Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate consumer motivation to maintain brand attachment when faced with brand transgressions. This study investigated consumer motivation to maintain brand attachment when faced with brand transgressions.

This study consisted of two experiments using student participants (n1 = 383 and n2 = 535) who examined how, from a customer prioritization strategy, perceived value- and image-based transgressions affect the motivation to maintain brand attachment and subsequent behaviors. Hypotheses were developed and tested using moderating mediation models that included attribution of blame and perceived threat.

Value- and image-based transgressions interacted to affect the motivation to maintain brand attachment and the consequent behavioral intentions among consumers with strong brand attachment. Generally, the interaction had a negative effect on motivation to maintain brand attachment; however, this effect was mediated through perceived threat and moderated by attributions of blame. Depending on the level of motivation to maintain brand attachment and the attribution of blame for the brand transgression (the brand, self- or noncontrollable factors), participants reflected different behavioral intentions: reengagement, contention and/or avoidance. Overall, severe value-based transgression coupled with absence (vs presence) of image-based transgression were perceived more threatening by consumers with strong brand attachment leading to lower motivation to maintain attachment and higher intentions to dissolve the relationship.

Little is known about the conditions that increase or decrease the motivation of strongly attached consumers to maintain their attachment. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to explore the potential effects of brand transgressions on the motivation to maintain brand attachment and the consequent behavioral intentions stemming from perceived transgressions.

This commentary accompanies Clare et al.’s study investigating psychotropic drug prescribing for adults with intellectual disability who were referred to specialist community learning disability teams in the east of England. The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the background to psychotropic drug prescribing for people with intellectual disability, review important contextual factors that influence prescribing decisions, and consider how we might make the best use of psychotropic drugs in this group.

Narrative summary and opinion, supported by reference to recent research literature.

Psychotropic drug use for people with intellectual disability raises complex issues, not least because of the lack of research evidence that exists on the topic. Psychotropic drugs can be an important part of treatment for people with mental illness but further research is needed to support prescribing for challenging behaviour. Medication optimisation is a framework within which individual preferences and values are considered alongside the evidence base and clinical judgement in order to inform safe, effective, and collaborative management decisions.

Prescribing decisions should be individualised and reviewed regularly, incorporating evidence from patients and carers. Improving the use of psychotropic medication requires concerted action, adequate social support, and the provision of alternative, non-pharmacological interventions that are acceptable and effective.

This paper reviews some of the current concerns about the use of psychotropic drugs and opens up new avenues of discussion.

Accumulating evidence suggests that individualism provides an atmosphere conducive to creative idea generation. However, research in both cross-cultural and social psychology suggests that individualism may reflect either independence or competition; a distinction that has been overlooked in research on group creativity. In this chapter, we highlight the distinction between these two constructs and develop a series of testable propositions that help distinguish their unique effects on the creative process. In doing so, we uncover several theoretical insights, including the possibility that independence and competition (a) are theoretically and empirically distinct, (b) have differential effects on idea generation, (c) have similar effects on idea selection but through different mechanisms, and (d) may interact to stimulate group creativity. We conclude by suggesting methodological approaches to disentangling these constructs in future research.

Scholarship on the state control of social movements has predominately focused on overt repression, resulting in comparatively less attention to more covert forms of control. Researchers have suggested that government surveillance of social movement organizations (SMOs) has become increasingly widespread and routinized in the post-September 11, 2001 era, but this hypothesis has remained untested. Since contemporary surveillance is grounded in a logic of information gathering that has diffused across law enforcement agencies since the September 11 attacks, government actors now cast a wide net and monitor a large variety of groups. This study shows that a result, traditional factors predicting surveillance, such as contentious behavior, have less explanatory power. Using a database of 409 SMOs active in Philadelphia between January 1996 and October 2009, the research asked who and why particular groups are monitored by the Pennsylvania Office of Homeland Security (PA-OHS) between November 2009 and September 2010. Bayesian logistic regression analysis is used to examine the variables predicting surveillance. Findings show that 23% of the SMOs in the sample were targets of surveillance. Organizational ideology was the strongest predictor and there was little evidence that history of contentious protests or previous conflict with the police influenced coming under surveillance. However, groups with less visibility in traditional media sources were more likely to be monitored.

The current study examined the effects of gender and motivation on negotiation strategy and outcome. It was hypothesized that findings suggesting that women obtain lower joint outcomes from integrative bargaining than men may result from women, but not men, entering negotiation settings with a high level of concern for the other's outcomes. Drawing on the dual concern model of Pruitt and his colleagues, it was predicted that situationally induced high self‐concern would result in high joint outcomes for female dyads—ay high as those for male dyads under any conditions. Male dyads were expected to require situationally‐induced self‐ and other‐concern to reach optimal joint outcomes. Where there was no situationally induced concern for either self or other, male dyads were expected to obtain higher joint outcomes than female dyads. Results from dyads bargaining in a laboratory setting were generally supportive of predictions, except that men tended to do well but for where other‐concern alone had been situationally induced. Discrepant findings are discussed in terms of the generally low level of antagonism present in these dyads.

Do accommodative or integrative components make contentious conflict behavior more effective? A questionnaire study shows that Japanese subordinates (N = 136) handle interpersonal conflicts with superiors more effectively to the extent that they complement high contending with high accommodating. By contrast, prior research shows that high contending by Dutch subordinates and superiors is more effective if complemented with high integrating. Together, these findings support the notion that the most effective conglomeration of contending with other components of conflict behavior is society‐specific.

To enhance the quality of group decision making, to promote affective acceptance of decisions by all participants involved, or to increase joint outcomes, a principal party or a third party may stimulate social conflict. We argue that when conflict focuses on identity issues, when tension level is high, and when disputants' goals are negatively interdependent, conflict stimulation generally decreases joint performance. However, conflict stimulation enhances performance when conflict focuses on task issues, when tension level is low, and when disputants' goals are positively interdependent. We conclude by arguing that conflict may be stimulated either by creating or extending conflict issues, or by promoting contentious conflict behaviors.

Purpose – Although extensive research shows that power affects negotiator performance, few efforts have been made to investigate how status conflict among negotiators affects negotiation. This chapter addresses this limitation and explores the question that when groups experience status conflict while simultaneously conducting negotiations, how this status conflict affects negotiator behavior and negotiation outcome.

Approach – We define three basic forms of status contest and develop 12 propositions about the impact of status conflict on between-group negotiator behavior and negotiation outcome.

Findings – We propose that when negotiating with an outgroup, negotiators who experience within-group status conflict will use the outgroup to increase their status within group by demonstrating their value to their own group. In the situation of wholly within-group status conflict and within-group negotiation, individual negotiators will use group concern to gain status. This group concern leads to more value-creating behaviors, but lessens the likelihood of reaching an agreement. When groups experience intergroup status conflict alongside intergroup negotiation, the likelihood of agreement, and the likelihood of integrative agreement, decreases and this is due to an increase in contentiousness.

Value – This chapter suggests that status conflict is an important, albeit neglected, aspect of negotiation and it can affect the outcome of the negotiation. Greater research attention toward status conflict in negotiation should help to improve negotiation effectiveness and the quality of agreements.

How does state repression influence levels of mobilization in authoritarian regimes? This study argues that the relationship between repression and protest is temporally dynamic. Specifically, the short- and long-term effects of autocrats' coercive actions differ conditionally on each phase of the contentious cycle. This argument is tested taking advantage of an original database of protest events in Pinochet's Chile between 1982 and 1989. Using an Interrupted Time Series design, the results show that the State of Siege declarations issued in 1984 and again in 1986 had divergent short- and long-term influence. When the cycle was on an expansive stage, the State of Siege shows no immediate influence on the protests, followed by an increase in long-term mobilization. However, when the mobilization was declining, the State of Siege was associated with an immediate and prominent drop in mobilization, followed by a progressive decrease in the number of protests over the long term. This chapter contributes to the literature on the protest–repression nexus by providing new evidence on the dynamics shaping the relationship between state repression and civil disobedience in authoritarian regimes.

This study aims to investigate how and to what extent structural network properties affect dyadic negotiation behavior in tourism destination ecosystems. Specifically, this study addresses negotiation behavior in terms of problem-solving and contending, because these two key strategies reflect the integrative and distributive aspects of dyadic interactions.

This study relies on network data and dyadic survey data from nine mountain tourism destinations in Southeastern Norway. The structural network properties the authors research are triadic closure – the extent to which a dyad has common ties to other actors – and structural equivalence – the similarities in networking patterns that capture firms’ competition for similar resources. In addition, the authors also study a possible effect of relationship duration on negotiation behavior.

Triadic closure and relationship duration have positive effects on problem-solving, and structural equivalence tends to decrease problem-solving, although the effect is inconsistent; none of these three independent variables was found to affect contending negotiation behavior.

This study shows that a dyad’s structural network embeddedness has implications for negotiation behavior. Further research is encouraged to develop this theoretical perspective.

This study is a pioneering investigation of how structural network properties affect dyadic negotiation behavior in ongoing coproducing relationships in real-world destination ecosystems.