Search results

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether negative meanings consumers attribute to a corporation transfer to the endorser and to examine the moderating effects of corporate-specific and product-specific negative meanings on an endorser’s credibility.

Following a protocol designed by Till and Shimp (1998), two experiments were conducted to examine if meaning transfer exists (experiment 1) and if meaning type moderates reverse meaning transfer (experiment 2). A doubly repeated multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to investigate changes in the endorser’s credibility and attitudes toward the brand.

The results revealed that the negative meanings consumers associated with these corporate crises influence consumer perceptions of the endorser as well as attitude toward the brand.

This finding supports the position that meaning type moderates reverse meaning transfer and may explain variances in the literature on the significance of reverse meaning transfer. Based on these findings, brand crises have a negative effect on the endorser’s credibility.

The results lead the authors to suggest that endorsers as well as marketers should closely scrutinize brand partnerships, as the relationship may positively and negatively influence consumer perceptions of the athlete endorser.

Based on the findings from this study, brand managers need to appreciate differences in brand crisis type by tailoring brand image remediation strategies to fit the type(s) of meaning(s) associated with a specific controversy.

The results from the current study add, significantly, to the literature by being the first to evidence that different meanings associated with different types of brand crises produce different attitudes toward the brand.

Recently, Jang and Byon (2020) found that esports recreational gameplay consumption is causally linked to esports online media consumption. In the context of esports, live-streaming content (by individual creators) is a new type of media consumption, which should be distinguished from esports event broadcast. Extending Jang and Byon’s finding, the purpose of this study is to examine the mediating effect of esports content live streaming in the relationship between esports recreational gameplay and esports event broadcast because it allows the games to be more accessible to viewers due to two-way communication. In order to test for stability of the mediating effect of esports live content streaming, we examined the hypothesized model across the three genres (i.e. imagination [n = 224], physical enactment [n = 195], sport simulation [n = 179]).

Data (N = 598) were collected via an online survey from individuals who had experienced esports recreational gameplay. A total of 15 items with five dimensions (i.e. esports recreational gameplay, esports content live streaming, esports event broadcast, streamer identification, and pro-player identification) were adapted from existing studies. The two identification constructs and gender were used as control variables.

The model fit of the measurement model was found to be acceptable via CFA. The results of SEM indicated that the intention of esports content live streaming consumption played a full mediation role in the relationship between esports recreational gameplay behavior and the intention of esports event broadcast consumption. Additionally, we found the mediating effect of esports content live streaming across the three genres.

This study contributes to literature related to the esports consumer behavior by conceptualizing esports content live streaming and found that esports content live streaming represents a mechanism that underlies the relationship between esports recreational gameplay intention and esports event broadcast consumption.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

THE 31st annual meeting of the Library Association passed off very comfortably at Brighton, and if nothing particularly momentous occurred affecting librarianship, everybody enjoyed the various entertainments and the breezy weather. Brighton certainly deserved the title to breeziness which it claims, because it was stormy nearly every night or early morning during the run of the Conference, and members must be congratulated on the lucky manner in which it was found possible to dodge the showers.

EVERYONE interested in the British library movement will learn with sorrow and regret that one of its greatest friends and strongest champions has passed away, in the person of Thomas Greenwood, the kind‐hearted and generous advocate of libraries, who won the respect and regard of every English libiarian. From one of his own periodicals the following particulars are abstracted:—

In order to succeed in an action under the Equal Pay Act 1970, should the woman and the man be employed by the same employer on like work at the same time or would the woman still be covered by the Act if she were employed on like work in succession to the man? This is the question which had to be solved in Macarthys Ltd v. Smith. Unfortunately it was not. Their Lordships interpreted the relevant section in different ways and since Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome was also subject to different interpretations, the case has been referred to the European Court of Justice.