Corporate Social Responsibility, Media Sentiment and Profit Quality: Evidence from the Chinese Listed Companies
Author(s)
Download Full PDF Pages: 41-50 | Views: 685 | Downloads: 208 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4964764
Abstract
Stakeholder theory points out those companies should not only pay attention to the interests of shareholders and create value for them, but also fulfill their responsibilities to all stakeholders to achieve healthy and sustainable development. Corporate social responsibility can reflect the extent to which companies fulfill responsibilities to stakeholders. Profit quality refers to the quality of the enterprise's profit, which can reveal the ability of corporate sustainable development. Based on stakeholder theory, this paper studies the effect of corporate social responsibility on profit quality. Since media sentiment can affect stakeholders' perception to corporate social responsibility, we explore its moderating role in the relationship between the two. Further, we select the Chinese listed companies as the research sample for empirical testing. We find that the corporate social responsibility of the overall Chinese listed companies has a significant positive impact on profit quality. Furthermore, media sentiment promotes the positive impact of corporate social responsibility on profit quality.
Keywords
Corporate social responsibility, Media sentiment, Profit quality
References
i. Ağan Y., Kuzey C., Acar M. F. and Açıkgöz A. 2016. The relationships between corporate social responsibility, environmental supplier development, and firm performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 112: 1872~1881.
ii. Albuquerque R. A., Koskinen Y. and Zhang C. 2019. Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management Science 65(10): 4451~4469.
iii. Benlemlih M. and Bitar M. Corporate social responsibility and investment efficiency. Journal of Business Ethics, 2016, 148(3): 647~671.
iv. Bushee B. J., Core J. E., Guay W. and Hamm, S. J. W. 2010. The role of the business press as an information intermediary. Journal of Accounting Research 48(1): 1~19.
v. Cahan S. F., Chen C., Chen L. and Nguyen N. H. 2015. Corporate social responsibility and media coverage. Journal of Banking & Finance 59: 409~422.
vi. Cui J., Jo H. and Na H. Does corporate social responsibility affect information asymmetry? Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, 148(3): 549~572.
vii. Dyck A., Volchkova N., Zingales L. The corporate governance role of the media: Evidence from Russia. The Journal of Finance, 2008, 63(3): 1093~1135.
viii. Eberle D., Berens G. and Li T. 2013. The impact of interactive corporate social responsibility communication on corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics 118(4): 731~746.
ix. Flammer C. 2015. Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance? A regression discontinuity approach. Management Science 61(11): 2549~2568.
x. Harjoto M. and Laksmana I. 2018. The impact of corporate social responsibility on risk taking and firm value. Journal of Business Ethics 151(2): 353~373.
xi. Hawn O. and Ioannou I. 2016. Mind the gap: The interplay between external and internal actions in the case of corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal 37(13): 2569~2588.
xii. Kang C., Germann F. and Grewal R. 2016. Washing away your sins? Corporate social responsibility, corporate social irresponsibility, and firm performance. Journal of Marketing 80(2): 59~79.
xiii. Li G. and Wei X. 2014. Definition, measurements and economic consequences of corporate social responsibility: A survey on theories of corporate social responsibility. Accounting Research (8): 33~40.
xiv. Li H., Wen S. and Jiao R. 2019. DANP variable weight financial early-warning model based on the earning quality pyramid. Systems Engineering — Theory & Practice 39(7):1651~1668.
xv. Lopatta K., Buchholz F. and Kaspereit T. 2015. Asymmetric information and corporate social responsibility. Business & Society 55(3): 458~488.
xvi. Martínez-Ferrero J., Banerjee S. and García-Sánchez I. M. 2014. Corporate social responsibility as a strategic shield against costs of earnings management practices. Journal of Business Ethics 133(2): 305~324.
xvii. Mishra S. and Modi S. B. 2016. Corporate social responsibility and shareholder wealth: the role of marketing capability. Journal of Marketing 80(1): 26~46.
xviii. Nelling E. and Webb E. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: the “virtuous circle” revisited. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting 32(2): 197~209.
xix. Shahzad F., Rehman I. U., Nawaz F. and Nawab N. 2018. Does family control explain why corporate social responsibility affects investment efficiency? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(5): 880~888.
xx. Shiu Y.-M. and Yang S.-L. 2017. Does engagement in corporate social responsibility provide strategic insurance-like effects? Strategic Management Journal 38(2): 455~470.
xxi. Su W., Peng M. W., Tan W. and Cheung Y.-L. 2016. The signaling effect of corporate social responsibility in emerging economies. Journal of Business Ethics 134(3): 479~491.
xxii. Wang Q., Dou J. and Jia S. 2016. A meta-analytic review of corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance. Business & Society 55(8): 1083~1121.
xxiii. Wang Q. and Xu X. 2016. Research on the value-creation mechanism of corporate social responsibility and its empirical test based on the stakeholder theory and life cycle stage theory. China Soft Science (2):179~192.
xxiv. Wei Z., Shen H., Zhou K. Z. and Li J. J. 2017. How does environmental corporate social responsibility matter in a dysfunctional institutional environment? Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics 140(2): 209~223.
xxv. Wen S. and Fang Y. 2008. An empirical research on relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance — Analysis based on stakeholder theory and panel dates. China Industrial Economics (10): 150~160.
xxvi. Wen S., Li H. and Jiao R. 2018. Corporate culture, stakeholder cognition and financial performance — Perspective of multi-capital symbiosis. China Soft Science 328(4): 118~127.
xxvii. Wen S. and Zhou L. 2017. The Influencing mechanism of carbon disclosure on financial performance — “Inverted U-shaped” moderating role of media governance. Management Review (11): 185~197.
xxviii. Xiong Y., Li C. and Wei Z. 2011. Media "sensational effect": transmission mechanism, economic consequences and reputation punishment — A case study based on the "overlord incident". Management World (10): 125~140.
xxix. Zhao X. and Murrell A. J. 2016. Revisiting the corporate social performance-financial performance link: A replication of Waddock and Graves. Strategic Management Journal 37(11): 2378~2388.
Cite this Article: