This study aims to examine how perceived brand authenticity (PBA) shapes consumers’ evaluation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and brand attitude (BA) through corporate reputation (CR). Using a signalling-theory lens grounded in corporate communications, we position PBA as an upstream credibility cue that frames later messages. We test whether CR and perceived CSR authenticity (PCSRA) mediate the PBA–BA link and consider the boundary conditions under which CSR authenticity matters. The paper responds to calls to clarify sequencing and credibility frames in CSR communication, explaining why similar CSR messages succeed or fail across brands.

A cross-sectional online survey (N = 271 Czech consumers) asked respondents to evaluate a familiar global brand (McDonald’s, IKEA and The North Face). Validated scales measured PBA, CR (RepTrak™), PCSRA and BA. We estimated a signalling-theory model using Hayes’s PROCESS (Model 6) with 5,000 bootstrap samples, testing three indirect paths (via CR, via PCSRA and serially via CR → PCSRA). Reliability, convergent and/or discriminant validity and CFA fit indices met recommended thresholds. The design isolates whether authenticity’s effects on attitudes are transmitted through reputation and/or corporate social responsibility authenticity.

PBA positively predicted BA. CR was the only significant mediator of the PBA–BA relationship; the PCSRA-only path and the serial path PBA → CR → PCSRA → BA were not significant. PBA and CR positively predicted PCSRA, indicating that prior authenticity and reputation shape sincerity judgements of CSR claims and/or CSR communication; PCSRA showed only a modest direct association with BA and did not significantly mediate the PBA–BA relationship. Results support hierarchical processing: early authenticity cues build reputational capital that frames CSR reception. Managerially, sequencing matters – reputation-building should precede high-profile CSR communication.

Cross-sectional data limit causal inference; longitudinal and experimental replications should test temporal sequencing. The single-country sample and three well-known brands constrain generalisability. CR was measured with a global RepTrak™ scale; multidimensional reputation measures could separate CSR-related from non-CSR facets and reduce conceptual overlap with PCSRA. Omitted covariates (e.g. CSR scepticism and CSR awareness) and possible brand-level heterogeneity warrant attention. Future work should manipulate brand–cause fit and motive attributions, include behavioural outcomes (e.g. WOM and purchase) and employ multi-group or single-brand designs.

The study reverses the common causal framing by placing brand authenticity upstream of CSR authenticity and modelling corporate reputation as an active interpretive frame rather than a mere outcome. It integrates signalling theory with corporate communications to test multi-stage message processing (PBA → CR → PCSRA → BA) and shows that CR, not PCSRA, mediates authenticity’s impact on attitudes. The work clarifies when CSR authenticity matters (conditional on fit and motive attributions) and offers actionable guidance on message sequencing, helping communicators design credible CSR strategies anchored in authentic brand-reputation foundations.