Search results

This paper aims to study age differences in responsiveness to shocking prosocial campaigns. It specifically investigates the differences between seniors and young adults regarding the persuasive effect of emotional charity campaigns, the intensity of negative emotions and empathy elicited, the affect-based persuasive process leading to the ad effectiveness and the role of perceived self-efficacy.

Two studies are conducted on seniors (n1 = 173; n2 = 118) and young adults (n1 = 170; n2 = 123) exposed to appeals for “Action against Hunger” incorporating various levels of emotional content.

The results indicate that seniors are more receptive to emotional campaigns but only for higher emotional ads and only regarding intention to donate. Young adults report lower levels of empathy, and findings do not suggest major age differences in the reported negative emotions after exposure to low or high emotional appeals. The affect-based persuasion differs; young adults are particularly influenced by negative emotions, whereas the persuasive effect on the elderly stems from an empathetic reaction. Self-efficacy moderates the effect of negative emotions only among older participants.

Social marketers are advised to use vivid and realistic stimuli to reach young people and develop these appeals in social media. For an older target audience, however, marketers are advised to use creative components and media support designed to foster personalisation and proximity.

This study provides a better understanding of age-related effects on emotional persuasion, and addresses the specificity of prosocial appeals involving responsiveness to the suffering of others.

This paper aims to demonstrate that state shareholders are confronted with contradictory logics leading to institutional contradictions that activist shareholders can exploit. The competing logics of the state as shareholder and their impact on corporate governance and shareholder activism offer fertile grounds for research advances in Coordinated Market Economies (CMEs).

Through an extensive literature review of state ownership, institutional contradictions and shareholder activism, this paper analyzes two case studies involving the French State as shareholder.

In the French context, these two cases illustrate how institutional contradictions result in opportunities for shareholder activism. By focusing on the institutional contradictions of the state shareholder, this investigation suggests a need for experimental research to observe how shareholder activists adapt to each institutional change in CMEs. This experimentation can help policymakers to avoid creating additional conditions that shareholder activists can exploit.

This focuses only on France and its state shareholdings. To generalize results, studies of other CMEs and state shareholders are needed.

Policymakers should consider all legislative proposals for their potential to deviate from corporate governance practice by experimenting with them in a laboratory setting. Shareholder activists can compare state shareholders’ actions against the state’s legislation to emphasize institutional contradictions that counter minority shareholders’ rights.

This research is the first to analyze how the state as shareholder can exploit its competing logics to resist against shareholder activism and support management or to become itself a shareholder activist.