When it pays to be a friend: Investigating nonprofessional investors' judgments toward CSR companies following an accounting restatement

Abstract

Prior literature suggests that engagement in corporate social responsibility (CSR) creates an insurance effect that shields companies from the negative consequences of corporate missteps. We experimentally examine whether this protection extends to an accounting restatement and whether investors' attributions of the underlying reasons for this restatement affect their judgments. Results indicate that when a restatement occurs, non-professional investors evaluate high-performing CSR companies more favorably than their average-performing peers, but only when the misstatement appears unintentional. We also incorporate the Stereotype Content Model to test whether feelings of warmth and competence toward the company affect non-professional investor judgments. We document that absent a restatement, feelings of warmth mediate the relationship between CSR performance and investor judgments through competence. Following a misstatement, however, warmth directly mediates that relationship. Our results provide insights into specific psychological mechanisms and boundary conditions of the previously documented insurance effect of CSR performance.