Drawing upon the research in institutional theory and comparative capitalism, the present study investigates how cross-national differences in the political, business, and economic institutional contexts of the United States, Italy, and Japan are associated with the ways in which companies in each of these countries prioritize and engage in their stakeholder engagement activities (SEAs). Using Porter and Kramer's framework, which classifies corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities as falling into four categories (good citizenship, mitigating harm from value chain, transforming value chain activities, and strategic philanthropy), we investigate how companies in the United States, Japan, and Italy prioritize and engage in these four SEAs. An analysis of data collected from 340 companies across these countries reveals that while companies in each of these three countries undertake the four types of SEAs, the prioritization and prevalence of the four types of SEAs vary from one country to the other, in ways that align with the prevailing institutional contexts of each country. The results contribute to a more nuanced understanding of why and how companies' approaches to CSR differ across countries. From a practitioner's perspective, the findings highlight the cultural specificity of CSR, implying that despite the global nature of CSR, the implementation of CSR needs to be tailored to a country's context.

Using the explicit and implicit Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) framework, this study investigates how small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and large companies differ in their approach to CSR and what association these differing approaches to CSR have with a company's financial and social performances. We develop and validate a stakeholder engagement approach (SEA) scale and then present the results of data collected from 211 SMEs and 179 large companies. The results indicate that while large companies rely more on explicitly articulated and formally enacted approaches to CSR, SMEs integrate social responsibility into their company activities in informal and implicit ways. The results also show that the explicit approach has a positive association with financial performance measures, while the implicit approach has a positive association with social performance. The findings of this study provide a more nuanced and theoretically grounded understanding of differences in the CSR practices of SMEs and large companies.

This study uses the theoretical frameworks of institutional theory and comparative capitalism to demonstrate how cross-cultural differences in national institutional frameworks are related to differences in the meaning and the nature of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and, as a result, how they create different incentives and opportunities for companies to engage in stakeholder management activities. More specifically, we draw upon the framework of "explicit" and "implicit" CSRs to investigate whether and how stakeholder management practices and programs differ between the United States and Japan. We first develop and validate a Stakeholder Engagement Activities (SEAs) scale, designed assess differences in the approach (explicit or implicit) that companies use to address a variety of common SEAs. Then we analyze data and present the results of surveys collected from 227 companies in the United States and Japan. We find that although the SEAs of American companies are characterized by strong "explicit CSR," in contrast, the SEAs of Japanese companies exhibit strong "implicit CSR." In the discussion that follows, we attribute these distinctions in the SEAs to differences in the configuration of political, economic, and market mechanisms in each country. The findings of this study contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the differences in prevailing CSR practices of American and Japanese companies than noted by previous researchers. From a practitioner's perspective, the findings of this study reveal that despite the global nature of CSR, stakeholder management practices are both interpreted and operationalized differently due to differences in national institutional frameworks.

We conducted preregistered replications of 28 classic and contemporary published findings, with protocols that were peer reviewed in advance, to examine variation in effect magnitudes across samples and settings. Each protocol was administered to approximately half of 125 samples that comprised 15,305 participants from 36 countries and territories. Using the conventional criterion of statistical significance (p < .05), we found that 15 (54%) of the replications provided evidence of a statistically significant effect in the same direction as the original finding. With a strict significance criterion (p < .0001), 14 (50%) of the replications still provided such evidence, a reflection of the extremely high-powered design. Seven (25%) of the replications yielded effect sizes larger than the original ones, and 21 (75%) yielded effect sizes smaller than the original ones. The median comparable Cohen's ds were 0.60 for the original findings and 0.15 for the replications. The effect sizes were small (< 0.20) in 16 of the replications (57%), and 9 effects (32%) were in the direction opposite the direction of the original effect. Across settings, the Q statistic indicated significant heterogeneity in 11 (39%) of the replication effects, and most of those were among the findings with the largest overall effect sizes; only 1 effect that was near zero in the aggregate showed significant heterogeneity according to this measure. Only 1 effect had a tau value greater than .20, an indication of moderate heterogeneity. Eight others had tau values near or slightly above .10, an indication of slight heterogeneity. Moderation tests indicated that very little heterogeneity was attributable to the order in which the tasks were performed or whether the tasks were administered in lab versus online. Exploratory comparisons revealed little heterogeneity between Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) cultures and less WEIRD cultures (i.e., cultures with relatively high and low WEIRDness scores, respectively). Cumulatively, variability in the observed effect sizes was attributable more to the effect being studied than to the sample or setting in which it was studied.

It is well known that individuals engage in reactive consumption to address self-discrepancy and self-threat and that this consumption may either be symbolically related to the nature of the threat or occur in an unrelated domain. This research proposes a theory for self-worth restoration through the consumption of high-intensity sensory stimuli. Four studies demonstrate that not only do individuals facing self-threat prefer high-intensity sensory consumption (HISC) but also that this consumption restores their self-worth. This propensity for HISC is negated after individuals are allowed to engage in additional self-affirmation tasks. The findings are documented in both the visual domain (as evidenced by a preference for more intense and saturated colors) and the auditory domain (as evidenced by a preference for louder audio levels). The consumption of high-intensity sensory stimuli elevates individuals' arousal levels, which in turn minimizes rumination on thoughts related to the threat and thus restores one's self-worth. The distractive nature of HISC and its subsequent impact on self-worth restoration is shown to operate regardless of the valence of the sensory consumption. Finally, the propensity for HISC is negated after individuals experience an arousal-elevating threat, providing additional support for the underlying process.

The popular saying “you are what you eat” suggests that people take on the characteristics of the food they eat. Wisdom from ancient texts and practitioners of alternative medicine seem to share the intuition that consuming spicy food may increase aggression. However, this relationship has not been empirically tested. In this research, we posit that those who consume “hot” and “spicy” food may be more prone to thoughts related to aggression. Across three studies, we find evidence for this proposition. Study 1 reveals that those who typically consume spicy food exhibit higher levels of trait aggression. Studies 2 and 3 reveal, respectively, that consumption of, and even mere exposure to spicy food, can semantically activate concepts related to aggression as well as lead to higher levels of perceived aggressive intent in others. Our work contributes to the literature on precursors of aggression, and has substantive implications for several stakeholders, including marketers, parents and policy makers.