Search results

Previous studies support the notion that corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives can have a positive effect on customers in the hospitality and tourism industry. However, most of these studies have ignored response biases and none have incorporated them into their analyses numerically. This study aims at closing this research gap.

The authors utilized a hybrid choice model to test for the hypothesized effects of social desirability (SD) and cynicism biases on reported purchase intention. The authors further compared the results with those of analyses that ignore these biases to demonstrate their distorting influence.

The results indicate that SD and cynicism biases have a moderating effect on reported purchase intention. Older generations and frequent travelers seem particularly prone to bias, and the biases have a distorting effect on the overall survey results.

Traditional analyses that exclude biases, incorrectly, suggest several aspects of CSR that are significant (or insignificant) to purchase intention, provide unreliable results. The authors did not generalize bias-prone respondent segments but urge future research to investigate this.

Hotel managers aspiring to gain competitive advantage through CSR investment must consider biases in their market research. Otherwise, they risk developing CSR initiatives that do not instigate positive customer behaviors, leading to the failure of the investment.

The authors quantified SD and cynicism as significant causes of response bias, which distorts survey results. Previous studies have conceptualized SD without quantifying its impact, while cynicism has been identified as a novel source of bias in the industry. This study further introduces hybrid choice modeling as a novel approach to address response bias that could extend itself beyond the industry studied here.

This viewpoint paper calls for research on the social impact that comes with implementing algorithmic pricing in hospitality and tourism, in particular online price discrimination. It seeks to broaden the literature on consumer backlash and corporate social responsibility (CSR) to include algorithmic pricing.

As algorithmic pricing will become increasingly important in hospitality and tourism, the authors argue that scholarly attention should be directed to two topics.

First, there is a need for research on how algorithmic pricing triggers consumer backlash and online firestorms, and how these can be detected, prevented, and mitigated. Second, the authors need to increase our understanding of how deception, misconduct, dishonesty, and injustice in algorithmic pricing impact CSR performance, especially when differential pricing is enticed by deceptive yet legal algorithmic applications of indirect behavioral “self-selection” mechanisms.

Algorithmic price discrimination has been criticized for its potential to harm consumers, and doubt is cast upon the current ability of legal frameworks to set minimum standards of behavior.

Algorithmic pricing includes a variety of computerized pricing applications aimed at increasing revenue and minimizing opportunity costs. With early use by airlines decades ago its diffusion has gradually extended to other sectors including hospitality and tourism. While algorithms are expected to increasingly impact pricing decisions, little research can be found on the topic, with the exception of a vigorous debate in the policy literature on its ethical implications and regulatory needs.

Many consumer-focused corporate social responsibility (CSR) studies suggest a positive link between the responsibility demonstrated by a company and consumers’ intention to favor the company in their purchases. Yet an analogous causal effect between corporate social and financial performances is not evident. This chapter conceptualizes how social desirability and cynicism contribute to the discrepancy between consumers’ attitudes and their actual purchase behavior, and analyzes why consumer choices indicated in surveys do not consistently convert into actions.

We develop a conceptual framework based on hybrid choice modeling to estimate the impact of two new variables, Corporate Social Desirability and Corporate Social Cynicism, on CSR research. The model presented synthesizes research findings from the fields of CSR and psychology with a discrete choice methodology that allows inclusion of psychological aspects as latent variables.

The goal of the framework is to bridge the gap between choices stated by consumers in CSR surveys and their actual choices by quantifying and extracting the effects of biases that otherwise threaten the validity of such survey results. As the next step, the practical value of the model must be evaluated through empirical research combining a CSR choice study with social desirability and cynicism measurement.

The framework proposes a novel way of controlling CSR surveys for potential biases created by social desirability and cynicism and enables quantification of this impact, with potential application to other fields where psychological aspects may distort research results. Future empirical evidence based on the framework may also offer new insights into the mechanisms by which the two biases distort findings.

Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid venture creation represents a significant opportunity for Indigenous peoples to build vibrant Indigenous-led economies that support sustainable economic development and well-being. It is a means by which they can assert their rights to design, develop and maintain Indigenous-centric political, economic and social systems and institutions. In order to develop an integrated and comprehensive understanding of the intersection between Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid ventures, this chapter adopts a case study approach to examining Indigenous entrepreneurship and the underlying global trends that have influenced the design, structure and mission of Indigenous hybrid ventures. The cases present how Indigenous entrepreneurial ventures are, first and foremost, hybrid ventures that are responsive to community needs, values, cultures and traditions. They demonstrate that Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid ventures are more successful when the rights of Indigenous peoples are addressed and when these initiatives are led by or engage Indigenous communities. The chapter concludes with a conceptual model that can be applied to generate insights into the complex interrelationships and interdependencies that influence the formation of Indigenous hybrid ventures and value creation strategies according to three dimensions: (i) the overarching dimension of indigeneity and Indigenous rights; (ii) indigenous community orientations and (iii) indigenous hybrid venture creation considerations.