Do Female Executives Prioritize Corporate Social Responsibility?

References

• Adams, R. B., and D. Ferreira. 2009. Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics 94:291–309. doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.10.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahern, K. R., and A. K. Dittmar. 2012. The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 127 (1):137–97. doi:10.1093/qje/qjr049.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber, B. M., and T. Odean. 2001. Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 261–92. doi:10.1162/003355301556400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betz, M., L. O’Connell, and J. M. Shepard. 1989. Gender differences in proclivity for unethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 8 (5):321–24. doi:10.1007/BF00381722.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bøhren, and R. Strøm. 2010. Governance and politics: Regulating independence and diversity in the board room. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 37 (9‐10):1281–308. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5957.2010.02222.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, A. L., and P. Nolen. 2012. Gender differences in risk behaviour: Does nurture matter? The Economic Journal 122 (558):F56–F78. doi:10.1111/ecoj.2012.122.issue-558.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boulouta, I. 2013. Hidden connections: The link between board gender diversity and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 113 (2):185–97. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1293-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, P. 2010. Going green: Women entrepreneurs and the environment. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 2:245–59. doi:10.1108/17566261011079233.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, L., and J. M. Logsdon. 1996. How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning 29 (4):495–502. doi:10.1016/0024-6301(96)00041-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byoun, S., K. Chang, and Y. S. Kim. 2016. Does corporate board diversity affect corporate payout policy? Asia-Pacific Journal of Financial Studies 45 (1):48–101. doi:10.1111/ajfs.2016.45.issue-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, B., I. Ioannou, and G. Serafeim. 2014. Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal 35:1–23. doi:10.1002/smj.2014.35.issue-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croson, R., and U. Gneezy. 2009. Gender differences in preferences. Journal Of Economic Literature 47 (2):448–474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daily, C. M., S. T. Certo, and D. R. Dalton. 2000. Research notes and communications: International experience in the executive suite: The path to prosperity. Strategic Management Journal 21:515–23. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200004)21:4<515::AID-SMJ92>3.0.CO;2-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickinson, D. L., and J. Tiefenthaler. 2002. What is fair? Experimental evidence. Southern Economic Journal 414–28. doi:10.2307/1061680.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dufwenberg, M., and A. Muren. 2006. Gender composition in teams. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 61 (1):50–54. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2005.01.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eagly, A. H., M. C. Johannesen-Schmidt, and M. L. Van Engen. 2003. Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin 129:569. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eckel, C. C., and P. J. Grossman. 2002. Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes toward financial risk. Evolution and Human Behavior 23 (4):281–95. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00097-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eckel, C. C., and P. J. Grossman. 2008. Forecasting risk attitudes: An experimental study using actual and forecast gamble choices. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 68 (1):1–17. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2008.04.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson, K., and B. Simpson. 2010. Emotional reactions to losing explain gender differences in entering a risky lottery. Judgment and Decision Making 5 (3):159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faccio, M., M. T. Marchica, and R. Mura. 2016. CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of capital allocation. Journal of Corporate Finance 39 (Supplement C):193–209.
   Google Scholar
• Galbreath, J. 2011. Are there gender-related influences on corporate sustainability? A study of women on boards of directors. Journal of Management & Organization 17:17–38. doi:10.1017/S1833367200001693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilligan, C. 1983. In a different voice : Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health28 (6), 39–40.
   Google Scholar
• Godfrey, P. C. 2005. The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review 30 (4):777–98. doi:10.5465/AMR.2005.18378878.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heckman, J., and S. Navarro-Lozano. 2004. Using matching, instrumental variables, and control functions to estimate economic choice models. Review of Economics and Statistics 86 (1):30–57. doi:10.1162/003465304323023660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt, C. A., and S. K. Laury. 2002. Risk aversion and incentive effects. American Economic Review 92 (5):1644–55. doi:10.1257/000282802762024700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, J., and D. J. Kisgen. 2013. Gender and corporate finance: Are male executives overconfident relative to female executives?. Journal of Financial Economics 108 (3):822–39. doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2012.12.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, N., and J. Angelidis 1991. Effects of board members’ gender on level of involvement in strategic management and corporate social responsiveness orientation. In Proceedings of the Northeast Decision Sciences Institute (pp. 208–10).
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, M. C., and W. H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3:305–60. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judge, W. Q., and C. P. Zeithaml. 1992. Institutional and strategic choice perspectives on board involvement in the strategic decision process. The Academy of Management Journal 35:766–94. doi:10.2307/256315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kakabadse, A. P. 2007. Being responsible: Boards are reexamining the bottom line. Leadership in Action 27:3–6. doi:10.1002/lia.v27:1.
   Google Scholar
• Kruger, P. 2009. Corporate social responsibility and the board of directors. Working Paper (Job Market Paper). Toulouse School of Economics, Toulouse, 31 May 2010
   Google Scholar
• Landry, E. E., R. A. Bernardi, and S. M. Bosco. 2016. Recognition for sustained corporate social responsibility: Female directors make a difference. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 23 (1):27–36. doi:10.1002/csr.v23.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, D. C., and J. K. Murnighan. 1998. Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review 23 (2):325–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levrau, A., and L. V. D. Berghe. 2013. Perspectives on the decision-making style of the board chair. International Journal of Disclosure & Governance 10 (2):105–121.
   Google Scholar
• Matten, D., and J. Moon. 2004. Corporate social responsibility education in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics 54 (4):323–37. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-1822-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reverte, C. 2009. Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure ratings by Spanish listed firms. Journal of Business Ethics 88 (2):351–66. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9968-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rigdon, M., K. Ishii, M. Watabe, and S. Kitayama. 2009. Minimal social cues in the dictator game. Journal of Economic Psychology 30 (3):358–67. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2009.02.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, C. 2007. Does female board representation influence firm performance? The Danish evidence. Corporate Governance: An International Review 15:404–13.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, P. R., and D. B. Rubin. 1983. Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 45 (2):212–218.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, P. R., and D. B. Rubin. 1985. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician 39 (1):33–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin, D. B. 1973a. Matching to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics 159–83. doi:10.2307/2529684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin, D. B. 1973b. The use of matched sampling and regression adjustment to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics 185–203. doi:10.2307/2529685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schubert, R., M. Brown, M. Gysler, and H. W. Brachinger. 1999. Financial decision-making: Are women really more risk-averse? The American Economic Review 89 (2):381–85. doi:10.1257/aer.89.2.381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, S., and C. B. Bhattacharya. 2001. Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research 38 (2):225–43. doi:10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma, S., and I. Henriques. 2005. Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal 26 (2):159–80. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terjesen, S., R. Sealy, and V. Singh. 2009. Women directors on corporate boards: A review and research agenda. Corporate governance: An international review. 17 (3):320–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waddock, S. A., and S. B. Graves. 1997. The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal 18 (4):303–19. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., and B. S. Coffey. 1992. Board composition and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics 11 (10):771–78. doi:10.1007/BF00872309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, K. T., and D. Li. 2016. Market reactions to the first-time disclosure of corporate social responsibility reports: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics 138 (4): 661–682.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb, N. J., and A. Farmer. 1996. Corporate Goodwill. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 67 (1):29–50. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8292.1996.tb01946.x.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, R. J. 2003. Women on corporate boards of directors and their influence on corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics 42:1–10. doi:10.1023/A:1021626024014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zelechowski, D. D., and D. Bilimoria. 2006. Characteristics of CEOs and corporate boards with women inside directors. Corporate Board Role 2 (2):14–21.
   Google Scholar