Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate differences in consumer reactions to high- versus low-equity brands in terms of consumer attitude toward the brand, involvement with the brand, company credibility and consumer purchase intentions.

Experimental procedure is conducted to test three hypotheses using 317 consumer participants. The experiment is carried out comparing a high-equity personal computer (PC) brand and a low-equity PC brand involved in product-harm crisis.

The results indicate that, in the case of product-harm crisis, negative consumer perceptions regardless of brand equity level; less negative perceptions for a high-equity brand than for a low-equity brand; and smaller loss in consumer perceptions for a high-equity brand than for a low-equity brand.

The findings highlight the importance of brand equity in crisis management explained by covariation theory of attributions.

Although product-harm crisis is inevitable for many firms, continuous investment in brand equity can mitigate the negative consequences.

Product-harm crisis can pose serious consequences for firms on both financial and intangible dimensions. Given the occurrence of numerous product-harm crises involving both reputable and less known brands, it is important to consider potential influences of brand equity on consumer reactions to such crisis.

This article aims to examine differences between older and younger consumers in their reactions to a product harm crisis. Research suggests that motivational and cognitive changes due to aging might cause information to be differentially utilized. The authors use primary and secondary control influences on information processing to explain why older consumers perceive themselves as less susceptible to the threats associated with a product harm crisis. This has important implications in terms of blame attributions, and marketing variables of interest such as purchase intentions and negative word of mouth.

Two studies were conducted in which participants were asked to read a short newspaper article about a product harm crisis and to respond to a series of questions. Participants were split into two groups based on age.

The empirical findings indicate that, compared with younger consumers, older consumers perceive product harm crises as less threatening, place less blame on the company, and have stronger intentions to purchase and recommend the product involved in the crisis.

The finding that the more physically vulnerable older population actually perceives themselves as less vulnerable to harm suggests that socially responsible companies should work harder to make older consumers aware of risks created by product harm crises when dealing with this increasingly important target market.

This research advances our understanding of differences between older and younger consumers, and adds another dimension to what it means to embrace the true essence of corporate social responsibility with regard to older consumers.

Although international product-harm crises have become more common, the influence of the country image (CI) associated with foreign goods in such crises remains under researched. This study aims to investigate the extent to which the CI of a foreign made product influences consumers’ attribution of blame and trust and, ultimately, their future purchase intentions after the product is involved in a crisis.

A 2 (country) × 3 (crisis type) quasi experimental design was used, with data collected from Australia (n = 375) and China (n = 401).

CI can influence attribution of blame, subsequent levels of trust and likely purchase intentions. Australian and Chinese consumers have different views when it comes to trusting a company or placing blame, depending on the country of origin or the type of crisis. The direct and positive effect of CI on consumer purchase intentions following a product-harm crisis is sequentially mediated by attribution of blame and trust. Trust is the most powerful influence on future purchase intentions in both samples.

In this research, only one type of crisis response strategy (no comment) was used. Thus, the results of this study must be viewed with caution when considering outcomes relating to other response options. Additionally, the testing was limited to only two samples, focussing on three countries (England, China, Vietnam), and one product context using a hypothetical brand. Further, despite our reasonable sample size (N = 776), the number of respondents represented in each cell would still be considered a limitation overall.

When developing crisis response strategies, managers should take into account the influence of a positive/negative source CI in driving attribution and trust. To minimize the impact of crisis on future purchasing decisions, organizations can leverage positive biases and mitigate negative ones, aiming to maintain or restore trust as a priority.

The study provides cross-country understanding about the significant role of CI during a product-harm crisis in relation to subsequent consumers’ blame attribution, their trust in the focal organization and ultimately their future purchase intentions.

Actual product-harm crises pose significant challenges to firms, but so can defaming product-harm crises, which are defined as crises caused by false or malicious rumors made by consumers or competing firms. Unlike typical product-harm crises, in defaming product-harm crises, the truth often emerges only after substantial damage has been done to the victim firm. Thus, crisis management strategies in these two cases may be different. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Using a defaming product-harm crisis that involved two competing firms, this paper examines how the firms changed their advertising strategies and how the changes affected consumers’ online search behavior regarding the two firms.

The analyses show that after the crisis, the offending firm sensitively reacted to its own and the victim firm’s advertising levels, but the victim firm did not react to the offending firm’s advertising as it had previously. The effectiveness of advertising on consumers’ online search weakened for both firms after the crisis.

The paper provides a new insight about marketing strategies and their effectiveness in the product-harm crisis literature.

Product harm crises are becoming increasingly common, and recent examples include Toyota and Vioxx. This chapter examines country differences that impact consumer blame attributions for an ambiguous product harm crisis, and proposes a framework for a crisis response strategy. The first step involves assessing the level of uncertainty avoidance and crisis severity which serve as an indicator of the urgency felt by consumers to assess blame. The second step involves examining consumer beliefs and information processing biases to determine who consumers will most likely blame in order to resolve the uncertainty. Based on information gathered from these steps, a crisis response strategy is suggested for global brand managers.

Brands facing a crisis have to decide whether to disclose crisis-related information themselves or to wait and take the risk that a third party breaks the news. While brands might benefit from self-disclosing the information, it is likely that the impact of crisis communication on customers’ evaluation of the brand depends on the type of crisis. This study aims to investigate the influence of type of crisis on the relationshp between disclosure and brand outcomes.

A 2 × 2 between-subjects experiment with 180 Dutch participants was conducted.

Results show that self-disclosure of a negative incident positively affects consumers’ attitude, trust and purchase intention compared to third-party disclosure. Additionally, disclosure and crisis type interact. In times of a product-harm crisis, self-disclosure does not represent an advantage to third party disclosure, while in times of a moral-harm crisis disclosure by the brand is able to maintain customers’ positive attitude towards and trust in the brand compared to disclosure by a third party. Moreover, blame attribution mediates the effect of crisis type on brand evaluations.

Recent research indicates that self-disclosing crisis information instead of waiting until thunder strikes has beneficial effects for a brand in times of crisis. However, these studies use the context of product-harm crises, which neglects the possible impact of moral-harm crises. Furthermore, this study adds the impact of blame attributions as a mediator in this context.

This paper aims to explore whether products branded with handwritten scripts suffer more from the effects of product-harm crises than other brands. Most studies on handwritten scripts focus on their positive effects, such as humanizing a product or creating an emotional tie with consumers. However, seldom have researchers investigated the negative effects of handwritten scripts. This paper goes some way to filling this gap.

Five experimental studies were conducted to test three hypotheses. These experiments provide evidence of the negative effects of handwritten scripts. In addition, they reveal the mechanisms that lead to these outcomes and outline the boundary conditions of the negative effects.

Framed by attribution theory, three conclusions can be drawn from the experiments: when a product-harm crisis occurs, consumers react with greater negativity toward the brand using handwritten scripts than to those using machine typefaces. The negative effect is explained by a serial mediation process that follows the pattern: typeface → perceived humanization → brand responsibility → brand attitude. The negative effect decreases when the crisis is perceived to be an accident.

This paper enriches the theory of marketing in terms of both handwritten scripts and product-harm crises, providing valuable guidance for enterprises that use handwritten scripts in their marketing activities.

Product‐harm crises have become an almost familiar phenomenon in today's business environment as technology becomes more vulnerable. Even if a product‐harm crisis is associated with the company that manufactured the defective product, the entire industry may be affected. Not only consumers of the affected company, but also consumers of competitors are affected by the crisis. The paper seeks to deal mainly with the situation of competitors and examines the potential opportunities and threats that may arise when another company in the same industry faces a product‐harm crisis.

For the purposes of this paper, an experiment was conducted that relied on four important influential factors of crisis management (i.e. corporate reputation, crisis scope, external effects, and organisational responses). The crisis was described through a hypothetical scenario. Consumer attitudes towards competitive products were used to determine impending prospects and threats.

The paper's results demonstrate that consumers are very receptive in buying competitor brands, especially when the extent of the crisis was medium or high and the company involved in the crisis had shown low levels of social responsibility.

Previous research studies on crisis management mainly focus on the affected company and how it confronted the crisis. The paper approaches crisis management from the competitor's perspective. Because a crisis may influence the entire sector, adequate preparation and effective crisis management skills are essential assets for competitors.

Investigates the conventional wisdom concerning consumer responses associated with product defect during a product‐harm crisis. Reports on an experiment relying primarily on three generally recognized factors: company′s reputation, external effects from regulatory agencies and the press, and organizational responses. Shows that over‐reliance on these areas may mask hidden variables which can prove counterproductive to crisis abatement.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate “how” and “when” the stereotypes of competence and warmth, that are evoked by a foreign company’s country-of-origin (COO), affect blame attributions and/or attitudes toward a company’s products when a company is involved in a product-harm crisis.

Study 1 (n=883) analyzes the psychological mechanisms through which perceived COO competence and warmth differently affect blame attributions and evaluative responses. Study 2 (n=1,640) replicates Study 1’s findings, and it also investigates how consumer ethnocentrism, animosity toward a country, and product category characteristics moderate the hypothesized COO’s effects.

COO competence leads to more favorable attitudes toward the involved company’s products. This effect increases when the company sells high-involvement or utilitarian products. COO warmth leads to more favorable attitudes toward the involved company’s products directly as well as indirectly by diminishing blame attributions. These effects increase when consumers are highly ethnocentric, or the animosity toward a foreign country is high.

This paper frames the investigation of COO stereotypes in a new theoretical and empirical setting, specifically, a product-harm crisis. It demonstrates that consumers differently evaluate a potential wrongdoing company and its harmful products in a product-harm crisis based on their perceptions of a company’s COO competence and warmth. Finally, it defines the moderating effects of individual, consumer-country-related and product characteristics on the hypothesized COO effects.