Testing the Selectivity Hypothesis in cause-related marketing among Generation Y: [When] Does gender matter for short- and long-term persuasion?

References

• Adkins, S. 1999. Cause Related Marketing: Who Cares Wins. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Andsager, J. L., E. W. Austin, and B. E. Pinkleton. 2002. “Gender as a Variable in Interpretation of Alcohol-Related Messages.” Communication Research 29 (3): 246–269.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arcand, M., J. Nantel, and S. Sénécal. 2011. “The Effects of Sex and Internet Usage on Search Efficiency and Effectiveness.” International Journal of Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management Applications 3: 663–670.
   Google Scholar
• Bar-Tal, Y., and M. Jarymowicz. 2010. “Who Are More Biased, Men or Women?” Psychology 1: 80–87.
   Google Scholar
• Bem, S. L. 1981. “Gender Schema Theory: A Cognitive Account of Sex Typing.” Psychological Review 88 (4): 354–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger, I. E., P. H. Cunningham, and R. V. Kozinets. 1999. “The Processing of Cause-Related Marketing Claims: Cues, Biases, or Motivators?” In Advances in Consumer Research, edited by E. J. Amould, and M. Scott. Vol. 26, 491–497. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
   Google Scholar
• Bergkvist, L., and J. R. Rossiter. 2007. “The Predictive Validity of Multiple-Item Versus Single-Item Measures of the Same Constructs.” Journal of Marketing Research XLIV: 175–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Big Brothers Big Sisters of America. 2011. “Big Brothers Big Sisters Chosen by Forbes Magazine as a Top 10 Charity that Shines.” December 11.http://www.bbbs.org/site/c.9iILI3NGKhK6F/b.6065577/apps/s/content.asp?ct=8211387.
   Google Scholar
• Bigné-Alcañiz, E., R. Currás-Pérez, C. Ruiz-Mafé, and S. Sanz-Blas. 2012. “Cause-Related Marketing Influence on Consumer Responses: The Moderating Effect of Cause-Brand Fit.” Journal of Marketing Communications 18 (4): 265–283.
   Google Scholar
• Brehm, J. W. 1966. A Theory of Psychological Reactance. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brehm, S. S., and J. W. Brehm. 1981. Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and Control. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brunel, F. F., and M. R. Nelson. 2000. “Explaining Gendered Responses to ‘Help-Self’ and ‘Help-Others’ Charity Ad Appeals: The Mediating Role of World-Views.” Journal of Advertising 29 (3): 15–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Business in the Community. 2004. “Brand Benefits of Cause Related Marketing. How Cause Related Marketing Impacts on Brand Equity, Consumer Behaviour and the Bottom Line.” http://www.bitc.org.uk/our-resources/report/brand-benefits-cause-related-marketing.
   Google Scholar
• Chaney, I., and N. Dolli. 2001. “Cause Related Marketing in New Zealand.” International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 6 (2): 156–163.
   Google Scholar
• Chattopadhyay, A., and J. W. Alba. 1988. “The Situational Importance of Recall and Inference in Consumer Decision Making.” Journal of Consumer Research 15 (1): 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Churchill, G. A. 1979. “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs.” Journal of Marketing Research 16: 64–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clee, M. A., and R. A. Wicklund. 1980. “Consumer Behavior and Psychological Reactance.” Journal of Consumer Research 6 (4): 389–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cone Communications, Inc. 1999. The 1999 Cone/Roper Cause-Related Trends Report: The Evolution of Cause-Branding SM. Boston, MA, March 8.
   Google Scholar
• Cone Communications, Inc. 2004. Multi-Year Study Finds 21 Percent Increase in Americans Who Say Corporate Support of Social Issues is Important in Building Trust, http://www.orendaconnections.com/resources_articles-BNET1.php.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, T. D., and B. R. Flay. 1978. “The Temporal Persistence of Experimentally Induced Attitude Change: An Evaluative Review.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, edited by L. Berkowitz, 1–57. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cui, Y., E. S. Trent, P. S. Sullivan, and G. N. Matiru. 2003. “Cause-Related Marketing: How Generation Y Responds.” International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 31 (6): 310–320.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, S. 2010. “Men Will Pause for a Cause, Survey Suggests.” The New York Times, November 2, Media Decoder, Between the Lines. http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/men-will-pause-for-a-cause-survey-suggests/?_r=1.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, E., and S. J. Arnold. 1994. “Sex, Gender Identity, Gender Role Attitudes, and Consumer Behavior.” Psychology & Marketing 11 (2): 163–182.
   Google Scholar
• Groeneman, S. 1994. “Multi-Purpose Household Panels and General Samples: How Similar and How Different?.” Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Danvers, MA, May.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, J. A. 1984. Nonverbal Sex Differences: Communication Accuracy and Expressive Style. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halpern, D. F. 2000. Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities. 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hoovers Company Profiles. 2010. “Kellogg Company.” Answers.com. http://www.answers.com/topic/kellogg-company.
   Google Scholar
• Hupfer, M. 2002. “Communicating with the Agentic Woman and the Communal Man: Are Stereotypic Advertising Appeals Still Relevant?” Academy of Marketing Science Review 3: 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• IEG Sponsorship Report. 2013. “2013 Sponsorship Outlook: Spending Increase is Double-Edged Sword.” IEG LLC, January 7. http://www.sponsorship.com/IEGSR/2013/01/07/2013-Sponsorship-Outlook–Spending-Increase-Is-Dou.aspx.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, B. J., and L. Solomon. 2010. “Gender Demographic Targeting in Sponsored Search.” CHI'10 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 831–840), April 10–15, Atlanta, GA.
   Google Scholar
• Joel, M. 2010. “Social Media a Waste of Time? Not to Gen Y.” The Vancouver Sun, October 14. http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=17975936-f691-42fa-924f-e18b68d200fd&k=57834.
   Google Scholar
• Joubert, C. 1990. “Relationship among Self Esteem, Psychological Reactance and other Personality Variables.” Psychological Reports 166: 1147–1151.
   Google Scholar
• Kempf, D. S., R. Laczniak, and R. E. Smith. 2006. “The Effects of Gender on Processing Advertising and Product Trial Information.” Marketing Letters 17 (1): 5–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumkale, G. T., and D. Albarracin. 2004. “The Sleeper Effect in Persuasion: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Psychological Bulletin 130 (1): 143–172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lafferty, B. A., and D. R. Edmondson. 2009. “Portraying the Cause Instead of the Brand in Cause-Related Marketing Ads: Does It Really Matter?” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 17 (2): 129–143.
   Google Scholar
• Lafferty, B. A., and R. E. Goldsmith. 2005. “Cause-Brand Alliances: Does the Cause Help the Brand or Does the Brand Help the Cause?” Journal of Business Research 58 (4): 423–429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenney, E., J. Gold, and C. Browning. 1983. “Sex Differences in Self-Confidence: The Influence of Comparison to Others' Ability Level.” Sex Roles 9 (9): 925–942.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ligos, M. 1999. “Mall Rats with a Social Conscience.” Sales and Marketing Management 151 (11): 115.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, G., and W.-W. Ko. 2011. “An Analysis of Cause-Related Marketing Implementation Strategies through Social Alliance: Partnership Conditions and Strategic Objectives.” Journal of Business Ethics 100: 253–281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackenzie, S. B., and R. J. Lutz. 1989. “An Empirical Examination of the Structural Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context.” Journal of Marketing 53 (2): 48–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, J. 1988. “The Influence of Sex Roles on Judgment.” Journal of Consumer Research 14 (4): 522–530.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, J. 1989. “Gender Differences in Information Processing: A Selectivity Interpretation.” In Cognitive and Affective Responses to Advertising, edited by P. Cafferata, and M. Tybout, 219–260. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, J., and D. Maheswaran. 1991. “Exploring Differences in Males' and Females' Processing Strategy.” Journal of Consumer Research 18 (1): 63–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, J., and B. Sternthal. 1991. “Gender Differences in the Use of Message Cues and Judgments.” Journal of Marketing Research 28 (1): 84–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moosmayer, D. C., and A. Fuljahn. 2010. “Consumer Perceptions of Cause Related Marketing Campaigns.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 27 (6): 543–549.
   Google Scholar
• Morton, L. P. 1999. “Segmenting Publics by Gender.” Public Relations Quarterly 44 (4): 41–42.
   Google Scholar
• Muehling, D. D., and R. N. Laczniak. 1988. “Advertising's Immediate and Delayed Influence on Brand Attitudes: Considerations across Message-Involvement Levels.” Journal of Advertising 17 (4): 23–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nan, X., and K. Heo. 2007. “Consumer Responses to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Initiatives.” Journal of Advertising 36 (2): 63–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayyar, D. 2001. “Inside the Mind of Gen Y.” American Demographics 23 (9): 6.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, M. R., and A. M. Vilela. 2012. “Is the Selectivity Hypothesis Still Relevant? A Review of Gendered Persuasion and Processing of Advertising Messages.” In Gender, Culture, and Consumer Behavior, edited by C. C. Otnes, and L. T. Zayer, 111–138. New York: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Noble, S. M., D. L. Haytko, and J. Phillips. 2009. “What Drives College-Age Generation Y Consumers?” Journal of Business Research 62: 617–628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palan, K. M. 2001. “Gender Identity in Consumer Behavior Research: A Literature Review and Research Agenda.” Academy of Marketing Science Review 10: 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, P. 2001. “Getting Inside GEN Y.” American Demographics 23 (9): 43–49.
   Google Scholar
• Pracejus, J. W., and G. D. Olsen. 2002. “The Role of Brand/Cause Fit in the Effectiveness of Cause-Related Marketing Campaigns.” Journal of Business Research 57 (6): 635–640.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putrevu, S. 2004. “Male and Female Responses to Print Advertisement.” Journal of Advertising 33 (3): 51–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putrevu, S., J. Tan, and K. R. Lord. 2004. “Consumer Responses to Complex Advertisement: The Moderating Role of Need for Cognition, Knowledge, and Gender.” Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising 26 (1): 9–24.
   Google Scholar
• Richard, M.-O., J.-C. Chebat, Z. Yang, and S. Putrevu. 2010. “A Proposed Model of Online Consumer Behavior: Assessing the Role of Gender.” Journal of Business Research 63: 926–934.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rifon, N. J., S. M. Choi, C. S. Trimble, and H. Li. 2004. “Congruence Effects in Sponsorship - The Mediating Role of Sponsor Credibility and Consumer Attributions of Sponsor Motive.” Journal of Advertising 33 (1): 29–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross, J. K., III, L. T. Patterson, and M. A. Stutts. 1992. “Consumer Perceptions of Organizations that Use Cause-Related Marketing.” Academy of Marketing Science Journal 20 (1): 93–97.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, J. K., III, M. A. Stutts, and L. T. Patterson. 1990–1991. “Tactical Considerations for the Effective Use of Cause-Related Marketing.” Journal of Applied Business Research 7 (2): 58–66.
   Google Scholar
• Rossiter, J. R. 2002. “The C-OAR-SE Procedure for Scale Development in Marketing.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 19: 305–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rust, R. T., and B. Cooil. 1994. “Reliability Measures for Qualitative Data: Theory and Implications.” Journal of Marketing Research 31 (1): 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seemann, E. A., W. C. Buboltz Jr, S. M. Jenkins, B. Soper, and K. Woller. 2004. “Ethnic and Gender Differences in Psychological Reactance: The Importance of Reactance in Multicultural Counselling.” Counselling Psychology Quarterly 17 (2): 167–176.
   Google Scholar
• Shabbir, S., H. R. Kaufmann, I. Ahmad, and I. M. Qureshi. 2010. “Cause Related Marketing Campaigns and Consumer Purchase Intentions: The Mediating Role of Brand Awareness and Corporate Image.” African Journal of Business Management 4 (6): 1229–1235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shavitt, S., S. Swan, T. M. Lowrey, and M. Wänke. 1994. “The Interaction of Endorser Attractiveness and Involvement in Persuasion Depends on the Goal that Guides Message Processing.” Journal of Consumer Psychology 3 (2): 137–162.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, S. M., and D. S. Alcorn. 1991. “Cause Marketing: A New Direction in the Marketing of Corporate Social Responsibility.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 8 (3): 19–35.
   Google Scholar
• Subrahmanyan, S. 2004. “Effects of Price Premium and Product Type on the Choice of Cause-Related Brands, a Singapore Perspective.” Journal of Product & Brand Management 13 (2): 116–124.
   Google Scholar
• Sun, Y., K. H. Lim, C. Jiang, J. Z. Peng, and Z. Chen. 2010. “Do Males and Females Think in the Same Way? An Empirical Investigation on the Gender Differences in Web Advertising Evaluation.” Computers in Human Behavior 26: 1614–1624.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaidyanathan, R., and P. Aggarwal. 2005. “Using Commitments to Drive Consistency: Enhancing the Effectiveness of Cause-Related Marketing Communications.” Journal of Marketing Communications 11 (4): 231–246.
   Google Scholar
• Vilela, A. M. 2010. Consumer Processing of Cause-Related Marketing (CRM): The Influence of Gender on Message Evaluation. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, D. J., and L. A. Mohr. 1998. “A Typology of Consumer Responses to Cause-Related Marketing: From Skeptics to Socially Concerned.” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 17 (2): 226–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar