Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41174700›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2025

Women's views about the use of gendered Corporate Social Responsibility strategies by harmful industries.

Monique Murray, Hannah Pitt, Simone McCarthy, Grace Arnot, Samantha Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Monique MurrayFaculty of Health, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Gheringhap Street, Geelong, Australia.
Hannah PittFaculty of Health, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Gheringhap Street, Geelong, Australia.
Simone McCarthyFaculty of Health, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Gheringhap Street, Geelong, Australia.
Grace ArnotFaculty of Health, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Gheringhap Street, Geelong, Australia.
Samantha ThomasFaculty of Health, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Gheringhap Street, Geelong, Australia. Samantha.thomas@deakin.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCorporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives are part of a suite of marketing and promotional strategies used by industries whose products and/or practices may be harmful to health and equity. These include the tobacco, alcohol, gambling, fossil fuel and pharmaceutical industries. CSR initiatives have included support for gender equity and empowerment initiatives, such as associations with women's organisations and charities, educational activities, and sports. Limited research has qualitatively investigated women's perceptions of these types of gendered CSR initiatives, including their opinions about appropriate public health and policy responses.

methodsThis study sought the opinions of n=506 Australian women, aged 18 years and over. Data was collected through an online qualitative survey. Participants were asked about the CSR strategies of a range of harmful industries, including gendered marketing, sponsorship of women's sport, and support for women's causes. Data were interpreted using a reflexive approach to thematic analysis.

resultsThree themes were constructed from the data. First, while participants acknowledged that CSR was a profit-making tactic used to enhance the image of harmful industries and mitigate reputational risk, they also thought there could be benefits associated with some CSR strategies - particularly related to women's sport. Second, while many women perceived that CSR strategies could positively influence women's views about harmful industries, others felt women needed to take responsibility for engaging with messages from these industries. Finally, while participants supported increased government regulation of harmful industry promotional tactics, they also recommended educational initiatives to expose industry tactics, and increased responsibility from organisations partnering or taking funding from these industries.

conclusionsThe insights from this study contribute to the growing evidence about the influence of the corporate tactics of industries who are harmful to women's health and equity. While mapping and monitoring of marketing tactics are essential in public health arguments for regulatory reform of these practices, this study shows the important role that community opinions play in understanding the impact of these tactics, and public expectations of policy and public health actions to prevent harms. There is broad support for increased government regulation, and independent education initiatives focused on exposing industry tactics. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

Indexed as

Ethics, BusinessGender EquityIndustryMarketingSocial ResponsibilityWomen's HealthAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaFemaleGovernment RegulationHumansLobbyingMiddle AgedCommercial determinants of healthCorporate social responsibilityHarmful industriesMarketingQualitativeWomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID41174700
PMCPMC12577066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.