This article examines the impact of alarmist and fake economic news on consumer behaviour in the context of the growing prevalence of fake news. The study is structured into two components: a theoretical section addressing the mechanisms of misinformation dissemination and its effects, and an empirical section based on a survey conducted on a nationally controlled quota-based sociodemographic sample (N = 1,066). The research aims to investigate how media exposure, the perception of fake news, information credibility, and concern influence economic behaviour. The analysis employs structural equation modelling (SEM) and distinguishes three types of responses: behavioural reactions, consumption reduction, and saving behaviour. The findings highlight the central role of concern as a key determinant of economic behaviour, as well as the existence of distinct response mechanisms depending on the type of behaviour analysed. Overall, the study underscores the complex relationship between misinformation and economic decision-making.
In an era of rapid information diffusion, fake news poses a growing threat to corporate credibility and stakeholder trust. Although firms frequently issue clarification announcements to refute misinformation, such verbal denials are often viewed as cheap talk and may fail to restore confidence. This study examines whether firms use real investment decisions as credible signals to counteract the adverse effects of fake news. Using a sample of Chinese A-share listed firms from 2012 to 2024, we identify exposure to fake news through firm-issued clarification announcements and analyse subsequent investment behaviour. We find that firms significantly increased both R&D and CAPEX following clarifications. The response was systematically differentiated by rumour valence: negative fake news triggered higher R&D spending, signalling long-term technological resilience; positive fake news led to greater CAPEX, demonstrating operational capacity to meet inflated expectations. These effects were stronger among firms with weaker governance or poorer disclosure quality, indicating that costly investment commitments substitute for low institutional credibility when verbal assurances are insufficient. The findings contribute to the literature by showing that real investment decisions serve as strategic tools for managing external belief uncertainty, extending signalling theory beyond traditional financial contexts
As sustainable development pressures escalate, stakeholders increasingly prioritise sustained corporate innovation resilience. However, these pressures also incentivise firms to adopt symbolic greenwashing tactics to mislead stakeholders, while the existing literature has paid limited attention to how such deceptive practices erode firms’ innovation capabilities. This study examines the impact of corporate greenwashing on innovation resilience using a panel dataset of 5,183 Chinese listed firms from 2015 to 2024. We find a significant negative relationship between corporate greenwashing and innovation resilience, suggesting that symbolic environmental management does not generate the technological depth required to withstand external shocks. Mechanism analysis indicates that this adverse effect operates through increased negative media coverage and reduced research and development expenditure, which jointly undermine corporate reputation and heighten structural rigidity. Further evidence shows that external institutional investors mitigate this negative relationship by strengthening monitoring and information verification, whereas government subsidies exacerbate it by creating soft budget constraints and fostering organisational inertia. The findings extend the literature by showing that innovation resilience depends not only on substantive technological investment and capability building, but also on limiting symbolic environmental communication that misallocates resources and weakens external support.
A comprehensive questionnaire survey, which considered over 270 responses from Croatian students in business and economics aged 18-30, provided detailed insight into the factors shaping their attitudes towards green finance and their intentions regarding green finance adoption. The survey emphasized sustainability literacy, sustainable finance literacy, green values, pro-environmental behavior and perceptions of greenwashing as key factors influencing opinions and future decisions about green finance. Multiple linear regression was used to examine green finance attitudes, while binary logistic regression differentiated between green finance adopters and non-adopters. Pro-environmental behavior positively influences both green finance attitudes and the intention to adopt products within its scope. Sustainable finance literacy also increases the likelihood of green finance adoption. Green values contribute to positive attitudes towards green finance, which are significant for green finance adoption. Regarding greenwashing perception, it does not negatively affect green finance attitudes but poses an obstacle to green finance adoption. Overall, there are strong prospects for green finance adoption among young financial consumers, as two-thirds are likely or certain to adopt at least one green financial instrument in the future. Nevertheless, higher education institutions must do much more to improve sustainability literacy and sustainable finance literacy to prevent misunderstandings of green financial innovations and to ensure that decisions about green finance adoption are more informed. Although respondents expressed moderate attitudes towards greenwashing in green finance, policymakers and sustainable development advocates should work diligently on advancing taxonomy in this area, given the potentially harmful impact of greenwashing perceptions on the transition towards a green economy. Sustainable finance literacy has only recently been included in studies on green finance acceptance, while perceptions of greenwashing have largely been neglected. This study also contributes to the literature by focusing on young financial consumers.
The purpose of this research is to analyse the relationship between disinformation (fake news), ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) reporting, and capital market reactions, toassess the role of corporate transparency in the context of contemporary information asymmetry. This study develops an integrated empirical framework which combines econometric modelling of financial time series with natural language processing techniques(NLP), to quantify the informational pressure generated by fake news content.The analysis is based on a panel data set which includes 722 companies listed on the main US markets (NYSE and NASDAQ), over the 2020-2025-time horizon. The research method integrates stock returns, attention indicators and sentiment variables. The impact of informational shocks is assessed through the event study methodology, completed with panel regressions, and a robustness analysis based on machine learning methods, which highlights the predictive capacity of the variables analysed. The results highlight the existence of an asymmetric effect of ESG components on the market reaction under conditions of misinformation. The Environmental and Social dimensions amplify negative market reactions, while the Governance component reduces the persistence of shocks and accelerates the market value recovery process. In addition, the dynamics of investor attention and the deterioration of sentiment precede price adjustments, confirming the role of information asymmetry in transmitting and anticipating the effects of fake news on capital markets. This study introduces the concept of "Transparency Paradox" as the main contribution of this research. In addition, this study also integrates the information dimension, ESG reporting and market behavioural mechanisms into a unified empirical framework. The results offer direct implications for regulators and practitioners, indicating the need to integrate information risk into ESG standards and corporate governance strategies.
