Search results

Studies have shown that negative publicity adversely affects brand trust, but exactly how brand trust can be damaged remains poorly understood. This study aims to explore how negative publicity influences image congruity and, subsequently, brand trust. In addition, the study also examined the effectiveness of two corporate strategies to repair both congruity and trust.

Based on a valid sample of 522 Chinese consumers between the ages 20 and 50, this study adopted a quasi-experimental design involving two types of negative publicity (performance- and value-related) and two initial corporate repair strategies (compensation and public apology) intended to repair brand trust.

Negative publicity shaped brand trust through both functional congruity and self-congruity. Moreover, the type of negative publicity affected the role of image congruity in brand trust. The effectiveness of repair strategies further depended on the type of negative publicity.

Mobile phones were an appropriate focal product for this research, but examining only one product category may limit findings’ generalizability. Negative emotions such as frustration or anger and their relationships with congruity can also be addressed in future work. Subsequent research can additionally consider more conditions to explore alternative routes of processing related to brand trust.

Brand trust is a vulnerable brand asset on which negative publicity can have seriously negative consequences. Marketers and brand managers should assess the extent to which negative publicity can damage image congruity and brand trust and come up with different repair strategies subsequently.

This study contributes to the limited and fragmented literature on consumers’ evaluations of negative information. Findings offer fresh insight into the impacts of negative publicity on image congruity and brand trust. The implications extend beyond negative publicity to other forms of negative information, such as rumors, fake news and negative word of mouth. Results also highlight the importance of adopting appropriate repair strategies to restore consumers’ trust in the event of negative publicity.

This research aims to systematically explore the cognitive and emotional effects of values-related and performance-related negative brand publicity and investigate how the psychological effects translate into different behavioural outcomes. In addition, it examines the relative effectiveness of two major brand response strategies in mitigating negative publicity.

Two experimental studies were conducted to test the hypotheses. Study 1 examines the effects of values- and performance-related negative brand publicity, using a 3 (negative brand publicity: values-related vs performance-related vs control) × 2 (brand: Dove vs Axe) between-subjects experiment. Study 2 further compares the effects of two major brand response strategies on consumers’ post-crisis perceived trustworthiness and trust and responses towards a brand involved in negative publicity. A 2 (negative brand publicity: values-related vs performance-related) × 2 (brand response strategy: reduction-of-offensiveness vs corrective action) between-subjects design was used.

The results suggest that values-related negative brand publicity is perceived as being more diagnostic and elicits a stronger emotion of contempt, but a weaker emotion of pity than performance-related negative brand publicity. Moreover, values-related negative brand publicity has a stronger negative impact on consumer responses than performance-related negative brand publicity. Interestingly, compared to perceived diagnosticity of information and the emotion of pity, the emotion of contempt is more likely to cause differences in consumer responses to these two types of negative brand publicity. Regarding brand response strategy, corrective action is more effective than reduction-of-offensiveness for both types of negative brand publicity, but the advantage of corrective action is greater for the performance-related case.

This research enriches the negative publicity and brand perception literature, showing the asymmetric cognitive, emotional and behavioural effects of values- and performance-related negative brand publicity. It also identifies the psychological mechanisms underlying consumer responses to negative brand publicity, and it provides empirical evidence for the relative effectiveness of two major brand response strategies.

The purpose of this study is to study the impact of relationship marketing orientation (RMO) and relationship quality on customers' commitment and pro-marketer behavior (positive word of mouth and external attribution) after negative brand publicity by using the combined lens of relationship marketing theory and the theory of cognitive dissonance.

A survey was conducted among banking customers in India using an online questionnaire. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling and the bootstrapping procedure using the SPSS process macro.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, findings of this study suggest that RMO and relationship quality are positively correlated to commitment even after negative publicity. The path between RMO, relationship quality and pro-provider behavior is found to be mediated by commitment. This indirect path is moderated by customers' cognitive dissonance arising out of the negative publicity.

The study establishes the combined roles of RMO and relationship quality in pre-empting the detrimental effects of negative brand publicity. Further, it establishes interactions of cognitive dissonance with these relationship variables, thereby bringing together literature from relationship marketing theory and cognitive dissonance theory.

The purpose of this research is to understand the relationship between publicity, advertising activity and corporate sales in the context of a company’s existing reputation.

The study brings together four unique industry datasets and uses discriminant analysis and multiple regression methods to examine the relationship between existing corporate reputation, publicity, advertising activity and sales levels for major multi-national companies in the technology products sector.

Positive publicity is most important in distinguishing between firms with higher and lower sales. The effects of negative publicity and advertising are dependent on a firm’s existing reputation. For companies with weaker reputations, positive publicity in tandem with business-to-consumer (B2C) advertising is most highly associated with higher company sales. Conversely, for firms with stronger existing reputations, advertising has a significantly diminished role; positive and even negative publicity are most crucial in distinguishing between companies with high and low sales. Negative publicity can be harmful to these firms though if it is not balanced by more positive publicity. Finally, the topic of news coverage is related to sales. Generally, stories that are positive reporting on business outcomes, leadership and business future and marketing practices are most important in discriminating between firms with stronger vs weaker sales.

For this set of technology product firms, publicity and advertising are relevant for sales. Firms with higher levels of sales have both more positive and negative publicity, but the volume of positive stories is much higher. Attracting negative publicity is common for firms that achieve higher sales, but it is offset by a greater number of positive stories, an aspect that public relations efforts can influence. B2C advertising spending meanwhile matters more for firms with weaker rather than stronger existing corporate reputations. It is most effective for firms with weaker existing reputations to maximize the positive signals in the marketplace as exemplified by positive publicity and B2C advertising efforts.

Little research has examined the relationship between different forms of corporate communications and sales; this study is a rare examination using publicity, advertising spending, existing reputation and sales in a durable goods and services context where there has been a particular dearth of even basic advertising studies. Beyond understanding the relative importance of publicity v. advertising, it also uniquely focuses on the individual topics of news publicity.

This study aims to understand the influence of negative publicity on brand image, brand attitude and brand purchase intention. Specifically, the study examines the role of attribution (or brand blame) and information characteristics in Chinese consumers’ responses to negative publicity.

The study used a quasi-experimental approach involving two negative publicity scenarios (mild and high severity) and a sample of 203 young and educated Chinese consumers. Partial least squares was used to test the hypotheses.

A common assumption is that negative brand information has a negative influence on all aspects of a brand. However, this study finds that brand blame and information severity have differential effects on consumer evaluations of the affected brand. Specifically, brand blame negatively impacted attitudes and purchase intentions, but not brand image. In contrast, information severity negatively impacted brand image, but not attitudes or intentions. Further, the relations between brand image and brand attitudes and intentions depended on the level of information severity. In the mild-severity condition, brand image positively influenced attitudes and intentions, but not in the high-severity condition.

Future research should examine consumer responses to negative publicity across different media and product categories. Cross-cultural studies should also be explored in the future.

When a brand encounters negative publicity, its marketer or brand manager should assess to what extent various brand equity components are influenced by negative publicity before adopting any cognitive-based or imagery-based communication strategies.

This paper contributes to the limited and fragmented literature on consumer response to negative publicity by examining the impact of consumer’s attributions of blame to the brand under conditions of mild and severe negative information on a range of important brand-related outcomes. Specifically, the authors find that negative publicity has a different impact on brand image, brand attitudes and intentions to purchase. The authors suggest that brand managers use this information to guide their marketing communications.

The exposure of recruitment discrimination often leads to negative publicity, which can substantially affect organizational attractiveness and the behavioral intentions of stakeholders. Therefore, this study aims to examine the relationship between negative publicity and intention to pursue a job, with organizational attractiveness as a mediator and perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate product quality (CPQ) as two moderators.

A survey completed by 382 college students in three universities in Nanjing, China, was used to empirically test the research hypotheses. The respondents were asked their intention to apply for a job at Meituan after the exposure of its recruitment discrimination scandal in 2017.

Perceived negative publicity negatively influences intention to pursue employment via organizational attractiveness. In addition, moderated path analysis indicated that perceived CSR strengthens and perceived CPQ weakens the direct effect of perceived negative publicity on organizational attractiveness and its indirect effect on intention to pursue employment.

Future research should seek to replicate these findings in other contexts and populations, including people who are not new to the job market and to control additional firm-level and contextual variables.

This research confirms a moderated mediation model positioning organizational attractiveness as a mediator of negative publicity's effects on intention to pursue employment and organizational image as a moderator of such effects. This study also contributes to the debate concerning the effect of corporate image by demonstrating opposing effects of its different dimensions amid a discrimination scandal.

The impact of negative publicity on health services organizations can be severe and wide ranging. Being able to cope effectively with, and minimize, the impact of negative publicity should be an important consideration for all care providers. Reviews the typical causes of negative publicity and then offers suggestions and direction for dealing constructively with this far‐reaching problem.

Based on the framing theory and the associative network theory, the purpose of this paper is to develop and test a model that examines the impact of employing corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication in apology statements after negative publicity. Specifically, this study examines the role of CSR fit and CSR history in reducing anger and negative word-of-mouth (NWOM). This study also examines whether perceived CSR motivation and skepticism toward the apology statement mediate the effect of CSR fit and CSR history on anger and NWOM.

This study was a 2×2 between-subject design manipulating CSR fit (high or low) and CSR history (long or short).

The findings of this study suggest that strategically employing CSR communication in an apology statement after negative publicity may reduce negative consumer reactions.

The effects of CSR history and CSR fit have been studied in different contexts, but the effects of mentioning the two components in terms of apology statements had been understudied. This paper fulfills an identified need to study how employing CSR communication in apology statements after negative publicity can mitigate negative audience reactions.

The goal of this paper is to understand the relationship between advertising spending and the volume and valence of publicity, and assessments of corporate brands (opinion, value and reputation).

Two studies examine major multi‐national companies as brands by bringing together five unique industry datasets to understand the connection between the assessments of the corporate brand and marketing communication activity. Discriminant analysis is used to study the differential impact of advertising and publicity on corporate brand attitude and value.

Publicity and advertising volume are important drivers in differentiating between firms with lower and higher brand evaluations. Overall, publicity valence, in and of itself, had little effect outside of the volume of positive and negative stories. Further, the role of prior corporate reputation works in conjunction and has unique effects that influence the communication activities of firms with high and low brand attitudes and value. The valence of publicity matters least for firms with strong prior reputations. Instead volume dominates for these firms. For lower reputation firms, the mix of communication that distinguishes stronger and weaker performance is more complex with both publicity valence and publicity and ad volume playing slightly different roles in the two studies.

The findings suggest that companies with different levels of brand evaluation (opinion and value) have distinct marketing communication profiles which can be labelled communication footprints. Further, this relationship is moderated by prior corporate reputation. Firms seeking to change stakeholder evaluations must pay particular attention to both the overall volume of publicity received, as well as the ratio of positive to negative publicity volume. Advertising spending plays an important supportive role in these evaluations.

The study adds to the understanding of the communication signals that influence corporate branding. Specifically, it brings together a unique set of industry data to investigate the influence of marketing communication activities on brand opinion and value. Further, the findings contribute to the discussion of the role that company publicity and volume play in developing the corporate brand.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to understanding the effects of framing apology statements with corporate social responsibility (CSR) communications after a company has suffered negative publicity. Specifically, this study examined the role of CSR fit on consumers’ skepticism toward the apology statement and attitude toward the company compared to a no-CSR message condition. In addition, the study also analyzed the interaction effects between CSR fit and history on skepticism toward the apology statement and attitude toward the company.

A 2 (CSR fit: high or low) × 2 (CSR history: long or short) between-subject design was employed to examine the hypotheses. In addition, a no-CSR message group without any mention of CSR activities was included. To test the hypothesized constructs of main interest (i.e. CSR fit and CSR history) and incremental validity in the same set of model equations, this study used a hierarchical regression approach.

The high CSR fit condition led to less skepticism toward the apology statement and a more positive attitude toward the company than the no-CSR message condition did. The low CSR fit condition, in contrast, led to more skepticism toward the apology statement and a less positive attitude toward the company than the no-CSR message condition did. In addition, the results showed that the interaction effects between CSR fit and history will predict skepticism toward the apology statement and attitude toward the company.

There is little research on the effectiveness of high (congruent) and low (incongruent) CSR fit compared to a no-CSR message condition. To address this gap, this paper compared the effectiveness of the two conditions to a no-CSR condition.