This study explores how individual judgments of organizational legitimacy form. While prior research links moral evaluations to intent, the role of motives in legitimacy judgments remains underexplored. Using an experimental vignette study, we test whether identical positive organizational outcomes have a weaker effect on legitimacy when driven by self-interest rather than prosocial motives. Our findings confirm that while evaluators consider outcomes, motives often play a greater role—prosocial motives enhance legitimacy benefits, while self-interested motives diminish them. Further analysis suggests this effect stems from inferred intentionality: Organizations gain legitimacy when positive outcomes appear intentional rather than incidental. These insights help managers strengthen legitimacy and underscore the importance of considering both outcomes and motives in public policy discussions, especially amid concerns that profit-driven actions harm public welfare.
{"title":"The Role of Organizational Motives in the Formation of Moral Legitimacy Judgments","authors":"Philipp Schreck, Nils Kruse, Gonzalo Conti","doi":"10.1111/beer.12801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12801","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study explores how individual judgments of organizational legitimacy form. While prior research links moral evaluations to intent, the role of motives in legitimacy judgments remains underexplored. Using an experimental vignette study, we test whether identical positive organizational outcomes have a weaker effect on legitimacy when driven by self-interest rather than prosocial motives. Our findings confirm that while evaluators consider outcomes, motives often play a greater role—prosocial motives enhance legitimacy benefits, while self-interested motives diminish them. Further analysis suggests this effect stems from inferred intentionality: Organizations gain legitimacy when positive outcomes appear intentional rather than incidental. These insights help managers strengthen legitimacy and underscore the importance of considering both outcomes and motives in public policy discussions, especially amid concerns that profit-driven actions harm public welfare.</p>","PeriodicalId":29886,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics the Environment & Responsibility","volume":"35 1","pages":"541-551"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/beer.12801","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145891328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We study the coverage of European funds by the mass media and the relationship between media sentiment and public sentiment. We analyze 31,570 media articles published across all European Union (EU) countries between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2023 — a period significantly shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic and major EU funding initiatives —using the BERTopic modeling technique. We find that public discussions related to European funds can be categorized into 11 distinct topics, ranging from project developments in Central and Eastern Europe to employment and economic measures. Our results show that during the period studied, public sentiment towards European funds is generally stable yet negative, with notable fluctuations corresponding to specific events. Significant positive and negative peaks in sentiment are observed during periods associated with successful project implementations or corruption scandals. We also find significant geographical variation in media coverage and sentiment across EU member states. While Greece, Croatia, and Bulgaria exhibit high media coverage and more negative sentiment, Denmark, Ireland, and Portugal display more positive media sentiments. Our results suggest a negative relationship between media sentiment scores and the proportion of negative responses concerning the EU and the European Parliament (i.e., a proxy for Euroscepticism).
{"title":"Media Coverage of European Funds and Public Sentiment: A Topic Modelling Approach","authors":"Iván Pastor Sanz, Félix J. López Iturriaga","doi":"10.1111/beer.12808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12808","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We study the coverage of European funds by the mass media and the relationship between media sentiment and public sentiment. We analyze 31,570 media articles published across all European Union (EU) countries between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2023 — a period significantly shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic and major EU funding initiatives —using the BERTopic modeling technique. We find that public discussions related to European funds can be categorized into 11 distinct topics, ranging from project developments in Central and Eastern Europe to employment and economic measures. Our results show that during the period studied, public sentiment towards European funds is generally stable yet negative, with notable fluctuations corresponding to specific events. Significant positive and negative peaks in sentiment are observed during periods associated with successful project implementations or corruption scandals. We also find significant geographical variation in media coverage and sentiment across EU member states. While Greece, Croatia, and Bulgaria exhibit high media coverage and more negative sentiment, Denmark, Ireland, and Portugal display more positive media sentiments. Our results suggest a negative relationship between media sentiment scores and the proportion of negative responses concerning the EU and the European Parliament (i.e., a proxy for Euroscepticism).</p>","PeriodicalId":29886,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics the Environment & Responsibility","volume":"35 1","pages":"525-540"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/beer.12808","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145887373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}