Search results

When companies face a crisis, they sometimes deliver blame-shifting communications, trying to shift blame onto another actor to protect their reputation. While previous research has considered how different features of the message affect its persuasiveness, little is known about whether specific senders can blame more effectively. This paper aims to contribute to research in this domain through an investigation of the sender’s social perception as a critical moderator to the persuasiveness of blame shifting.

The authors conduct four between-subjects scenario experiments to test the research hypotheses. In each experiment, participants are presented with a realistic crisis scenario and the crisis communications delivered by the company. The authors assess the extent to which perceptions of the sender influence the message’s ability to reduce negative word-of-mouth intentions and to increase purchase intentions.

The authors show that blame shifting is more likely to be effective when deployed by senders that are small (Study 1) or have a positive CSR track record (Study 2). Furthermore, The authors find that even large senders can successfully deploy blame shifting if they can benefit from being known for their CSR programs (Study 3). Finally, the authors show that the effect of blame shifting depends on the receiver’s level of concern about the crisis: stakeholders significantly concerned by the crisis reject blame-shifting communications (Study 4).

Further research should examine the impact of information about brand competence on blame-shifting effectiveness. Further research is also needed to explore sender effects for other defensive crisis communication strategies such as denial or the use of excuses or justifications.

The study offers critical information for marketers considering the use of defensive crisis communications strategies such as blame shifting.

The study extends the understanding of how sender effects influence blame-shifting communications. The analysis allows us to clarify why this strategy is effective for certain senders and certain receivers while, for others, it tends to backfire. Blame shifting backfires for large senders unless they can boast a strong CSR record.

The purpose of the study is to outline the unique role of compassion in reactions to cases of irresponsible corporate behavior that present information about victims of these events. In this study, four antecedents of compassion for the victims of irresponsibility are presented, and a model that explains the consequences of this emotion is tested empirically.

Two studies test the research hypotheses using a mix of experimental and survey research. The effects are tested both in laboratory conditions, where consumers assess a fictitious case of corporate irresponsibility, and through a test of reactions to real online campaigns.

Compassion is one of the drivers of consumers’ anger at the culprit, playing an indirect role in decisions to retaliate against perpetrators. Four key drivers of compassion are identified in the research: the perceived suffering of the victims, the perceived similarity of the victims to the observer, victims’ derogation and the vividness of the description of the victims.

The study offers insights both for campaigners wishing to instigate boycotts and organizations managing complex stakeholder relationships following a crisis. Insights on the role of compassion and its antecedents lead to more effective communications able to heighten or dampen this emotion.

Existing research offers contrasting views on the potential role of compassion in reactions to injustices. This study presents a novel account that clarifies previous findings and extends our knowledge of causes and consequences of compassion.

Past research on cause-related marketing (CRM) suggests that these socially beneficial initiatives are more effective when linked with hedonic than utilitarian products. Little is known, however, about the process underpinning this effect. This paper aims to investigate why and under what circumstances CRM enhances the appeal of hedonic products by testing the mediation of guilt and introducing the moderating role of cause-product fit.

The authors test a model of moderated mediation in two studies. Study 1 shows that the effectiveness of combining CRM with hedonic consumption is explained by the mediating role of feelings of guilt. Study 2 demonstrates that this mediation depends on the level of fit or congruency between the cause and the product.

Results suggest that CRM campaigns offer the opportunity to improve the consumption experiences of hedonic products by reducing the feelings of guilt intrinsically connected with these options. Moreover, fit moderates the emotional processes activated by CRM initiatives. When fit is high, CRM reduces guilt and improves consumers’ experiences when purchasing hedonic alternatives.

The study extends current understanding of how CRM can promote hedonic consumption and contributes further to research on guilt as an emotion able to promote responsible consumption decisions. Moreover, the study introduces and tests the impact of cause-product fit in predicting consumers’ ethical purchase intention. For managers of hedonic brands, the study offers important implications on how to deploy CRM campaigns to foster better customer experiences.

Research on sustainable consumption (SC) has shown how, faced with barriers that prevent them from embracing a sustainable lifestyle, consumers experience classic symptoms of distress. Although distress emerges as a constitutive dimension of sustainable lifestyles, research has not yet provided a comprehensive account of how consumers cope with it. This paper aims to provide such an account.

In-depth interviews were conducted with 25 people who defined themselves as sustainable consumers. A hermeneutic approach was adopted for the analysis.

The analysis shows that consumers enact two different coping strategies: adjustment or episodic coping and structural coping or deradicalization. Both sets encompass reappraisals and meaning-making strategies to maintain motivation while simultaneously appeasing tensions. They also comprise the strategic enactment of emotions to energize the self and/or to appease distress. Coping influences how SC is appraised and lived, as these practices are dynamically changed to navigate structural constraints.

SC campaigns have traditionally focused on cognitive empowerment. However, the evidence suggests that emotional empowerment could be a more effective way to promote the practice.

This paper provides the first in-depth examination of the strategies adopted to cope with distress. The analysis shows that consumers reconfigure how SC is appraised and implemented, while emphasizing the crucial role of emotion work in the coping repertoire. Although SC is stressful due to structural and social constraints, consumers are able to remain committed to it to varying degrees.

Consumer animosity toward a foreign country can affect negatively international brands. Existing international marketing research offers inconsistent accounts of the factors that explain product quality perceptions, negative word of mouth (NWOM) and product avoidance in animosity contexts. This paper aims to demonstrate that such inconsistency is caused by the fact that different explanations apply to different consumer subgroups. Searching for a single solution, thus, leads to erroneous predictions for sizable subgroups of consumers.

The study implements a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to two quantitative surveys examining Chinese consumers’ (n = 476) reactions to Japanese products and American consumers’ (n = 517) reactions to Chinese products.

The analysis yields novel explanations of the outcomes of animosity. Only in some causal configurations reduced quality evaluations explain product avoidance and NWOM, while in others negative behaviors co-exist with positive quality perceptions. Moreover, negative emotions’ role varies across forms of animosity. While anger is often associated with the behavioral outcomes of animosity, fear plays an important role in only a few specific combinations.

General models of animosity need to be complemented with accounts that examine the multiple mechanisms underpinning animosity outcomes.

Marketers should identify which animosity model applies to their consumer segment(s) as different mechanisms require different marketing approaches.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study recognizing that the same animosity outcomes are explained by multiple mechanisms offering a more nuanced picture of the motivations associated with consumer animosity.

The paper aims to propose a new conceptualisation of consumer anger directed against a company.

In this paper, an integrative review of the literature on anger in marketing has been conducted.

Anger at the firm is experienced in two forms: vengeful anger or problem-focused anger. The motivational goals associated with each differentiate between the two types and lead to different relational consequences: vengeful anger implies a desire to hurt the culprit, whereas problem-focused anger solely requires the attainment of a thwarted goal. The two types are associated with different patterns of appraisals, levels of intensity and emotion expression. These differences, documented in the literature, are not universal but shaped by contextual and personal variables. Although marketers conflate these two types of anger under the same label, only vengeful anger represents a threat to marketing relationships, whereas problem-focused anger has positive consequences if managed appropriately.

Studies that examine anger will benefit from a more nuanced understanding of this concept. This paper raises important implications for the measurement of this emotion, as existing scales are not able to measure the goals associated with the two types of anger.

The insights presented help managers form strategies to address consumer anger in contexts such as service failures and/or crisis communications.

The paper extends scholars’ understanding of consumer anger. It offers an improved conceptualisation of this emotion, opening new avenues for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to examine cognitive, emotional, and behavioral reactions caused by online petition campaigns against cases of perceived corporate malpractice, while also contributing to the ongoing debate over the spill-over effects of online activism to offline contexts. A dual pathway model is advanced based on the individual’s motivation to help the people affected by irresponsible corporate behavior and punish the deviant corporation.

Two studies (USA and UK) are used to gather cross-sectional and longitudinal data, which are analyzed using structural equation modeling.

Online petition campaigns relying on the display of victims affected by irresponsible behavior trigger feelings of compassion and anger. While the former leads to campaign support motivated by a desire to help, the latter causes intentions to punish. Intentions to support the petition resulting from this dual pathway influence the actual signing of the petition online and self-reported offline negative word of mouth against the company.

Both identified pathways should be activated by online petition campaigns to increase online support and spreading offline negative word of mouth. To do so, such campaigns need to increase perceptions of unfairness and victim’s similarity, and likeability.

Scant research has examined the psychological processes that explain the effectiveness of online petition campaigns against businesses and the motivations to sign an online petition and engage in subsequent offline behavior. Implications for businesses are also discussed.