Social justice or social stigma? Hotel customers’ perception on branded hotel used as quarantine facility

Abstract

This study provides evidence that hotels could reap benefits by including social justice notions of equity and fairness in their corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. The study develops a novel conceptual model for understanding perceived social justice in the context of COVID-19 quarantine hotels based on social exchange theory. Data was collected using an online survey of 465 hotel customers, with results analyzed using structural equation modeling and bootstrap analysis. The results show that perceived CSR is a significant antecedent of brand loyalty and identification while perceived social justice mediates this relationship. Further, most human values, except the openness to change, were found to moderate the mediated relationship between perceived CSR and brand loyalty and identification through their interaction with perceived social justice. In general, the mediating effect of perceived social justice was stronger when the hotel customers scored higher on human value dimensions. Theoretical and practical implications are also discussed.

Keywords

brand identification brand loyalty corporate social responsibility human values quarantine hotel social justice

Highlights

A critical social justice issue from hotel customers’ perspective is discussed.

Incorporating social justice in hotel corporate social responsibility practice is highlighted.

The moderating role of human values on social justice is examined.

A shift from “business as usual” to socially sustainable practice is argued.

Introduction

With the extremely unstable health crisis, quarantine facility has been playing an essential role at different stages during the past 3 years. For example, at the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, quarantine hotels ensured that communities were protected from the threat of spreading the virus (Goh & Baum, 2021). In 2021, quarantine hotels accommodated infected patients with minor symptoms to facilitate the burden on the local government’s medical system (Hoang et al., 2021). Nevertheless, the severe shortage of appropriate quarantine facilities faced by many countries has always been a critical issue, leading to unfair and unequal incidences pervading our society. For instance, in Europe, many British citizens found themselves stranded overseas during the Christmas season because of the shortage of quarantine facilities (“UK travelers stranded by quarantine hotel shortage,” 2021). In Asia, many foreign domestic workers in Hong Kong were forced to sleep outside on the street once they tested positive for COVID-19 due to the lack of quarantine hotel rooms (Dorman, 2022). Moreover, there have been media reports of incredibly costly quarantine hotels with substandard hygiene conditions that exploit vulnerable hotel customers (“‘Slugs and mould’ in quarantine hotels as prices rise,” 2021).

International branded hotels can benefit societies with their rich resources during the health crisis. Nevertheless, the potential business conflicts and social stigma associated with pandemics have deterred decision-makers from transforming their hotels into quarantine facilities (Chien, Kelly, & Mao, 2022). Consequently, very few influential international hotel brands volunteer to adopt such helpful measures to facilitate the shortage of quarantine hotels. Some commentators have called for moving beyond “business as usual” frameworks to adopting a social justice concept that provides a moral turn for tourism development (Camargo & Vázquez-Maguirre, 2021; Rastegar, Zarezadeh, & Gretzel, 2021). Higgins-Desbiolles and colleagues (2019) suggested degrowth and redefining tourism to prioritize the rights of local communities over tourists to maintain social and environmental sustainability. Therefore, the key research question arising from this study is: How do hotel customers perceive branded hotels converting into quarantine facilities?

The social justice movement has witnessed significant progress which profoundly affects how customers perceive a brand (Bradford et al., 2017). Specifically, customers now expect the brands they support to stand on justice issues before purchasing their products (Komiya, 2020). Consequently, customers perceive social justice as important because it is the means through which organizations can build brand trust for their customers (Ro & Olson, 2014). Such perceptions are important to tourism and hospitality scholars because tourism and hospitality experiences are socially created (Rihova et al., 2013). The hotel industry is an important tourism sector where social injustices may occur (Kim et al, 2009). Nevertheless, there has been little social justice research within the hotel industry, especially in the context of COVID-19, which has exacerbated inequality and injustice (Rastegar, Higgins-Desbiolles, & Ruhanen, 2021).

Additionally, many hotels have adopted the concept of CSR as a means to promote their social and environmental responsibility. However, this can be considered as a means to avoid critical scrutiny while maintaining existing practices (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2008). Studies have also shown that customers are skeptical about CSR practices (Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013). Nevertheless, CSR-related research seldom scrutinizes potential reasons and addresses customers’ skepticism. As Losada-Otálora and Alkire (2021, p. 201) tersely wrote, “the reactions toward companies’ socially responsible actions are not always in line with companies’ goals.” Higgins-Desbiolles (2020) asserts that “responsible tourism” fails to address the existing unjust structures in tourism. The concept of social justice promotes equity and fairness in the distribution of resources. Therefore, we argue that hotel CSR practices can achieve desirable outcomes (e.g., brand identification and loyalty) with the presence of social justice. Specifically, perceived social justice plays an essential mediating role in the relationship between the perceived CSR and positive outcomes (e.g., brand identification and loyalty).

On the other hand, pursuing social justice requires understanding the attitudes and opinions of travelers (Tyler et al., 2019). An understanding of hotel customers is the foundation of social power to support a responsible and just recovery (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2008). Rokeach (1973) posits that human values are enduring beliefs that impact people’s behavior and are a primary source of public opinion (Kilburn, 2009). Specifically, values motivate and stimulate social issues such as social justice. This raises the question of whether hotel customers have the same expectation of a just and fair hotel business model. Answering this question requires exploring the role of human values in supporting social justice. This study examines the interaction between human value and perceived social justice in quarantine hotels (Feather, 1994; McCabe & Qiao, 2020).

Social Exchange Theory (SET) provides the basis for this study by relating an individual’s intrinsic motivation to CSR and the social justice activities of a hotel. This study incorporates the concept of perceived social justice into perceived CSR and investigates the impact of human values to develop an expanded framework. The objective of this study is twofold. First, from the practical perspective, we aim to propose a more socially just hotel business model and inform the hotel industry to shift the “business as usual” way of thinking into a more socially sustainable practice (Dyllick & Muff, 2016). Second, from the theoretical perspective, this study is intended to provide empirical evidence that weaves together the perceived social justice notion in hotel management and operation, which inherently promotes equity and fairness that can propel future brand identification and loyalty in the long term. Following this introductory section, we review relevant literature on social exchange theory and justice framework as well as related concepts such as CSR, social justice, and human values. We further discuss the methods employed to achieve the above objectives with results presented and discussed subsequently.

Literature Review

The Conceptualization of CSR

The mechanism of reciprocal benefit is demonstrated by the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR). CSR reflects a company’s or brand’s engagement in business activities to enhance economic, societal, and environmental welfare (Sen et al., 2016). According to Xie, Bagozzi, and Grønhaug’s (2019) morality-based framework of CSR categorization, it can take three major forms: autonomy-focused CSR, community-focused CSR, and divinity-focused CSR. Autonomy-focused CSR promotes an individual’s rights and freedom to pursue personal goals (Shweder et al., 1997). Examples of autonomy-focused CSR include offering products or services that meet the needs of customers and suppliers or avoiding unethical business relationships. The goal of community-focused CSR is to fulfill a company’s (or a brand’s) social obligations within a community (Rozin et al., 1999). Examples of community-focused CSR include making an investment in local business, working with local suppliers, or subsidizing local sports teams. The divinity-focused CSR aims to protect people’s spiritual quality and the natural environment from deterioration (Rozin et al., 1999). Examples of divinity-focused CSR include creating products that can be recycled, reducing packaging, or waste management.

A hotel used as a quarantine facility is a specific CSR initiative that entails both autonomy- and community-focused CSR characteristics. By serving the needs of customers—including business travelers, cabin crew, citizens, and students coming from overseas or other places—quarantine hotels are performing autonomy-focused CSR by providing a safe shelter. Moreover, communities also benefit from quarantine hotels as it reduces potential infection risks within the community areas. CSR is a key concept in relationship marketing as it can establish and maintain customer-brand relationships (Xie, Bagozzi, & Grønhaug, 2019). A common relationship marketing strategy is to foster customers’ positive brand attitudes and behaviors by undertaking CSR initiatives (Xie, et al., 2019). The frequent customer reactions to a company’s CSR initiatives may involve brand identification and brand loyalty. Brand identification is defined as a psychological state that manifests the connection between customers and a brand (Elbedweihy & Jayawardhena, 2014). Brand loyalty refers to customers’ commitment to maintaining repurchasing a preferred product or service over time (Oliver, 1999). Both constructs are indicators of strong customer-brand relationships.

Therefore, both autonomy- and community-focused CSR enhance hotel brand relationships (Martínez & Del Bosque, 2013) by providing individuals with intrinsic benefits (Khan et al., 2013). Therefore, the following hypotheses are posited:

Hypothesis 1: Customers’ perception of hotel CSR is positively related to brand loyalty.

Hypothesis 2: Customers’ perception of hotel CSR is positively related to brand identification.

Social Justice

While the term social justice has different connotations, Constantine and colleagues (2007, p. 24) define social justice as ‘‘fairness and equity in resources, rights, and treatment for marginalized individuals and groups of people who do not share equal power in society because of their immigration, racial, ethnic, age, socioeconomic, religious heritage, physical ability, or sexual orientation status groups.” In this study, we define social justice as a belief that people should possess equitable access to resources and the protection of human rights (Torres-Harding et al., 2012). This definition recognizes that social justice consists of key dimensions of power, minimization of social and structural inequalities, empowerment, and broad participation. Hotel customers’ perceptions of social justice are, thus, their beliefs of an equal society where all customers have equal opportunities with the recognition that all people are born equal with equal rights and dignity, irrespective of their background and characteristics. However, research has shown that tolerance of different people within the hospitality context remains a challenge (Grayman & Godfrey, 2013).

With the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, which has the potential to intensify existing inequalities within the hotel industry (Rastegar, Higgins-Desbiolles, & Ruhanen, 2021), social justice is important for hotels to recognize and protect the rights of its stakeholders (Torres-Harding et al., 2012). Prior to COVID-19, the hotel industry has been challenged with social issues of unfair pay and compensation of its frontline employees (Wu et al., 2013), customer discrimination (Nagar et al., 2022), and gender stereotyping (Nagar et al., 2022; Qu et al., 2020 ). These issues have been compounded by COVID-19 with some commentators questioning the social justice of social distancing measures for socially-marginalized groups (Silva & Smith, 2020). Addressing these impending social issues via the lens of social justice not only helps to attract and earn loyal customers but also to retain employees (Wu et al., 2013).

Meanwhile, the concept of social justice has been predominantly examined from a western-centric perspective with few studies on non-western contexts (see Qu et al., 2020; Wu & Wang, 2008). Nonetheless, there have been arguments to extend research beyond Euro-American cultural contexts since both abstract issues and contextual rules intersect to produce decisions on justice (Leung & Stephan, 2001). Within the hotel-justice literature, an emerging stream of scholars has examined the relationship between perceived service justice, service quality, and customer satisfaction (Chi et al, 2020), and the influence of perceived justice on customer satisfaction with service recovery and revisit intentions (Kim et al., 2009). For example, Chi and colleagues (2020) examined the critical role of customers’ perceived justice (distributive, procedural, and interactional justice) on customer service quality within the economy hotel sector in China. Their study indicates that procedural justice that connotes the firm’s systems and employee interactional skills have a significant influence on the assessment of soft and hard quality. Kim and colleagues (2009) similarly found that distributive, procedural, and interactional justice plays a significant role in trust and revisiting intentions through recovery satisfaction.

However, research examining customer responses to social justice practices in the hospitality industry is limited. Some previous studies have examined the indirect effect of brand experience, brand identification, brand image, and trust on the relationship between CSR and brand loyalty with limited attention to social justice (Abd-El-Salam, 2020; He & Li, 2011; Khan & Fatma, 2019). One such study concludes that brand identification has a significant positive moderating effect on the relationship between CSR and customer satisfaction among customers of mobile telecommunications services (He & Li, 2011). The few studies that have examined justice confirm that distributive justice is indirectly related to customer loyalty (Tolba et al., 2016). Moreover, overall justice has been found to strongly mediate the relationship between CSR and job satisfaction among employees (De Roeck et al., 2014). However, prior studies have ignored the mediating role of social justice in the relationship between CSR and brand loyalty and identification, particularly in the context of quarantine hotels. Hence, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 3: The effect of perceived hotel CSR from hotel customers on brand loyalty is mediated by perceived social justice.

Hypothesis 4: The effect of perceived hotel CSR from hotel customers on brand identification is mediated by perceived social justice.

Human Values

Hotels are interested in the importance of social justice initiatives to their customers and how they can stimulate brand loyalty and identification (Chang & Hsiao, 2008). Determining the significance of social justice to customers requires understanding customers’ values, making the moderating role of values critical in the examination of social justice in quarantine hotels. As desirable goals, values represent the things that are important in the life of an individual and are the motivational bases of individual attitudes and actions (Schwartz, 2012). Human values reflect beliefs and standards that are intricately linked to affect, and they vary according to knowledge structure and attitude (Rohan, 2000; Rokeach, 1973). Consequently, individual actions and attitudes may be understood and explained by examining their values (Choi et al., 2016).

The Schwartz (2012) theory of basic human values identified 10 values common across different cultures, namely “self-direction,” “power,” “achievement,” “hedonism,” “stimulation,” “universalism,” “benevolence,” “tradition,” “conformity,” and “security.” Schwartz (2012) further categorized these 10 values into four higher-order, bi-polar, abstract dimensions with a circular structure that contrasts openness to change against conservation, and self-enhancement against self-transcendence. This study focuses on the four main dimensions (openness to change, conservation, self-transcendence, and self-enhancement) of Schwartz’s (2012) human values for two reasons. First, according to the human values theory, there are four-dimensional aspects that are reflective of the 10 motivationally distinct values, allowing the understanding of the dynamic relations among the individual items (Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987). Second, by focusing on the four-dimensional constructs, we explicate that actions in pursuit of a specific dimension may lead to conflicting or non-conflicting psychological and social consequences on another (Schwartz, 2006). According to Schwartz et al. (2012), openness to change emphasizes the independence of thought, action, feeling, and readiness for changes while conservation values connote order, restriction, preservation of the past, and resistance to change. Self-transcendence connotes concern for social justice, equality, and the welfare of others, while self-enhancement implies an inclination towards self-promotion and one’s interests within a social hierarchy. Previous consumer behavior studies demonstrate that self-transcendence and self-enhancement values predict socially responsible consumers. For example, high self-transcendence values predict recycling and avoiding products that have long-term negative impacts on the environment (Lee & Cho, 2019).

Sustainable tourism researchers are interested in human values since values have been theoretically argued to influence pro-environmental behaviors (Agyeiwaah, 2020). Sustainable actions, including car-sharing, are related to values including environmental concern and responsibility (Schaefers, 2013). In a cruise expedition context, Walker and Moscardo (2014) employed means and chains analysis to identify six values connected to environmental concern and responsibility. However, the extant literature has not examined the role of human values in the relationship between corporate social responsibility, social justice, and brand loyalty and identification. Roccas (2003) tested the moderating role of human values among 160 first-year students at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and confirmed that both self-enhancement and self-transcendence play a moderating role in the relationship between perceived status and identification. Studies in China confirm that Chinese youth with high self-transcendence values have negative perceptions of the CSR performance of organizations in China (Wang & Juslin, 2011). Given that self-transcendence value is associated with social justice and equality (Roccas, 2003; Schwartz, 2012), people who place high importance on self-transcendence are likely to demonstrate higher loyalty and identification with tourism and hospitality firms embarking on social justice. We therefore argue here that human values moderate the indirect relationship between perceived CSR and brand loyalty and identification. This implies that the strength of the positive indirect relationship between perceived CSR and brand loyalty and identification changes depending on whether the hotel customer exhibits openness to change, conservation, self-enhancement, and self-transcendence values. Given the lack of empirical research on the moderating role of human values on the social justice–brand loyalty and identification relations—particularly during the COVID-19 period within the hospitality industry—this study offers a novel contribution by explicating how the current COVID-19 context generates unique brand sensitivity among hotel customers. Hence, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 5: Hotel customers with self-transcendence values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand loyalty.

Hypothesis 6: Hotel customers with conservation values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand loyalty.

Hypothesis 7: Hotel customers with self-enhancement values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand loyalty.

Hypothesis 8: Hotel customers with openness to change values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand loyalty.

Hypothesis 9: Hotel customers with self-transcendence values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand identification.

Hypothesis 10: Hotel customers with conservation values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand identification.

Hypothesis 11: Hotel customers with self-enhancement values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand identification.

Hypothesis 12: Hotel customers with openness to change values would moderate the indirect relationship between perceived hotel CSR and brand identification.

Theoretical Perspective: The Social Exchange Theory (SET)

This paper is underpinned by social exchange theory (Emerson, 1976). Social exchange theory is rooted in sociology, anthropology, and sociopsychology (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005) and is considered one of the most influential theories to explain social interaction (Cook at al., 2013). According to Blau (1968, p. 91), social exchange is “voluntary actions of individuals that are motivated by the returns they are expected to bring and typically do bring from others.” SET has predominantly been used in tourism research as a theory for explaining residents’ attitudes and support for tourism development (Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2012). SET argues that human relationships are based on cost-benefit analysis, where benefits can be either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic benefits include social approval, social identity, altruism, gratitude, respect, and positive feelings (Blau, 1968; Paraskevaidis & Andriotis, 2017) while extrinsic benefits include material goods, money, assistance, and obedience (Blau, 1968; Cao et al., 2013). In the hospitality industry, SET indicates that hotel customers are likely to reciprocate with positive behaviors for positive hotel treatment (Kim & Qu, 2020; Kim et al., 2009). For example, a customer receiving high-quality staff interaction may reciprocate by developing an interpersonal relationship with that employee (Kim et al., 2009), or positive employee-customer exchanges in a restaurant may stimulate prosocial service behaviors (Kim & Qu, 2020).

This reciprocal relationship and prosocial behaviors contribute to brand loyalty and identification, which are key factors not only for profitability but more so for the company’s public image. However, the success of the interaction between customers and a hotel depends on whether the two parties can provide reciprocal benefits (Rahimi & Kozak, 2017). Generally, customers anticipate that the hotel enterprise can provide satisfying service and products, while the hotel enterprise expects a customer to provide repeat patronage or positive word of mouth. Social interaction supports this exchange process (Park et al., 2021). Thus, support for a specific hotel brand is based on negotiation and reciprocity (Xiong et al., 2014). This study investigates the influence of intrinsic benefits received through support of a hotel that displays higher corporate social responsibility and social justice. The influence of higher corporate social responsibility and social justice for hotels in a crisis has not previously been studied. This study argues that quarantine hotels are an important context to examine the mechanisms of perceived social justice and perceived CSR during a pandemic through the provision of a place for customers to quarantine (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Conceptual Model.

Methodology

Study Setting, Instrument Design, and Pilot Study

This study was set in China and focused on customers of the tourism and hospitality industry. There is no doubt that the tourism and hospitality industry of China has experienced significant growth within the past decades and customers’ views are supportive of a just and fair hotel business model (Chi et al., 2020). A structured questionnaire was developed according to the research objectives and the primary concepts examined in this study. Consequently, the questionnaire employed in this study consisted of six sections with five different scales and respondents’ profiles. For the hotel’s corporate social responsibility, a total of 11 items were adopted from a prior study that also investigated the concept from the hotel customer’s perspective (Palacios-Florencio et al., 2018). To examine the social justice concept, a social justice attitudes scale developed by Torres-Harding and colleagues (2012) was employed. Human values are measured by Portrait Value Questionnaire 21 (PVQ-21) developed by Schwartz (2003). Additionally, to measure brand loyalty and brand identification, a total of 10 items (five items each) were adopted from a prior study that also examined these two concepts in the hotel industry (So et al., 2013). There are a total of 63 items in the questionnaire including nine demographic items. The survey took around 10 min to complete. All the items were measured by a 7-point Likert scale from extremely disagree to extremely agree.

Prior to the formal data collection, a pre-test was conducted to validate the reliability of the questionnaire. Consequently, a sample of 100 hotel customers within China was collected and subsequently subjected to reliability analysis. Results indicated that all the measures are reliable, and Cronbach’s alpha values were all above 0.8.

Data Collection and Analysis

Following the pre-test and subsequent modifications, the main data collection was undertaken. An online survey platform in mainland China was employed for 6 weeks from mid-March to May 2021. The target participants in this study were hotel customers who were over 18 years old and frequent users of four- or five-star rated international hotel brands. Both convenient and snowball sampling methods were used for data collection with 2 RMB (approximately $0.29) as an incentive to encourage participation. Moreover, this study designed a screening question to precisely reach the target group: “Have you visited any international hotel or branded hotel in the past 3 years?” with yes or no as the answer. If the participant indicated “no” as the answer to the first question, the questionnaire was then completed. On the other hand, if the participant selected “yes,” they were then required to indicate the hotel name and continue completing the questionnaire. Consequently, all the participants in this study had visited the branded hotel at least once in the past 3 years. The visited hotels include Hilton, Sheraton, Indigo, Marriott, Four Point by Sheraton, Four Seasons, and Westin. Some 500 returned questionnaires were collected. Incomplete questionnaires were eliminated resulting in 465 (93%) being retained and used for the analysis. Preliminary analysis of the data collected revealed that the sample had slightly more females (52%) than males (48%). Almost half of the participants (45.8 %) use 4 to 5 star hotel services 4 to 7 times per year, and 55.3 % of participants usually stayed in a hotel two to three nights per year. Some 61.5 % of the participants had completed their university education and 18.3% had a college degree. The 36 to 45 age group constituted 35.1% of the sample, followed by the 26 to 35 age group (24.5%).

AMOS software (Version 21) was used to conduct structural equation modeling (SEM) of the direct effect between perceived CSR, brand loyalty, and brand identification (e.g., H1 and H2). In addition, the SPSS PROCESS Macro Plugin developed by Hayes (2017) was used to test the mediating effect (Model 4) and moderated mediation effect (Model 14). This study conducted 5,000 resamples to generate the 95% confidence intervals (CI; bias-corrected confidence intervals) for determining the significance of the mediating effect (indirect effects) of perceived social justice and the moderated mediation effect (conditional indirect effects) of human values. When zero is not included in the 95% CI, it suggests a statistically significant mediating and moderated mediation effect.

Results

Measurement Model

Before conducting the CFA, this study first examined missing values and outliers. It was found that there were no missing values and outliers in the data. We also examined the multivariate normal distribution and confirmed that the data were normally distributed with skewness ranging between 0.823 and 1.732 while kurtosis ranged between 0.215 and 4.626. In addition, the common method bias (CMB) of the measures was examined using Harman’s single-factor approach. Consequently, we found that the variance explained by the first major factor based on the exploratory factor analysis was 39.914% which is less than the suggested cut-off point of 50%. The approach confirmed that there is no evidence of common method errors in the results. This study, therefore, conducted various examinations to ensure the measurement model adequacy including Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE) for convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Consequently, the Cronbach’s alphas for all scales were all above .06 (from 0.635 to 0.798) which is an acceptable level (Ursachi et al., 2015). Composite reliability was above the cutoff value at 0.6 (from 0.635 to 0.835). All the concepts showed good AVEs (ranging from 0.521 to 0.732). Moreover, the Fornell and Larcker (1981) criteria were applied for the examination of the discriminant validity of the measurement model. The square roots of AVE for each construct were greater than the correlation between each pair of the constructs with only two correlations being slightly greater than the square roots of AVE, which supports the discriminant validity. The results of the measurement model showed that CMIN/df = 1.898, RMSEA = 0.044, TLI = 0.937, CFI = 0.945, GFI = 0.905, SRMR = 0.0357, which has achieved a fit to the sample date. Table 1 presents the detailed results of the measurement model assessment.

Table 1.

Measurement Results.

Construct	Loading	Alpha	CR	AVE
Corporate Social Responsibility		.770	.845	.521
It is important that the hotel helps developing country	0.774***
It is important that the hotel is concerned about its customers’ rights (guarantees, information etc.).	0.703***
It is important that the hotel gives its customers a fair deal.	0.686***
It is important that the hotel creates jobs.	0.722***
It is important that the hotel guarantees the health and safety of its staff.	0.721***
Brand Loyalty		.735	.834	.558
I would recommend this hotel brand to someone who seeks my advice.	0.807***
I would encourage friends and relatives to do business with this brand.	0.652***
I would consider this hotel brand my first choice.	0.762***
I would do more business with this hotel brand in the next few years.	0.758***
Brand Identification		.712	.839	.635
When I talk about this brand, I usually say we rather than they.	0.829***
This brand’s successes are my successes.	0.751***
When someone praises this brand, it feels like a personal compliment.	0.808***
Social Justice		.798	.861	.555
I believe that it is important to make sure that all individuals and groups have a chance to speak and be heard, especially those from traditionally ignored or marginalized groups.	0.803***
I believe that it is important to talk to others about societal systems of power, privilege, and oppression.	0.665***
I believe that it is important to help individuals and groups to pursue their chosen goals in life.	0.757***
I believe that it is important to allow others to have meaningful input into decisions affecting their lives.	0.751***
I believe that it is important to promote fair and equitable allocation of bargaining powers, obligations, and resources in our society.	0.742***
Openness to Change		.742	.838	.566
Thinking up new ideas and being creative are important to me.	0.719***
I like surprises and am always looking for a new thing to do.	0.799***
Having a good time is important to me. I like to spoil myself.	0.704***
I seek every chance to have fun. It is important to me to do things that give me pleasure.	0.709***
Self-Enhancement		.635	.846	.733
It is important to me to show my ability. I want people to admire what I do.	0.851***
Being very successful is important to me. I like to impress other people.	0.861***
Self-Transcendence		.635	.804	.579
It is important for me to listen to other people. Even when I disagree with them, I still want to understand them.	0.799***
It is important for me to be loyal to my friends. I want to devote myself to people close to me.	0.710***
I strongly believe that people should care for nature. Looking after the environment is important to me.	0.771***
Conservation		.736	.835	.559
It is important for me to live in secure surroundings. I avoid anything that might jeopardize my safety.	0.768***
I think people should follow rules at all times, even when no one is watching.	0.769***
I think it is important not to ask for more than what I have. I believe that people should be satisfied with what they have.	0.707***
It is important for me always to behave properly. I want to avoid doing anything that people would say is wrong.	0.744

Note: *1% level of significance; **5% level of significance; ***10% level of significance.

Structural Model

After the psychometric quality of the measurement model is confirmed, this study subsequently assessed the direct effect of perceived CSR on brand loyalty and identification. Overall, the model fit result indicated the data fits the proposed model well (CMIN/df = 2.624, RMSEA = 0.059, TLI = 0.944, NFI = 0.932, CFI = 0.956, GFI = 0.953, AGFI = 0.929, SRMR = 0.0379). Moreover, the hypothesis testing result showed that perceived CSR has a significant and positive effect on brand loyalty (β = 0.794, t = 19.981, p < .001). Similarly, perceived CSR has a significant and positive relationship with brand identification (β = 0.673, t = 12.586, p < .001). Therefore, Hypotheses 1 and 2 are supported.

Mediating Effect of Social Justice

For Hypotheses 3 and 4, PROCESS Model 4 was performed to examine the indirect effect of perceived CSR. Results showed that the indirect effects of perceived CSR on brand loyalty (β = 0.4131, 95% Boot. CI = [0.3307, 0.4956]) and brand identification (β = 0.4095, 95% Boot. CI = [0.2924, 0.5346]) through perceived social justice were all significant such that zero did not fall into the 95% CI. Therefore, H3 and H4 were supported. Additionally, the bootstrap result also indicated the direct effect of perceived CSR on brand loyalty (β = 0.4067, 95% Boot. CI= [0.3161, 0.4972]) and brand identification were significant (β = 0.2937, 95% Boot. CI= [0.1671, 0.4204]). Consequently, the mediating role of perceived social justice is confirmed as a partial mediation.

Moderated Mediation Effect of Human Value

To examine Hypotheses 5 to 8 for the conditional indirect effect (moderated mediation effect) of human values on the relationship between perceived social justice and brand loyalty, the PROCESS Model 14 was computed. As a result, the index of moderated mediation generated by the PROCESS macro indicated that openness to change (β = -0.0240, 95% Boot. CI = [-0.0587, 0.0070]) did not have moderated mediation effect on the relationship between perceived social justice and brand loyalty as zero was included in the 95% CI. On the other hand, the moderated mediation effects of self-enhancement (β = .0436, 95% Boot. CI = [-.0751, -.0125]), self-transcendence (β = -.0399, 95% Boot. CI = [-.0822, -.0050]), and conservation (β = 0.0336, 95% Boot. CI = [-0.0681, -.0003]) on the relationship between perceived social justice and brand loyalty was supported. This is verified by the results that zero did not fall within the CI. In other words, the higher the “self-enhancement,” “self-transcendence,” and “conservation” value, the stronger the indirect effect of perceived social justice on the relationship between the perceived CSR and brand loyalty (see Figures 2a, 2b, and 2c).

Figure 2a.

Moderated Mediation Effect of Self-Transcendence on Brand Loyalty.

Figure 2b.

Moderated Mediation Effect of Self-Enhancement on Brand Loyalty.

Figure 2c.

Moderated Mediation Effect of Conservation on Brand Loyalty.

In relation to Hypotheses 9 to 12, the moderated mediation effect of human value on the relationship between perceived social justice and brand identification was examined using the same PROCESS 14 procedure. The results showed that the self-transcendence (β = -.0682, 95% Boot. CI = [-.1172, -.0251]), conservation (β = .0696, 95% Boot. CI = [-.1129, -.0284]), self-enhancement (β = -.0785, 95% Boot. CI = [-.1196, -0.0386]), and openness to change (β = .0566, 95% Boot. CI = [-.0925, -.0210]) all significantly affect the relationship between perceived social justice and brand identification as zero was not included in the 95% CI. According to the figures, it can be found that the higher the self-transcendence, conservation, and openness to change, the stronger the indirect effect of perceived social justice on the relationship between perceived CSR and brand identification with the quarantine hotel (see Figures 3a, 3c, and 3d). On the other hand, the higher the self-enhancement value, the weaker the indirect effects of perceived social justice on the relationship between perceived CSR and customer identification (see Figure 3b).

Figure 3a.

Moderated Mediation Effect of Self-Transcendence on Brand Identification.

Figure 3b.

Moderated Mediation Effect of Self-Enhancement on Brand Identification.

Figure 3c.

Moderated Mediation Effect of Openness To Change on Brand Identification.

Figure 3d

Moderated Mediation Effect of Conservation on Identification.

Discussion

The COVID-19 crisis has led to concern about the unfair and unequal treatment of customers within the tourism and hospitality industry (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2020). Although the CSR concept has been regarded as a type of restorative justice approach, it has also received criticism as being only a hypocritical disguise. Specifically, under the COVID-19 crisis, the tourism and hospitality industry must have more robust measures—such as social justice—to safeguard disadvantaged groups through fair and equitable resource distribution. Drawing on social exchange theory, this study investigated justice and fairness issues during the COVID-19 crisis observed in the hotel industry.

Results confirm previous studies which perceived that corporate social responsibility has a significant and positive effect on the brand loyalty and brand identification of quarantine hotels (Mandhachitara & Poolthong, 2011). Specifically, the more the hotel customers perceive CSR as important, the higher the brand loyalty and identification with the quarantine hotels. Social exchange theory suggests that a quarantine hotel that fulfills social obligations provides customers with intrinsic benefits and hence customers provide their loyalty and identification (Morsing et al., 2008). Here, customers evaluate the hotel brand not only on its service and facilities but also on its social responsibility (Iglesias et al., 2020). These results imply that the hotel industry would benefit by linking its CSR strategies to social benefits provided during the COVID-19 crisis. Nevertheless, the hotel industry should not take CSR as the elixir. Previous studies have indicated that CSR measures that do not benefit society or public welfare would be regarded as hypocritical (Losada-Otálora & Alkire, 2021). In other words, CSR measures can be impractical if the resulting solution does not cater to society’s needs. Therefore, CSR measures need to be more realistic and down-to-earth.

The findings also reveal that perceived social justice partially mediated the relationship between perceived CSR and brand identification and loyalty. This indicates that, apart from the direct effect of perceived CSR on enhancing the quarantine hotel brand identification and loyalty, when hotels implement a more fair and equitable business model (by being used as quarantine facilities), they receive higher levels of identification and loyalty. This result is in line with social exchange theory which argues that customers are likely to engage in a business relationship when they evaluate the company positively (Kim et al., 2009). Specifically, a quarantine hotel benefits the customers and society with just and equitable resource allocation which provides intrinsic benefits based on feelings of altruism, social approval, or social identity (Blau, 1968; Paraskevaidis & Andriotis, 2017). Hence, hotels should recognize the intrinsic benefits of social justice initiatives on hotel brand loyalty and identification. Such a result is consistent with previous studies that social justice initiatives reinforce loyalty and satisfaction in the hotel industry (Saleem et al., 2018). More importantly, as defined in our study, social justice indicates equitable access to resources and protects human rights, guiding more practical hotel CSR measures and eliminating the skeptical attitude of the hotel customers. Compared with prior studies which highlighted that CSR is important for hotel business (Xie, Bagozzi, & Grønhaug, 2019; Xie, Nozawa et al., 2019), the finding of this study provides a new pathway for a more actionable and sustainable business model by incorporating equality and justice elements.

The present study findings indicate that human values moderate the conditional indirect effect of CSR on brand loyalty through its effect on perceived social justice. Specifically, self-enhancement, self-transcendence, and conservation values moderated the relationship between perceived social justice and brand loyalty. Such relationships were stronger when hotel customers ranked higher on self-enhancement, self-transcendence, and conservation. On the other hand, the conditional indirect effect of perceived CSR on brand loyalty through perceived social justice was not affected by openness to change. We offer a possible explanation for such a finding. Quarantine hotels provide accommodation for customers who are at high risk or have already contracted COVID-19. By doing so, quarantine hotels protect the public from spreading COVID-19 which serves as evidence of equal distribution of hotel resources to the community in which they operate. Such a role of quarantine hotels enhances the welfare of humans as well as promoting hotel goodwill which is supported by customers who possess high self-transcendence, conservation, and self-enhancement. Nevertheless, this is not the case for customers possessing high openness to change values. One explanation could be that the priority of different values is determined by environmental cues (Bardi & Goodwin, 2011). Therefore, under the circumstance of community-wide life-threatening events, openness to change—highlighting an anxiety-free and personal focus—has no moderating effect on the relationship between social justice and customer loyalty. Such a postulation is supported by Schwartz and colleagues (2012) who maintain that openness to change is motivated by egoistic and individual interests.

Findings also confirmed the moderated mediating role of human values on the conditional indirect effect of perceived CSR on hotel brand identification through perceived social justice. Specifically, the ability of perceived social justice to explain the relationship between perceived CSR and brand identification increases when customers possess high values of openness to change, self-transcendence, and conservation, but reduces when customers have high self-enhancement values. This study argues that self-enhancement values focus on individualism, highlighting power and achievement, which contradicts the idea of fairness and equality highlighted in social justice. Therefore, the interaction effect between self-enhancement and perceived social justice leads to less psychological identification of the quarantine hotel brand (Ladhari & Tchetgna, 2015). Such a result is in line with previous studies, indicating that fairness is associated with identification (Lizzio et al., 2007) and value affects social justice (Stewart, 2014). In addition to supporting existing studies, our findings offer significant theoretical and practical implications.

Theoretical Implications

From a social exchange theory perspective, this study provides a novel perspective to elaborate further on the interactive nature between society and branded hotel enterprises under the COVID-19 crisis. Branded hotels benefit from highlighting their CSR activities because these provide customers with intrinsic benefits. The more the branded hotel business provides intrinsic benefits, the more likely reciprocal obligations will be created. If CSR is enhanced by the inclusion of social justice notions, this further enhances positive social exchange outcomes, indicating the importance of perceptions of just distribution specifically under the pandemic crisis. The branded hotel business model should also support the rights of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups (Rastegar, Higgins-Desbiolles, & Ruhanen, 2021). A more just, equal, and fair distribution of hotel resources during a crisis stimulates loyal and supportive customers by providing an intrinsic benefit. Therefore, customers’ loyalty and identification with the branded hotel can be improved not only by CSR but also by fairness that aligns with the principles of sustainable development.

This study provides fresh insight into the potential influence of human value on quarantine hotels. Different human values support various attitudinal and behavioral patterns. Despite the quest for a more just development and policy for our society from tourism and hospitality business models, current research seldom investigates perceived social justice and the influence of human values. Examining the moderating role of human values on perceived social justice extends our understanding of the relationship between perceived social justice and customers’ opinions and attitudes. Thus, this paper contributes to the social sustainability literature in the hospitality field by demonstrating that human values have a significant impact on the indirect influence of perceived social justice on quarantine hotels’ brand loyalty and identification. We therefore suggest that the existing discussion of the social justice issue and its influence on the tourism and hospitality business model can be enhanced by discussing the effect of human values.

Practical Implications

Results from this study provide important practical implications for the hotel enterprise. The hotel industry needs to be aware that continuing the “business as usual” CSR model may fail to maintain customers’ loyalty and identification. On the other hand, a more social justice-oriented hotel business model is preferable to hotel customers. In this vein, recognition of justice is important to the hotel enterprise and its business model (Harbor & Hunt, 2021). Specifically, hotel entrepreneurs should develop and implement social justice and equity policies which recognize that all customers—including disadvantaged groups—have equal rights and opportunities to stay in the hotel. Hotels can offer products that identify community needs, such as providing hotel packages that allow migrants, minorities, and the disabled to have equal accessibility to hotel resources. In addition, actions taken to benefit the most vulnerable groups or individuals affected by COVID-19 are also essential.

Moreover, hotel enterprises should also incorporate the procedural justice concept in their business model to highlight fairness in the process of dispute resolution and resource allocation. In prior studies, procedural justice has been established as an important antecedent of trust that can enhance hotel employees’ work satisfaction and organizational commitment (Hon & Lu, 2010). Hence, hotel enterprises are encouraged to highlight procedural justice in their operations. Enhancing initiatives and programs to benefit disadvantaged groups significantly affected by COVID-19 or other crises would earn the support of hotel customers. Some current examples of procedural justice have been demonstrated by Choice Hotels through the provision of beds to hospitals during the pandemic (“Choice Hotels donate beds at medical facilities amid COVID-19 pandemic,” 2020). Moreover, MGM Resort International offered refrigerators for COVID-19 test kits’ preservation (“MGM Resorts International provides critical resources and support,” 2020).

Conclusion, Limitations, and Future Research Recommendations

The consequences of various crises has highlighted and aggravated the inequality and injustice in our society. To respond to this, we proposed a value shift for the tourism and hospitality industry to be more socially friendly in the development and decision-making process (Rastegar, Higgins-Desbiolles & Ruhanen, 2021). We argue that an ongoing CSR which is inadequate to ensure fairness, and social justice which inherently promotes equity and fairness in the distribution of resources, can propel future brand identification and loyalty in the long term. In doing so, the present study provides empirical support to the theoretical justification of the need for a more just, fair, equitable, and sustainable policy for our society under the global crisis in the hospitality industry (Jamal & Higham, 2021).

This study is not without limitations. First, this study acknowledges that individual values change with time, and those prioritized during this pandemic can change in the post-pandemic. Second, the data were obtained from Chinese customers and, as a result, the findings cannot be generalized to other nationalities. Future research should collect data from different countries to examine the cross-cultural differences in human values. Moreover, investigating the influence of collectivism and individualism on perceived social justice can also provide profound insights. Third, this study collected data from hotel customers rather than those having quarantine experiences. Hence, future research is encouraged to explore customers’ loyalty and identification with the hotel brand from those who have had quarantine experiences.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Fu Chieh, Hsu

Elizabeth Agyeiwaah

Jing Liu

Noel Scott

Author Biographies

Fu Chieh Hsu is assistant professor at the Department of Cultural Tourism, National United University, Taiwan. He received his PhD at the University of Queensland. His research interests include food tourism, food-related personality trait, tourists experience, and cultural heritage tourism.

Elizabeth Agyeiwaah is an assistant professor at the Faculty of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Macau University of Science and Technology. She received her PhD at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Her research interests include sustainable tourism development, small and medium tourism enterprises, and tourist studies.

Jing Liu is currently an assistant professor in the Faculty of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Macau University of Science and Technology. Her work mainly focuses on customer–employee interactions, frontline employee management, employee-organization relationship, foodservice management, and multilevel theory and methods.

Noel Scott is adjunct professor at the Sustainability Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia. His research interests include the study of tourism experiences, destination management and marketing, and stakeholder organization. He is a frequent speaker at international academic and industry conferences. He has over 300 academic articles published including 17 books. He has supervised 19 doctoral students to successful completion of their theses. He is on the editorial board of 10 journals and is a member of the International Association of China Tourism Scholars and Fellow of CAUTHE. Prior to starting his academic career in 2001, Noel worked as a senior manager in a variety of leading businesses including as Manager Research and Strategic Services at Tourism and Events Queensland.

References

Abd-El-Salam

E. M.

(2020). Investigating loyalty through CSR: The mediating role of brand image and brand trust. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 19(3), 252–279. https://doi.org/10.1362/147539220X16003502334226

Agyeiwaah

(2020). The contribution of small accommodation enterprises to sustainable solid waste management. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.04.013

Bardi

Goodwin

(2011). The dual route to value change: Individual processes and cultural moderators. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(2), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110396916

Blau

P. M.

(1968). Social exchange. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 7, 452–457. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/41588618/EconPsy_4_-_Social_exchange-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1663584930&Signature=hD87I4BWrVppwj-Z45CaZ-9tGhP2XW~J~vEBcxMdUSEIx2LaGD6ULakbLMUZbAtBBNZorBVpuSqWAEshCwjonHZ2prdqT8rnrQ6ol9BeBpzkh1u2e30ht1K0R03VNlPydjY3UHirVmGLFU7UXetUMGlFbYtBymgaNc7MXPMyMzgl6LBucOL4GpE6PqMTD1o16ezGhgHtYG1h5keOikxNMOjS2hLR6J9BrInrPoZM92E7JePA~KPbaAZmS6-09vu~k4ikH7mgvcnLNnHlBvHJuMhfASonY2VgQv2qwnAK3vg8bRYTvOnmmq5~KVLTSwJUGoX-qfUzMGe0ooM0rJeySg__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA

Bradford

Earp

J. B.

Showalter

D. S.

Williams

P. F.

(2017). Corporate sustainability reporting and stakeholder concerns: is there a disconnect? Accounting Horizons, 31(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51639

Camargo

B. A.

Vázquez-Maguirre

(2021). Humanism, dignity and indigenous justice: The mayan train megaproject, Mexico. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(2–3), 372–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1758707

Cao

Chen

Song

(2013). Does total rewards reduce the core employees’ turnover Intention? International Journal of Business and Management, 8(20), 62. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.5539/ijbm.v8n20p62

Chang

H. S.

Hsiao

H. L.

(2008). Examining the casual relationship among service recovery, perceived justice, perceived risk, and customer value in the hotel industry. The Service Industries Journal, 28(4), 513–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060801917646

Chi

C. G. Q.

Wen

Ouyang

(2020). Developing relationship quality in economy hotels: The role of perceived justice, service quality, and commercial friendship. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 29(8), 1027–1051. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2020.1748158

10.

Chien

Kelly

Mao

(2022, January 21). Research reveals impacts on hotel brands used for COVID quarantine. UQ news. https://www.uq.edu.au/news/article/2022/01/research-reveals-impacts-hotel-brands-used-covid-quarantine

11.

Choi

M. J.

Heo

C. Y.

Law

(2016). Developing a typology of Chinese shopping tourists: An application of the Schwartz model of universal human values. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(2), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2014.997961

12.

Choice Hotels donate beds at medical facilities amid COVID-19 pandemic. (2020, April 16). Travel and Tour World. https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/choice-hotels-donate-beds-medical-facilities-amid-covid-19-pandemic/

13.

Constantine

M. G.

Hage

S. M.

Kindaichi

M. M.

Bryant

R. M.

(2007). Social justice and multicultural issues: Implications for the practice and training of counselors and counseling psychologists. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85(1), 24–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2007.tb00440.x

14.

Cook

K. S.

Cheshire

Rice

E. R.

Nakagawa

(2013). Social exchange theory. In DeLamater

Award

(Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 61–88). Springer.

15.

Cropanzano

Mitchell

M. S.

(2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602

16.

De Roeck

Marique

Stinglhamber

Swaen

. (2014). Understanding employees’ responses to corporate social responsibility: Mediating roles of overall justice and organisational identification. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(1), 91–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.781528

17.

Dorman

(2022, February 23). Hong Kong faces shortage of quarantine facilities, pressure on domestic workers. Asia Minute, Hawaii Public Radio. https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/asia-minute/2022-02-23/asia-minute-hong-kong-faces-shortage-of-quarantine-facilities-pressure-on-domestic-workers

18.

Dyllick

Muff

(2016). Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: Introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability. Organization & Environment, 29(2), 156–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575176

19.

Elbedweihy

A. M.

Jayawardhena

(2014). Consumer-brand identification: A social identity-based review and research directions. The Marketing Review, 14(2), 205–228. https://doi.org/10.1362/146934714X14024778816995

20.

Emerson

R. M.

(1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2(1), 335–62. http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/social_exchange_theory_-_1976.pdf

21.

Feather

N. T.

(1994). Human values and their relation to justice. Journal of Social Issues, 50(4), 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb01201.x

22.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

23.

Goh

Baum

(2021). Job perceptions of Generation Z hotel employees towards working in Covid-19 quarantine hotels: The role of meaningful work. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 33(5), 1688–1710. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2020-1295

24.

Grayman

J. K.

Godfrey

E. B.

(2013). Social justice attitudes and their demographic correlates among a nationally representative sample of US adolescents. Social Justice Research, 26(4), 422–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-013-0196-9

25.

Harbor

L. C.

Hunt

C. A.

(2021). Indigenous tourism and cultural justice in a Tz’utujil Maya community, Guatemala. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(2–3), 214–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1770771

26.

(2011). CSR and service brand: The mediating effect of brand identification and moderating effect of service quality. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(4), 673–688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0703-y

27.

Hon

A. H.

(2010). The mediating role of trust between expatriate procedural justice and employee outcomes in Chinese hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(4), 669–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.01.002

28.

Hoang

T. G.

Truong

N. T.

Nguyen

T. M.

(2021). The survival of hotels during the COVID-19 pandemic: A critical case study in Vietnam. Service Business, 15(2), 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-021-00441-0

29.

Higgins-Desbiolles

(2008). Justice tourism and alternative globalisation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(3), 345–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580802154132

30.

Higgins-Desbiolles

(2020). Socialising tourism for social and ecological justice after COVID-19. Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 610–623. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2020.1757748

31.

Higgins-Desbiolles

Carnicelli

Krolikowski

Wijesinghe

Boluk

(2019). Degrowing tourism: Rethinking tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27(12), 1926–1944. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2019.1601732

32.

Iglesias

Markovic

Bagherzadeh

Singh

J. J.

(2020). Co-creation: A key link between corporate social responsibility, customer trust, and customer loyalty. Journal of Business Ethics, 163(1), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4015-y

33.

Jamal

Higham

(2021). Justice and ethics: Towards a new platform for tourism and sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(2–3), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1835933

34.

Khan

Fatma

(2019). Connecting the dots between CSR and brand loyalty: The mediating role of brand experience and brand trust. International Journal of Business Excellence, 17(4), 439–455. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBEX.2019.10020542

35.

Khan

M. Y.

Rizwan

Arshad

M. I.

Anwar

M. F.

(2013). Impact of employee motivation on job satisfaction with respect to corporate social responsibility and rewards. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 3(3), 226–243. https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v3i3.6219

36.

Kilburn

H. W.

(2009). Personal values and public opinion. Social Science Quarterly, 90(4), 868–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009.00667.x

37.

Kim

T. T.

Kim

W. G.

Kim

H. B.

(2009). The effects of perceived justice on recovery satisfaction, trust, word-of-mouth, and revisit intention in upscale hotels. Tourism Management, 30(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.04.003

38.

Kim

(2020). Effects of employees’ social exchange and the mediating role of customer orientation in the restaurant industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 89, Article 102577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102577

39.

Komiya

(2020, July 7). A majority of customers expect brands to take a stand on issues before purchasing, survey finds. Barron’s. https://www.barrons.com/articles/a-majority-of-consumers-expect-brands-to-take-a-stand-on-issues-before-purchasing-survey-finds-51594143666

40.

Ladhari

Tchetgna

N. M.

(2015). The influence of personal values on Fair Trade consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production, 87, 469–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.068

41.

Lee

Cho

(2019). New insights into socially responsible consumers: The role of personal values. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 43(2), 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12491

42.

Leung

Stephan

W. G.

(2001). Social justice from a cultural perspective. In Matsumoto

(Ed.), The handbook of culture and psychology. (pp. 375–410). Oxford University Press.

43.

Lizzio

Wilson

Hadaway

(2007). University students’ perceptions of a fair learning environment: A social justice perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801969

44.

Losada-Otálora

Alkire

(2021). A transformative approach to corporate social responsibility: An antidote to corporate hypocrisy. The Service Industries Journal, 41(3–4), 200–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2019.1655000

45.

Mandhachitara

Poolthong

(2011). A model of customer loyalty and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(2), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041111119840

46.

Martínez

Del Bosque

I. R.

(2013). CSR and customer loyalty: The roles of trust, customer identification with the company and satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.05.009

47.

McCabe

Qiao

(2020). A review of research into social tourism: Launching the Annals of Tourism research curated collection on social tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 85, Article 103103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.103103

48.

MGM Resorts International provides critical resources and support to community partners as they respond to the COVID-19 crisis. (2020, April 09). PR Newswire. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/mgm-resorts-international-provides-critical-resources-and-support-to-community-partners-as-they-respond-to-the-covid-19-crisis-301038492.html

49.

Morsing

Schultz

Nielsen

K. U.

(2008). The ‘Catch 22’ of communicating CSR: Findings from a Danish study. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(2), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527260701856608

50.

Nagar

Shani

Poria

(2022). “You feel like a second-class guest”: Customer discrimination against Arab guests in Israeli hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 103, Article 103216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103216

51.

Nunkoo

Ramkissoon

(2012). Power, trust, social exchange and community support. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 997–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.11.017

52.

Oliver

R. L.

(1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63(4, Suppl. 1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429990634s105

53.

Palacios-Florencio

García del Junco

Castellanos-Verdugo

Rosa-Díaz

I. M.

(2018). Trust as mediator of corporate social responsibility, image and loyalty in the hotel sector. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(7), 1273–1289. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1447944

54.

Paraskevaidis

Andriotis

(2017). Altruism in tourism: Social exchange theory vs. altruistic surplus phenomenon in host volunteering. Annals of Tourism Research, 62, 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.11.002

55.

Park

J. Y.

Back

R. M.

Bufquin

Nutta

M. W.

(2021). Attraction, social presence, sociability, and booking intentions: The moderating role of homophily. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 45(6), 1044–1068. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348020988898

56.

Choi

H. C.

(2020). Gender discrimination, injustice, and deviant behavior among hotel employees: Role of organizational attachment. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 21(1), 78–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2019.1619498

57.

Rahimi

Kozak

(2017). Impact of customer relationship management on customer satisfaction: The case of a budget hotel chain. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 34(1), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2015.1130108

58.

Rastegar

(2020). Tourism and justice: Rethinking the role of governments. Annals of Tourism Research, 85, Article 102884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102884

59.

Rastegar

Higgins-Desbiolles

Ruhanen

(2021). COVID-19 and a justice framework to guide tourism recovery. Annals of Tourism Research, Article 103161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103161

60.

Rastegar

Zarezadeh

Gretzel

(2021). World heritage and social justice: Insights from the inscription of Yazd, Iran. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(2–3), 521–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1782925

61.

Rihova

Buhalis

Moital

Gouthro

M. B.

(2013). Social layers of customer-to-customer value co-creation. Journal of Service Management, 24(5), 553–566. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-04-2013-0092

62.

Olson

E. D.

(2014). The effects of social justice and stigma-consciousness on gay customers’ service recovery evaluation. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1162–1169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.05.006

63.

Roccas

(2003). Identification and status revisited: The moderating role of self-enhancement and self-transcendence values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 726–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029006005

64.

Rohan

M. J.

(2000). A rose by any name? The values construct. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(3), 255–277. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0403_4

65.

Rokeach

(1973). The nature of human values. Free Press.

66.

Rozin

Lowery

Imada

Haidt

(1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 574. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.76.4.574

67.

Saleem

M. A.

Yaseen

Wasaya

(2018). Drivers of customer loyalty and word of mouth intentions: Moderating role of interactional justice. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 27(8), 877–904. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2018.1469447

68.

Schaefers

(2013). Exploring carsharing usage motives: A hierarchical means-end chain analysis. Transportation research Part A: Policy and practice, 47, 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.024

69.

Schwartz

S. H.

(2003). A proposal for measuring value orientations across nations. The questionnaire development package of the European social survey, 259(290), 259–319. http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/methodology/core_ess_questionnaire/ESS_core_questionnaire_human_values.pdf

70.

Schwartz

S. H.

(2006). Basic human values: An overview. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.510.6950&rep=rep1&type=pdf

71.

Schwartz

S. H.

(2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 2307–0919. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.9707/2307-0919.1116

72.

Schwartz

S. H.

Bilsky

(1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 550. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.550

73.

Schwartz

S. H.

Cieciuch

Vecchione

Davidov

Fischer

Beierlein

Ramos

Verkasalo

Lönnqvist

J.-E.

Demirutku

Dirilen-Gumus

Konty

(2012). Refining the theory of basic individual values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(4), 663. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/a0029393

74.

Sen

Bhattacharya

(2016). Corporate social responsibility: A consumer psychology perspective. Current Opinion in Psychology, 10, 70–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.12.014

75.

Shweder

R. A.

Much

N. C.

Mahapatra

Park

(1997). The “big three” of morality (autonomy, community, divinity) and the “big three” explanations of suffering. In Brandt

A. M.

Rozin

(Eds.), Morality and health (pp. 119–169). Taylor & Frances/Routledge.

76.

Silva

D. S.

Smith

M. J.

(2020). Social distancing, social justice, and risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 111(4), 459–461. https://doi.org/10.17269/s41997-020-00354-x

77.

Skarmeas

Leonidou

C. N.

(2013). When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1831–1838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.004

78.

‘Slugs and mould’ in quarantine hotels as prices rise. (2021, August 12). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-58108635

79.

K. K. F.

King

Sparks

B. A.

Wang

(2013). The influence of customer brand identification on hotel brand evaluation and loyalty development. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 34, 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.02.002

80.

Stewart

(2014). Leisure research to enhance social justice. Leisure Sciences, 36(4), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2014.916961

81.

Tolba

Seoudi

Meshreki

Shimy

(2016). Effect of justice in complaint handling on customer loyalty: Evidence from Egypt. Global Journal of Business Research, 9(3), 1–14. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2664289

82.

Torres-Harding

S. R.

Siers

Olson

B. D.

(2012). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Social Justice Scale (SJS). American Journal of Community Psychology, 50(1–2), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-011-9478-2

83.

Tyler

T. R.

Boeckmann

R. J.

Smith

H. J.

Huo

Y. J.

(2019). Social justice in a diverse society. Routledge. https://books.google.com.tw/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=sAeiDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT9&dq=Social+justice+in+a+diverse+society&ots=ohemKxa2vW&sig=kHtuZ05kKDJm584sao45esuqWUU&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Social%20justice%20in%20a%20diverse%20society&f=false

84.

U.K. travelers stranded by quarantine hotel shortage. (2021, December 4). Africanews. https://www.africanews.com/2021/12/04/uk-travellers-stranded-by-quarantine-hotel-shortage/

85.

Ursachi

Horodnic

I. A.

Zait

(2015). How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 679–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00123-9

86.

Walker

Moscardo

(2014). Encouraging sustainability beyond the tourist experience: Ecotourism, interpretation and values. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(8), 1175–1196. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.918134

87.

Wang

Juslin

(2011). The effects of value on the perception of corporate social responsibility implementation: A study of Chinese youth. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(4), 246–262.https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.250

88.

Sturman

M. C.

Wang

(2013). The motivational effects of pay fairness: A longitudinal study in Chinese star-level hotels. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 54(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965512471891

89.

Wang

(2008). The impact of organizational justice on employees’ pay satisfaction, work attitudes and performance in Chinese hotels. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 7(2), 181–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332840802156923

90.

Xie

Bagozzi

R. P.

Grønhaug

(2019). The impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer brand advocacy: The role of moral emotions, attitudes, and individual differences. Journal of Business Research, 95, 514–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.043

91.

Xie

Nozawa

Yagi

Fujii

Managi

(2019). Do environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance? Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(2), 286–300. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2224

92.

Xiong

King

(2014). Where is the love? Investigating multiple membership and hotel customer loyalty. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(4), 572–592. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-03-2013-0141