyze these findings more in depth. Limitations, Suggestions for Futu re Research, and Implications There are some drawbacks to this res earch. Methodologically, the study utilized experiments conducted online based on different types of news rele ases (tobacco related/ tobacco unrelated). Because respondents we re asked to read the news rele ase in order to be exposed to 66

PAGE 67

different types of CSR, the artificiality of the situation coul d influence respondents reaction toward the CSR. Additional research in a natu ral and realistic setti ng would be helpful to confirm the results of the research. There were also inconsistent findings between attitudes toward Philip Morris s CSR and behavioral intent to seek employments and to invest. More future research on these points will be necessar y. Because the sample was limited to college students, for generalization of the important fi ndings, more studies using an expanded sample will be needed. Although this research focuse s only on tobacco industry CSR activities, more studies on the effects of CSR taking into consid eration CSR-type will be necessary. However, to date there is lit tle research regarding tobacco industry CSR, especially relating to CSR-type. Thus, theore tically, this research may offer gr eater insight on the effects of tobacco industry CSR. This study found that smoking status plays a crucial role in the effects of CSR-type on perceived motivation. Specifically, the unique results relating to smoking status that heavy smokers showed very favorable attitudes toward Philip Morriss CSR and the Philip Morris corporation, and that oc casional smokers or former smokers showed very skeptical attitudes toward each. These findi ngs, based on varying levels of smoking status, may help to understand the inconsistencies of previous research. Also, this study reveals the importance of national background as a main variable. Although this study did not examine the attributio n tendency precisely, it nonetheless implies the usefulness of the attribution theo ry in anticipating the effects of perceived motivation. However, in this regard, more future stud ies will be necessary. Lastly, the results of this study demonstrate that an evaluation of CI can also play an important role in anti cipating behavioral intentions. Practically speaking, information on the effects of tobacco industry CSR based on CSRtype dependent on smoking status and the particul ar nation will be especi ally useful for public 67

PAGE 68

68 health practitioners who work closely with anti-smoking campaigning. Specifically, public health practitioners can utili ze the different effects of tob acco industry CSR for designing and planning counter-marketing anti-smoking campaigns. Practitioners would then be able to segment their audience by smoking status or natio nality to conduct more effective anti-smoking campaigning.

PAGE 69

APPENDIX A STIMULI Tobacco-related CSR Stimulus in the U.S. Philip Morriss Youth Smoking Preven tion Program Raises Awareness Philip Morris Companies Inc. has provided several youth smoking prevention programs from 1999. One of those programs is informi ng students parents by providing youth smoking prevention tips and tools to parents. As children get ready to go back to school, parents have good reason to be concerned about the activities their kids c ould be engaging in. Research s hows that key risk periods occur during every transition from early childhood through young adulthood. Nationally, 12.2 percent of youth between 12 and 17 years of age reported using cigarettes. To raise awareness of the importance of youth smoking prevention and to encourage parents to talk to their kids about not sm oking, Philip Morris USA is airing two national television advertisements. These advertisements remind parents of the key role they play in influencing their children's deci sions not to smoke and highlight everyday moments as perfect opportunities for parents to talk to their kids about not smoking. In addition to the two television advertisements, Philip Morris USA has placed online advertising on national parenting websites highlighting the free ti ps, tools and resources from parenting experts availabl e at philipmorrisusa.com. "Research indicates parents are the single greate st influence on their kids' decision not to smoke," smoke, said Howard A. Willard, Philip Morris USA executive vice president, corporate responsibility. "As the manuf acturer of a product intended for adults who smoke, that has serious health effects and is addi ctive, we believe we have a responsibility to help prevent kids from smoking. We take that responsibility seri ously and, as a company, are working towards it through comprehensive actions including pare nt communications, gr ant programs and youth access prevention efforts." The two television ads will air from August 8 until October 9, and November 14 until December 11. In addition, new and updated free tools, tips and printed resources will be available to parents, including a recently rele ased parenting brochure called, Could your kid be smoking?, as well as tip sheets on Parenting st yles and youth smoking, Talking to pre-teens about not smoking, and Preventing ki ds access to cigarettes. Tobacco-unrelated CSR Stimulus in the U.S. Philip Morris Companies Inc. Join Forces to Feed 500,000 Hungry People. Philip Morris Companies Inc., has not only supported several arts and cultural programs, but also supported charitable works such as providing hunger relief programs or donating for womens shelter. Recently, Philip Morris Compan ies Inc., has announced that it will donate 150,000 pounds of salmon through the Safari Clubs National Campaign Against Hunger program to provide more than 500,000 meals for hungry people in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Florida and Arizona. The program was announced today in a news conference at the Food Lifeline Food Bank in Shoreline, Washington. Through the program, thousands of disadvantaged people are expected to be provided w ith nutritious, high-protein meals. 69

PAGE 70

About the donation, SCI Executive Director Rudolph Rosen, Ph.D. said, "This venture shows what happens when interests from bot h the profit and non-pr ofit worlds unite in humanitarian programs. Everyone wins. More im portantly, the biggest winners are those who have the least -the hungry and homeless." "We have a 40-year history of supporting hunger-relief efforts and are pleased to support Safari Club International in th eir generous support to feed hungry people," said Stephanie French, Vice President, Corporate Contributi ons, Philip Morris Companies Inc. "This is a significant and innovative effort, one that accesse s important new resources to aid in the fight against hunger." Against Hunger is a SCI humanitarian serv ices program that was launched in 1989. The SCI Against Hunger program is active in all 50 stat es, parts of Canada, a nd in several countries around the world. In 1999, the Philip Morris family of companie s -which includes Kraft Foods, Inc. and Miller Brewing Company -launched a four-year, $100 million campaign to combat hunger. The Philip Morris Fight Against Hunger initiative in cludes $50 million in cash contributions and $50 million in food donations. It is believed to be the nation's largest corporate response to this pressing social issue, which affects as many as 35 million Americans, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Fighting hunger is ju st one way Philip Morris has been helping people in need for more than 40 years. Tobacco-related CSR Stimulus in South Korea: Korean Version Tobacco-related CSR Stimulus in South Korea: English Version Philip Morris Koreas Youth Smoking Prevention Campaign 70

PAGE 71

Philip Morris Korea Inc. has provided several youth smoking prevention programs from 1999. Those programs include that distributing stickers and brochur es to retailers for providing message of selling tobacco to person under19 y ear olds is prohibited by law and add clause relating youth smoking prevention when the company make a contract with retailers. One of major youth smoking prevention programs, recently Philip Morris Korea and 930 Ministop Convenient Stores have conducted Youth Smoking Prevention Campaigns making it mandatory requesting ID and distributing broc hures. That is since many adolescent buy cigarettes at convenient stores Philip Morris provide educatio nal campaigning toward retailers regarding youth smoking preventi on. Managing director of Mini stop Convenient Store explain the motivation of joining the campaign as that convenient stores genera lly rely on part-time workers so it happened sometimes selling cigarettes to youth. Byun-Cheul Kim, an organizational communication manager of Philip Morris, who support educations and publicities of the campaign, said I think the first respons ibility of youth smoking is on Tobacco companies and retailers, and argued I hope other tobacco companies and other convenience stores also join the campaign with responsibility Philip Morris provide public health information on smoking, disease, and addiction through their website( www.pmkorea.com ) to protect youth having biased knowledge of cigarettes and to give more accurate informa tion of it. In their website, there are also information on Philip Morriss youth smoking preven tion campaigning with parents and ads that conducted in the U.S.A. Tobacco is only for adults, that has serious h ealth effects and is addictive, and As the manufacturer, we believe we have a responsibility to help prevent kids from smoking. We take the responsibility seriously, Howard A. Willa rd, Philip Morris USA executive vice president. Youth sometimes cannot make right judgments a nd youth smoking is one of the examples. It is necessary to prevent youth smoking, who regards smoking cool under peer pressures in social level in diverse way. Philip Morris will keep try to prevent youth smoking. Tobacco-unrelated CSR Stimulus in South Korea: Korean Version 71

PAGE 72

72 Tobacco-unrelated CSR Stimulus in South Korea: English Version Philip Morris Korea strives to leap to responsible corporate management Philip Morris Companies Inc., presently supports a wide range of socially responsible programs, ranging from art and cultural programs to charitable works projects such as hunger relief programs and donations to womens shelte rs. Philip Morris maintains the belief that corporations are so interwoven w ith society that corporations ar e obligated to contribute to societys long-term development and well-being. In furtherance of this belief, Philip Morri s Korea recently donated 26 freezer trucks to social welfare institutions across the nation to help f eed the hungry. On June 24th, the company pledged to donate yet another freezer truck. In total, this amounts to 27 freezer trucks that Philip Morris has donated to Food Sharing Campaign Associ ation, one that Korean Buddhist political party Jogye Order supports as one of the Associations most visibl e members. The freezer trucks are equipped with freezing, refrige rating systems, and kitchen equipment, to store and transport foods safely and feed hungry people. Also, it is possible that donated foods more safely deliver to unprivileged family. About the donation, Food Sharing Campai gn Associations mana ging director, Kim Hyunsu Ph.D. said, "This venture shows what ha ppens when interests from both the profit and non-profit worlds unite in humanitarian programs. Everyone wins. More im portantly, the biggest winners are those who have the least -th e hungry and homeless." As Phillip Morris organizational communication manager Byun-Ch eul Kim explains, We have donated these freezer trucks to provide fresh and sage foods for the economically struggling people such as unprivileged families. We will continue to tr y and provide fresh foods to the poor and conduct charitable activities to encourage them and give them hope. Moreover, Philip Morris has supported homele ss shelters. Victims of family abuse or homeless lack the financial means to sustain th emselves because of low social awareness. Consequently, Philip Morris has not only supported main tenance of shelter faci lities so that these people may have a place to sleep, but has also supported job education programs which help them to gain employment. For their voluntary effo rts, Philip Morris receiv ed the Health-Welfare Minister award in 2004 for aiding the poor. As a socially responsib le member of society, Philip Morris Korea will continue to c onduct responsible corporate manage ment and invest in a broad range of social charit able activities.

PAGE 73

APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE Questionnaire in the U.S. To receive extra credit on the survey, please enter your UF ID in the survey when prompted for your UF ID. When the last digit of your UF ID ends with an EVEN number, I AGREE: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.a spx?sm=iFZM9CDDtlKDt2_2b2MAXi5Q_3d_3d When the last digit of your UF ID ends with an ODD number, I AGREE: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=JtxPpUnzfgK_2b0sC2iL_2bA1w_3d_3d I DO NOT AGREE: http://www.ufl.edu Please read the news article carefully and answ er the following question s to the best of your ability. 1. Please check the following questions, on a sc ale from 1 to 7, to the best of your ability: What do you think about why Philip Morris is conducting socially responsible activities? Self-interested (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) Mu tually beneficial 2. Please respond to how much you agree with the following statements. Please check the following questions, on a scale from 1 to 7 : (1) I think Philip Morris is very compassionate Strongly disagree (1)-----(2) -----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) Strongly agree (2) I think Philip Morris is a very activist Strongly disagree (1)-----(2) -----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) Strongly agree (3) I think Philip Morris is very sincere Strongly disagree(1)-----(2 )-----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Strongly agree (4) I think Philip Morris is very trustworthy Strongly disagree(1)-----(2 )-----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Strongly agree 3. Please check the following questions, on a sc ale from 1 to 7, to the best of your ability: (1) To me, Philip Morriss socially responsible practices are: Unfavorable (1)-----(2)-----(3)----(4)-----(5)-----(6)----(7) Favorable Bad (1)-----(2)-----(3 )-----(4)-----(5)-----(6)-----(7) Good Unpleasant (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)-----(5)----(6)-----(7) Pleasant (2) To me, Philip Morris is: 73

PAGE 74

Unfavorable (1)-----(2)-----(3)----(4)-----(5)-----(6)----(7) Favorable Bad (1)-----(2)-----(3 )-----(4)-----(5)-----(6)-----(7) Good Unpleasant (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)-----(5)----(6)-----(7) Pleasant 4. Please respond to how much you agree with the following statements. Please check the following questions, on a scale from 1 to 7 : (1) I am willing to discuss Philip Morris youth smoking prevention campaign (or hunger relief project) with friends. Strongly disagree(1)-----(2 )-----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Strongly agree (2) I am willing to search for more info rmation on Philip Morris youth smoking prevention campaign (hunger relief project). Strongly disagree(1)-----(2 )-----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Strongly agree 5. Please check the following questions, on a sc ale from 1 to 7, to the best of your ability: (1) If you had money to invest, how likely would you to invest in Philip Morris? Very unlikely (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Very likely (2) How likely are you to seek employment with Philip Morris within next two years? Very unlikely (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Very likely (3) How likely are you to seek information a bout jobs at Philip Morris in the future? Very unlikely (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Very likely (4) In the future, how likely are you to talk-up Philip Morris to your friends as a good organization to work for? Very unlikely (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Very likely (5) I would very much like to work for Philip Morris. Very unlikely (1)-----(2)----(3)-----(4)-----(5 )-----(6)-----(7) Very likely 6. How much and how often do you smoke? (1) Never. (2) In the past, but have not smoked for at least one month. (3) At least once in the past month, but not every day. (4) Almost everyday. 7. Your sex: Male_____ Female _____ 8. Your ethnicity 9. Your age: Thank you for your participation! 74

PAGE 75

Questionnaire in Korea (1)-----(2)-----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) (1)-----(2)-----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) (1)-----(2)-----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) (1)-----(2)-----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) (1)-----(2)-----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) 75

PAGE 76

(1)-----(2)-----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) (1)-----(2)-----(3)-----(4)----(5)-----(6)-----(7) 76

PAGE 77

77

PAGE 78

LIST OF REFERENCES Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). At titude behavior relations: a theore tical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84 888-918. American Cancer Society (2007, December 18). New Report Estimates 12 Million Cancer Cases Worldwide In 2007. ScienceDail y. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2007/12/071217092929.htm An, B.S., & Kwon, K.(2005). The study on the impact of corporate social responsibility attitude toward the corporate image and the purchasi ng intention: focusing on the adjusting role of the publics motive perception. Study of Public Relations, 9(1) 5-37. Andrews, K. H., & Kandel, D. B. (1979). A ttitude and behavior: A specification of the contingent consistency hypothesis. American Sociological Review, 44 298-310. Armour, B. S., Woollery, T., Malarcher, A ., Pechacek, T. F., & Husten, C. (2005). Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and productivity losses -United States. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 54(25) 625-628. Arnott, N. (1994). Marketing with a passion. Sales and Marketing Management, 146 64-71. Bae, J., & Cameron, G.T.(2007). Conditioning eff ect of prior reputation on perception of corporate giving. Public Relations Review, 32 144-150. Balmer, J. M.T. (2001). Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3), 248-291. Balmer, J. M. T.,& Gray, E.R.(2001). Ethical identi ty: what is it? What of IT?, in C.L.Pass(ed.), University of Bradford School of Ma nagement Working Paper Series, 1(15). Barone, M. J., Miyazaki, A. D., &Taylor, K. A. (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. Biener, L. (2002). Anti-tobacco advertisements by Massachusetts and Philip Morris: what teenagers think. Tobacco Control, 11 ii44-ii46. Bowen, H.R. (1953). Social Responsibilities of the Businessman Harper & Row, New York. Business wire (1999, November 23) Safari club international a nd Philip Morris companies Inc. join forces to feed 500,000 hungry people. Bu siness wire. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from http://findarticles.com/p/ar ticles/mi_m0EIN/is_1999_Nov_23/ai_57781549 Brown. T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The Compa ny and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses. Journal of Marketing, 61 68-84. 78

PAGE 79

Carringer, P. T. (1994). Not just a worthy cause : cause related marketi ng delivers the goods and the good. American Advertising, 10, 16-19. Calder, B., & Burnkrant, R. (1977). Interper sonal influence on consumer behavior: An attribution theory approach. The Journal of Consumer Research, 4 29-38. Campbell, M.C., & Kirmani, A. (2000). Consumer s use of persuasion knowledge: the effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on per ceptions of an influence agent. Journal of Consumer Research, 27 69-83. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4 497. Centers for disease control and prevention (2006). Hea lth united states, 2005 with chartbook on trends in the health of Americans. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics Retrieved April 20,2008, from http://ww.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/tables/2003/03hus031.pdf Chapman, S. (2004). Half full or half empty? Tobacco control, 13 445-447 Cheney, G., & Christensen, L.T. (2001). Organizational identity: Linkages between internal and external communication. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in th eor, research, and methods (pp. 231269). London: Sage. Christensen L. T., & Askegaard S. (2001). Corporate identity a nd corporate image revisited A semiotic perspective, European Journal of Marketing 35(3/4), 292. Clark, C. E. (2000). Differences be tween public relations and corpor ate social responsibility: an analysis. Public Relations Review, 26(3) 363-380. Creyer, E. H., & William, T. R. (1997). The influe nce of firm behavior on purchase intention: do consumers really care about business ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing,14 (6), 421-32 Dacin, P. A., & Brown, T. J. (2002). Corporate id entity and corporate as sociations: a framework for future research. Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2), 254-264. Davis,K. (1973). The case for and against busin ess assumption of soci al responsibilities. The Academy of Management Journal 16(2), 312-322 Davis, K., & Bloomstrom, R. L. (1975). Business and Society: Environment and Responsibility 3rd ed. New York:McGraw Hill David, P., Kline, S., & Dai, Y.(2005). Corporat e social responsibility practices, corporate identity, and purchase intention: a dual-process model. Journal of Public Relations Research, 17(3) 291-313. 79

PAGE 80

Dean, D. H. (2003). Consumer pe rception of corporate donations. Journal of Advertising, 32(4) 91. Debon, M., & Kleges, R. C. (1996). Adolescents perceptions about smoking prevention strategies: a comparison of the programmes of the American Lung Association and the Tobacco Institute. Tobacco Control, 5 19-25. DeGeorge, R. T. (2006). Business Ethics 6th ed. Simon & Schuster, Upper Saddle River, N.J. Esrock, S. L., & Leichty, G. B. (1998). Social responsibility and cor porate Web pages: Selfpresentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review, 24 (3) 305-319. Ellen, P. S., Mohr, L. A., & Webb, D. J. (2000) Charitable programs and the retailer: do they mix?" Journal of Retailing, 76 (3). 393-406. Elsbach, K. D., & Sutton, R. I. (1992.) Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Academy of Management Journal, 35(4), 699-738. Farrelly, M. C., Healton, C. G., Davis, K. C., Messeri, P., Hersey, J. C., & Haviland, M. L. (2002). Getting to the truth: evaluating na tional tobacco counter marketing campaigns. American Journal of Public Health, 92(6) 901. Fein, S., Hilton, J. L., & Miller, D. T. (1990) Suspicion of ulterior motivation and the correspondence bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(5), 753-764. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. ( 1972). Attitudes and opinions. Annual Review of Psychology, 23, 487544. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1974). Attitudes towards objects as predictors of single and multiple behavioral criteria. Psychological Review, 81(1), 59-74. Garfield, B. (1993). This heavy-handed Ad exploits someone new. Advertising Age 64 (10), 50. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, L. (1986). The science of the sophomore revisited: from conjecture to empiricism. Academy of Management Review, 11(1) 191-207. Grunig, J., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing Public Relations. Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Wilson Hays, C. L. (1998, December 3). The media busine ss: advertising; Philip Morris assembles a $ 100 million program to try to reduce smokings appeal to teenagers. New York Times. When dont smokie means do. (2008, Novemb er 27). NewYork Times, Editorial. Healton, C. (2001). Whos afraid of the truth? American Journal of Public Health, 91(4), 554558. Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley. 80

PAGE 81

Hirschhorn, N.(2004). Corporate so cial responsibility and the tobacco industry: hope or hype? Tobacco Control,13, 447-453. Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communi cation and impression managementNew perspectives: Why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 55-68. Johnston, L. D., OMalley, P. M., Bachman, J. G. & Schulenberg, J. E. (2005). Monitoring the future national survey results on drug us e, 1975-2004: Volume II, College students and adults ages 19-45 (NIH Publication No. 05-5728). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. Kahle, L. R., & Berman, J. J. (1979). Attitudes cause behaviors: A cross0lagged panel analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(3), 315-321. Kelley, H. H. (1972), Causal Schemata and the Attribution Process, in Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior Edward E. Jones et al., eds., Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press, 151-174. Kelly, H. H. (1973), The Pro cess of Causal Attribution, American Psychologist, 28 107-128. Kim, M. & Hunter, J. E. (1993). Attitude-behav ior relations: A meta-analysis of attitudinal relevance and topic. Journal of Communication, 43(1), 101-142. Kim, T.H. (2007, September 13). Cigarette price increase foreign tobacco companies profits. Medical News [Electronic version] Retrieved July 27,2008, from http://www.mdtoday.co.kr/mdtoday/index.html?no=31871 Kirmani, A.,& Wright, P. (1989). Money talks: perceived advertising expense and expected product quality. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3 ), 344-53. Kluger, R. (1996). Ashes to Ashes: America's Hundred Year Cigarette War, the Public Health, and the Unabashed Triumph of Philip Morris. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Kruglanski, A.W., Schwartz, J. M., Maides, S., & Hamel, I.Z. (1978). Covariation, discounting, and augmentation: Towards a clarification of attributional principles. Journal of Personality, 46 (1) 176-189. Landman, A., Ling,P.M., & Glantz, S. A. (2002) Tobacco industry youth smoking prevention programs: protecting the industr y and hurting tobacco control. American Journal of Public Health, 92(6), 917-930. Lantos, G.P. (2001). The boundaries of stra tegic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 595-632. 81

PAGE 82

Lantz, P. M. (003). Smoking on the rise am ong young adults: Implications for research and policy. Tobacco Control.12 i60-i70. Lee, I.W .(2005, Jun 12). KT&G need to conduct youth smoking cessa tion campaigning. Hangyere. Lee, H.H.(2007). National t obacco control programmes, Public affairs forum 7, 6-21 Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2001). Corporat e citizenship as a marketing instrument. European Journal of Marketing, 35 457. McGuire, J.W. (1963). Business and Society New York: McGraw-Hill. McDaniel, P. A., Smith, E. A., & Malone, R. E. (2006). Philip Morriss project sunrise: weakening tobacco control by working with it. Tobacco control,15, 215-223. Metzler, M. S.(2001). Responding to the legitimacy problems of big tobacco: an analysis of the people of Philip Morris: image advertising campaign. Communication Quarterly, 49(4) 366-381. Morgan, S. E., & Miller, J. K. (2002). Beyond th e organ donor card: The effect of knowledge, attitudes, and values on willingness to communicate about organ donation to family members. Journal of Health communication, 14(1) 121-134. Mizerski, R.W. (1975). A test of the relations hip between trait and ca usal attribution. In Advances in Consumer Behavior 2th ed. J. Schlinger, Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, 471-480. Niederdeppe, J., Farrelly, M.C.,& Haviland,M.L. ( 2004). Confirming truth: more evidence of a successful tobcco countermarketing campaign in Florida, American Journal of Public Health, 94(2) 255-257. Nguyen, N., & Leblanc, G.(2001). Corporate imag e and corporate reputation in customers retention decisions in services, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 8(4), 227236 Park.S.W.(2007). National policy for adolescent smoking prevention and cessation. Public affairs forum, 7, 22-34 Rifon, N. J., Choi, S. M., Trimble, C. S ., & Li, H. R. (2004). Congruence effects in sponsorshipThe mediating role of sponsor credibility and consumer attributions of sponsor motive. Journal of Advertising, 33(1), 29. Rigotti, N., Lee, J. E., & Wechsler, H. (2000). US college students' use of tobacco products: results of a national survey. Journal of American Medical Association,284, 699-705. Robinson, L. A., Klesges, R. C., & Zbikowski, S. M. (1998). Gender and ethic differences in young adolescents sources of cigarettes. Tobacco Control, 7, 353-359. 82

PAGE 83

Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C.B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to do ing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility, Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 22544. Sheldon, O. (1924). The Philosophy of Management London, Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons Ltd., first published 1924, reprinted 1965. Son, Y.Y. (2002). The effects of tobacco consum ption policies: Korean vs.U.S. Steidl, P.& Emory, G. (1997). Corporate Image and Identity Strategies: Designing the Corporate Future. Business &Professional Publishing, Warriewood, Australia. Sparkman, Richard M., Jr. (1982). The Discounting Principle in the Perception of Advertising, in Advances in Consumer Research. 9. Andrew Mitchell, ed., Ann Arbor, Ml: Association for Consumer Research, 277-280 Szykman, L. R., Bloom, P. N., & Blazing, J. (2004). Does corporate sponsorship of a sociallyoriented message make a difference? An i nvestigation of the effects of sponsorship identity on responses to an anti-drinking and driving message. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1) 13. The National Health Interview Survey (2005). Smoking status records in the NHIS, by Year. [Electronic version] National Center for H ealth Statistics, Retrieved April 21,2008, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/nhi s/tobacco/nhis_hist_recode_list.htm Tugend. A. (2002, October 27). Business; cigarette makers take anti-smoking ads personally New York Times. Turban, D. B., & Greening, D.W. (1997). Corpor ate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658763. Van Riel, C. B. M., & Balmer, J. M. T.(1997). Corporate identity: The concept, its measurement and management, European Journal of Marketing, 31, 340-355. Woburg, J. M. (2006). College Students Respons es to Antismoking Messages:Denial, Defiance, and Other Boomerang Effects. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 40(2), 294-323. Webb. D. J., & Mohr, L. A., (1998). A typology of consumer responses to cause-related. marketing: From skeptics to socially concerned. Journal of public policy and marketing, 17(2), 226-238. Van Riel, C.B.M., & Balmer, J.M.T. (1997). Cor porate identity: the concept, its measurement and management. European Journal of Marketing, speci al edition on Corporate identity, 31(5/6), 340-55. Vonk, R. (1998). The slime effect: suspicion and di slike of likable behavi or toward superiors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 849-864. 83

PAGE 84

Vonk, R. (1999). Impression formation and im pression management: motives, traits, and likeability inferred from self promo ting and self deprecating behavior. Social Cognition, 17(4), 390-412. Yoon, J. (2006). A study on corporate strategic philanthropy in Korea. Unpublished master's thesis, Sogang University, Seoul, Korea. 84

PAGE 85

85 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Yeonsoo Kim has worked as a researcher in a pub lic relations firm for the past four years. From 2002 to 2005, she worked at the Korcom Porter Noveilli Institute of Communication Strategies, in Seoul, South Korea. There, she was responsible for designing and conducting research relating to analysis of media cove rage to develop public relations programs for managing corporate reputation. She also worked at the Korean Press Foundation as a research assistant for many projects regarding political ca mpaigns: from presidential candidate selection to the presidential election campaign in 2002. Sh e received her master's degree in 2004 and her bachelor's degree in 2001, each in Mass Communicat ions with a focus on Journalism at Ewha Women's University. Also, she received her masters degree in Mass Communication s with a focus on Public Relations from the University of Florida in the fall of 2008. Her current research interests are mainly corporate social responsible activities, persuasion communications, and strategic communications related to the promotion of heath issues.