Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines how corporate social responsibility influences customer behavior, suggesting new pathways for sustainable finance.
This study examines how perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) activates Customer Social Responsibility (CuSR) and ultimately shapes green financial consumption among Generation Z in Vietnam, an emerging market.Drawing on an integrated theoretical framework that combines Signaling Theory and Norm Activation Theory, CSR is conceptualized as a normative signal capable of triggering customers' internal moral responsibility.The proposed sequential mechanism links PCSR → CSR authenticity (AUTH) → green trust (GTR) → CuSR → green financial intention (GFI) → green financial behavior (GFB), while incorporating greenwashing skepticism (GSK) as a boundary condition.Survey data were collected online from 396 Gen Z respondents (18-27) in Vietnam, using established multiitem measures and analyzed via covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) with 5,000 bootstrap resamples for mediation and moderation testing.Procedural and statistical remedies were applied to address common method bias, and data normality was confirmed prior to CB-SEM estimation.Results support the proposed chain: PCSR increases authenticity (β=0.61),authenticity strengthens green trust (β=0.53),trust activates CuSR (β=0.47),CuSR predicts intention (β=0.59), and intention predicts behavior (β=0.65).The model explains 50% of variance in intention and 42% in behavior, with significant sequential mediations (including CuSR → GFI → GFB, β=0.38).This study contributes to the literature by moving beyond outcome-based CSR models and demonstrating how corporate responsibility can activate customer-level moral responsibility, thereby extending traditional frameworks such as the Theory of Planned Behavior and Value-Belief-Norm theory.The findings offer important implications for promoting sustainable financial behavior in emerging markets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nhung et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: