Luiza Braga, Amir Grinstein, Matheus Tardin, Marcelo Perin
{"title":"理解对企业激进主义的反应:两极分化的调节作用。","authors":"Luiza Braga, Amir Grinstein, Matheus Tardin, Marcelo Perin","doi":"10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In our polarized societies, more companies are taking a stand on divisive sociopolitical issues. However, given the mixed findings from previous studies, it remains unclear whether Corporate Activism (CA) is more likely to hurt or help a company's performance and reputation, or shape the public's attitudes toward the sociopolitical issue involved. To better understand the impact of CA in polarized societies, it is valuable to study moderating factors, especially those linked to polarization. A meta-analysis of 72 scholarly works is conducted to examine the impact of CA on various outcomes (e.g. ads and social media engagement, cognitive and attitudinal reactions, public's intentions and actions, emotional reactions, social and ethical engagement, workplace, and employee perceptions) and the role of moderators (a sociopolitical issue's political leaning and controversy level, political orientation of the target audience, key demographics). The analysis reveals a positive, albeit small, effect size (0.085 [95% CI (0.0542, 0.1158)]) with the most impact on two outcomes: cognitive and attitudinal reactions, and emotional reactions. It further reveals that companies adopting liberal-leaning CAs elicit more favorable responses than those adopting conservative CAs and that liberals respond positively to CA, while conservatives are more neutral. However, when there is alignment between the CA's political leaning and the audience's political orientation, conservatives have a stronger positive response than liberals. Also, younger audiences view CA more positively. Finally, per national culture, while power distance and individualism positively moderate the reaction to CA, uncertainty avoidance has a negative effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":74468,"journal":{"name":"PNAS nexus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11475398/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding reaction to corporate activism: The moderating role of polarization.\",\"authors\":\"Luiza Braga, Amir Grinstein, Matheus Tardin, Marcelo Perin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae313\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In our polarized societies, more companies are taking a stand on divisive sociopolitical issues. However, given the mixed findings from previous studies, it remains unclear whether Corporate Activism (CA) is more likely to hurt or help a company's performance and reputation, or shape the public's attitudes toward the sociopolitical issue involved. To better understand the impact of CA in polarized societies, it is valuable to study moderating factors, especially those linked to polarization. A meta-analysis of 72 scholarly works is conducted to examine the impact of CA on various outcomes (e.g. ads and social media engagement, cognitive and attitudinal reactions, public's intentions and actions, emotional reactions, social and ethical engagement, workplace, and employee perceptions) and the role of moderators (a sociopolitical issue's political leaning and controversy level, political orientation of the target audience, key demographics). The analysis reveals a positive, albeit small, effect size (0.085 [95% CI (0.0542, 0.1158)]) with the most impact on two outcomes: cognitive and attitudinal reactions, and emotional reactions. It further reveals that companies adopting liberal-leaning CAs elicit more favorable responses than those adopting conservative CAs and that liberals respond positively to CA, while conservatives are more neutral. However, when there is alignment between the CA's political leaning and the audience's political orientation, conservatives have a stronger positive response than liberals. Also, younger audiences view CA more positively. Finally, per national culture, while power distance and individualism positively moderate the reaction to CA, uncertainty avoidance has a negative effect.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PNAS nexus\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11475398/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PNAS nexus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae313\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PNAS nexus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae313","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在我们这个两极分化的社会中,越来越多的公司开始在具有分歧的社会政治问题上表明立场。然而,鉴于以往的研究结果不一,目前仍不清楚企业激进主义(CA)更有可能损害还是帮助公司的业绩和声誉,或者影响公众对相关社会政治问题的态度。为了更好地理解公司激进主义在两极分化社会中的影响,研究调节因素,尤其是与两极分化相关的因素是很有价值的。本研究对 72 篇学术著作进行了元分析,以研究新闻传播对各种结果(如广告和社交媒体参与、认知和态度反应、公众意图和行动、情感反应、社会和道德参与、工作场所和员工看法)的影响以及调节因素(社会政治问题的政治倾向和争议程度、目标受众的政治取向、主要人口统计数据)的作用。分析表明,尽管影响较小,但对认知和态度反应以及情绪反应这两个结果的影响最大,其效应大小为 0.085 [95% CI (0.0542, 0.1158)]。研究进一步揭示,采用自由主义倾向的CA的公司比采用保守主义CA的公司获得更多有利反应,自由主义者对CA做出积极反应,而保守主义者则更加中立。然而,当传播交流的政治倾向与受众的政治取向一致时,保守派比自由派的积极反应更强烈。此外,年轻受众对《宪法》的看法更为积极。最后,在民族文化方面,权力距离和个人主义会积极调节受众对《宪法》的反应,而不确定性规避则会产生负面影响。
Understanding reaction to corporate activism: The moderating role of polarization.
In our polarized societies, more companies are taking a stand on divisive sociopolitical issues. However, given the mixed findings from previous studies, it remains unclear whether Corporate Activism (CA) is more likely to hurt or help a company's performance and reputation, or shape the public's attitudes toward the sociopolitical issue involved. To better understand the impact of CA in polarized societies, it is valuable to study moderating factors, especially those linked to polarization. A meta-analysis of 72 scholarly works is conducted to examine the impact of CA on various outcomes (e.g. ads and social media engagement, cognitive and attitudinal reactions, public's intentions and actions, emotional reactions, social and ethical engagement, workplace, and employee perceptions) and the role of moderators (a sociopolitical issue's political leaning and controversy level, political orientation of the target audience, key demographics). The analysis reveals a positive, albeit small, effect size (0.085 [95% CI (0.0542, 0.1158)]) with the most impact on two outcomes: cognitive and attitudinal reactions, and emotional reactions. It further reveals that companies adopting liberal-leaning CAs elicit more favorable responses than those adopting conservative CAs and that liberals respond positively to CA, while conservatives are more neutral. However, when there is alignment between the CA's political leaning and the audience's political orientation, conservatives have a stronger positive response than liberals. Also, younger audiences view CA more positively. Finally, per national culture, while power distance and individualism positively moderate the reaction to CA, uncertainty avoidance has a negative effect.