Paper Type
Complete
Paper Number
PACIS2026-1993
Description
Digital technologies create new forms of corporate misconduct that compromise information integrity and complicate accountability. This study examines how digital misconduct shapes reputational dynamics and stakeholder responses. Study 1 analyzes RepRisk firm-month data from 2011–2020, using event-time trajectories and two-way fixed-effects distributed-lag models. The results show that reputational consequences unfold dynamically and differ across privacy violations, misleading communication, and greenwashing. Privacy violations generate the most sustained reputational risk elevation, consistent with their direct threat to personal information control. Study 2 uses a 3×2 investor experiment to test stakeholder-level responses. Psychological discomfort mediates the effect of misconduct on investment intention and negative word-of-mouth, while AI versus human accountability framing conditions these responses. The findings advance research on digital misconduct, reputational adjustment, and accountability in digitally mediated environments.
Recommended Citation
Kim, Jooyoung, "When Digital Misconduct Becomes Reputational Risk: Evidence from Firms and Stakeholders" (2026). PACIS 2026 Proceedings. 15.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2026/ai_ethic/ai_ethic/15
When Digital Misconduct Becomes Reputational Risk: Evidence from Firms and Stakeholders
Digital technologies create new forms of corporate misconduct that compromise information integrity and complicate accountability. This study examines how digital misconduct shapes reputational dynamics and stakeholder responses. Study 1 analyzes RepRisk firm-month data from 2011–2020, using event-time trajectories and two-way fixed-effects distributed-lag models. The results show that reputational consequences unfold dynamically and differ across privacy violations, misleading communication, and greenwashing. Privacy violations generate the most sustained reputational risk elevation, consistent with their direct threat to personal information control. Study 2 uses a 3×2 investor experiment to test stakeholder-level responses. Psychological discomfort mediates the effect of misconduct on investment intention and negative word-of-mouth, while AI versus human accountability framing conditions these responses. The findings advance research on digital misconduct, reputational adjustment, and accountability in digitally mediated environments.
Comments
03-EthicsSocietalImpact