Given the conundrum of moral washing in CSR communication, this research examines the effectiveness of narrative richness using storytelling in marketing. In the process, the moderating role of moral imagination is further explored. An online experiment with a 2 (Narrative Richness: High vs. Low) x 2 (Moral Imagination: High vs. Low) between-subjects factorial design was conducted with two well-known companies (Shell vs. Facebook) suffered from a reputation crisis as the target brands. The results (N = 287) showed that the effects of narrative richness on consumer responses, including positive emotion, negative emotion, and behavioral intention, were significant for Facebook whereas its effect on positive emotion was significant for Shell. Most importantly, the two-way interaction between narrative richness and moral imagination on attitude toward the brand was significant for Shell, indicating that the effect of narrative richness on attitude toward the brand was augmented by moral imagination. In other words, consumers with high moral imagination view narrative-rich messages with virtuous thoughts to figure out the conundrum of CSR communication for the company, and vice versa. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

Consumers become increasingly concerned about the impact of business on the society and social media platforms facilitate the spread of their concern worldwide. This research investigates how consumers react (i.e. Electronic Word-of-Mouth) when brands initiate good or bad practices in the context of social and environmental corporate responsibility. Three experiments provide a multifaceted representation of the phenomenon. We examine the role of consumers’ self-conscious moral emotions (i.e. guilt and pride), in combination with brand engagement in self-concept (BESC) and brand loyalty, in explaining consumers’ reaction. The results will help scholars and managers to better understand and address the spread of consumers’ e-WOM relating to what they perceive as responsible or irresponsible brand behaviors.

In nowadays consumption-based society, products (e.g. food and electronic products) are often thrown away before they are sufficiently used. The aversive consequence of such a lifestyle is becoming more alarming. There is an urgent need for a change in people’s consumption style. How can we make people correct their existing wasteful consumption behaviors and act responsibly? In fact, feelings very often can influence people’s behavior and judgments (Schwarz, 1990), even though the feelings are aroused by irrelevant sources - incidental emotion (Garg, Inman, & Mittal, 2005; Lerner & Keltner, 2000; Schwarz & Clore, 1983). Feelings of guilt and shame are known as moral emotions which are the guidance to ethical behaviors (Tangney, 1991, 2003). Although there is a significant overlapping between these two emotions, they also differ in several important aspects. One critical difference lies in the way the transgressor makes attributions (Niedenthal, Tangney, & Gavanski 1994). A transgressor who attributes the wrongdoing to a specific behavior (i.e. “I’ve done something bad”) is more likely to experience guilt while a transgressor who makes attribution to the global self (i.e. “I’m a terrible person”) is more likely to experience shame (Tracy & Robins, 2004). Given these fundamental differences, we speculate that a guilt-laden consumer is more likely to correct his or her wrongdoing (i.e. wastage) by taking reparative actions to minimize waste but a shame-laden consumer may possibly give up doing so. Findings from an experimental study (N=90) largely support this prediction. Undergraduate students who were made to feel shame were less likely to participate in a recycling campaign organized by the university than the students in the control condition. They reported a lower intention to use recycling facilities provided. On the other hand, participants who were made to feel guilt reported a marginally higher intention to participate in the campaign than the control participants. These preliminary findings suggest that emotional experience derived from other life domains might determine responsible consumption behaviors. Shame, which is commonly regarded as a moral emotion, may not necessarily make people more responsible consumers. The mechanism that underlies this effect may warrant further investigation.