Search results

This research aims to examine the role of consumers' brand trust and attachment on advocacy intention before and after the occurrence of brand misconduct in retail banking. In addition, the influence of brand attachment on consumers' willingness to switch, advocate for and forgive brands is examined in a post-misconduct scenario.

Data were collected through a self-administered online survey questionnaire. A total of 304 valid and usable responses from Australian participants were analysed using IBM SPSS 27.0.

The findings reveal that brand attachment mediates the positive relationship between trust and advocacy intention. Furthermore, brand attachment (1) dilutes consumers' switching intention and (2) strengthens their willingness to forgive the bank after misconduct.

Results suggest that retail banks should create strong brand attachments with their consumers. In addition to brand trust, brand attachment will generate greater advocacy intention among consumers. Moreover, practitioners in retail banking can leverage brand attachment to mitigate the negative impact of brand misconduct.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to examine the impact of brand attachment on the consumer–bank relationship within the context of brand misconduct. The study is also unique in its analysis of the mediating role of brand attachment between brand trust and advocacy. This research further adds to the current literature by suggesting that strong and positive customer connections to the brand facilitate communication and marketing efforts after brand misconduct and that these are effective in maintaining consumer-bank relationship.

In recent years, negative spokesperson incidents have raised significant concerns in academia and industry. While several studies have addressed celebrity endorser scandals, comprehensive analyses of current knowledge are lacking. Therefore, this study systematically reviewed the related literature to better understand trends and suggest future research directions for advancing this field.

This study employs the theory–context–characteristics–methodology (TCCM) framework to examine 76 articles on celebrity endorser scandals.

Utilizing the TCCM framework, this study presents a comprehensive research framework, revealing that (1) the celebrity endorser scandal effect primarily includes associative learning, attribution of responsibility, and moral reasoning; (2) entertainment celebrities and athletes have received significant research attention; (3) both individual- and relationship-level characteristics serve as crucial moderators, with focal brand and related brand being the primary outcome variables. Additionally, this study outlines enterprise response strategies, encompassing the reformation of existing spokesperson relationships and the establishment of future spokesperson connections; and (4) quantitative approaches dominate the field.

This study integrates and expands existing research on celebrity endorser scandals while proposing future research opportunities to advance the field.

This study proposes that the relationship between the employee's moral identity and unethical behavior might sometimes differ from linearly negative, given certain contextual variations, such as unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB). The pro-organizational motivation of UPB may appeal to individuals' morality to perform unethical behavior for their organization. Herein, using the social identity perspective, the present study hypothesizes a curvilinear relationship between moral identity and UPB with the moderation of organizational identification.

Data collected in two field studies, from 316 and 185 executives in Study 1 and 2, was analyzed using hierarchical regression analysis.

The results affirmed an inverted U-shaped relationship between moral identity and UPB. Further, organizational identification moderated the relationship such that an increase in organizational identification augmented the UPB tendency for low moral identity individuals while inhibiting the UPB tendency for high moral identity individuals.

The current study uniquely demonstrates how moral identity might promote unethical behavior in pro-organizational contexts. Further, this research shows how high moral identity might mitigate the negative outcomes of high organizational identification.

The 2008 Chinese melamine milk scandal resulted in six reported fatalities and affected around 300,000 children, of whom 54,000 were hospitalised. Previous studies have used linear approaches to examine the root causes of the melamine milk scandal.

In the present study, we applied a systems approach to the melamine milk scandal to identify the complex systems-level failures across the supply chain leading to the incident and why food fraud incidents such as this occurred in the dairy sector. Additionally, systemic failures associated with food fraud vulnerability factors were considered (i.e. opportunities, motivation and control measures).

48 contributory factors of influence were identified and grouped across six sociotechnical levels across the Chinese dairy system, from government to equipment and surroundings. Lack of vertical integration (processes and communication) contributed to the failure. When viewed from a broader perspective, the melamine milk scandal can be linked to a series of human errors and organisational issues associated with government bodies, the dairy supply chain, individual organisations and management decisions and individual actions of staff or processes.

This approach is of value to policymakers and the industry as it supports public health investigations of food fraud incidents and proactive food safety management.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to analyse a food safety or fraud incident using the AcciMap approach and the food fraud vulnerability assessment (FFVA) technique. AcciMap analysis is applied to both unintentional and intentional aspects of the incident.

The purpose of this study is to understand the effect of different brand positions (underdog vs top dog) and comparative advertising on consumers’ brand attitudes. Additionally, this study also aims to demonstrate the effects of inspiration, self-relevance and empathy on the relationship between brand positioning and comparative advertising.

A two-by-three factorial design was employed with brand positions (underdog vs top dog) and three types of comparative advertising (noncomparative, indirect comparative and direct comparative) as the independent variables. Inspiration serves as the mediator, while self-relevance and empathy act as moderators and brand attitude is the dependent variable.

The results show that different brand positions significantly affect brand attitudes, with respondents having a better brand attitude toward the underdog brand. Brand attitude is partially mediated by inspiration. Self-relevance moderates the relationship between brand positioning and brand attitude. However, brand positioning, comparative advertising and empathy do not have interaction effects.

This study contributes to a better understanding of the effect of psychological variables on brand positioning and comparative advertising.

The results suggest that the underdog setting requires a real and honest story because consumers will spot a fake underdog story, which will damage consumer trust in the brand and harm the brand image.

There is a lack of research using psychological variables to demonstrate the effect of being the underdog brand. This study contributes to the literature by employing psychological variables to illustrate the effect of underdog positioning. These findings can help brands develop branding positioning strategies.

National surveys reveal that sports fans exhibit greater support for athletes, sports teams and leagues endorsing social justice initiatives compared to the general population, highlighting the potential of sports for positive social impact. This study investigates whether such responses are influenced by systematic biases.

Replicating a Nielsen national survey, two experiments explore whether biases affect support for athletes' participation in the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. The study also examines partisan motivated reasoning as a factor driving sports fans' support for BLM.

While avid fans display stronger endorsement of BLM compared to causal/non-sports fans, evidence suggests that systematic biases distort these responses. When sport identity becomes salient, reported support for the BLM movement becomes inflated.

Researchers often employ self-report surveys to gauge audience perceptions of athlete activism or cause-related initiatives, particularly when assessing their impact. This study's findings indicate that this context is susceptible to SDB.

The study underscores the role of systematic biases in self-report surveys, particularly in socially desirable contexts. People tend to over-report “positive behavior,” leading survey participants to respond more favorably to questions that are socially desirable. Therefore, interpreting survey results with caution becomes essential when the research context is deemed socially (un)desirable. It is crucial for researchers to apply appropriate measures to identify and mitigate systematic response biases. The authors recommend that researchers adopt both procedural and statistical remedies to detect and reduce social desirability biases.

This study aims to develop and test a research model that explores the empirical relationship between consumer religiosity, brand love and consumer forgiveness. Its objective was to enhance our understanding of the mechanisms that can influence consumers to extend forgiveness to brands in the context of Islamic banking in Tanzania.

The study used a quantitative cross-sectional survey design to gather data from 399 respondents in the Dodoma and Dar-es-salaam regions of Tanzania. A structured questionnaire was used to collect the data, which were subsequently analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS 21.

The study’s findings revealed that consumer forgiveness is influenced by the level of brand love at an individual level. Additionally, the findings indicate that in the context of Islamic banking, brand love is an emotional behavior that is influenced by the strength of religious beliefs, that is, consumer religiosity. Consequently, the findings highlighted the mediating role of brand love in the proposed relationship between consumer religiosity and consumer forgiveness.

The fact that Islamic banking is guided by Islamic laws (Sharia) and Islamic values means that competitiveness in this sector can be established by serving consumers who are well-versed in Islamic teachings and doctrines. Furthermore, customers who possess a strong understanding of Islamic teachings and doctrines can be an asset to Islamic banks, as they are less likely to switch banks due to service delivery issues.

This empirical study is one of the few attempts to explore the relationship between consumer religiosity, consumer forgiveness and brand love. It expands our understanding of consumer forgiveness by examining the influence of deontological norms (applying norms to assess Islamic banking practices) and teleological evaluation (evaluating Islamic banking practices based on the overall balance of right and wrong expected to occur).

This study aims to outline the role of causal attributions in consumer responses to irresponsible corporate behaviour. Specifically, this paper presents a moderated mediation model that explains how four types of perceived motives behind an irresponsible action shape corporate blame and word-of-mouth recommendations.

To test the hypotheses, the study uses data from a large survey assessing consumer reactions to a real case of corporate socially irresponsible behaviour in the banking industry.

The findings show that market-, unethicality- and rogue employee-driven attributions increase corporate blame and subsequently make people more likely to spread negative comments regarding the culprit. The difficult situation of a bank, as a perceived reason for wrongdoing, does not reduce the blame attributed to the irresponsible organisation.

The literature offers little information on the attributions people make following egregious corporate behaviour; however, such cognitions can play an important role in stakeholders’ reactions to wrongdoing. This study therefore extends the understanding of how irresponsibility attributions affect consumers’ responses to misbehaviour. Given the empirical context, the findings might be particularly important for communication and bank managers.

The purpose of this paper is to scrutinise the effectiveness of four derivative exchanges’ enforcement efforts since 2007. These exchanges include the Commodity Exchange Inc. and ICE Futures US from the United States and ICE Futures Europe and the London Metal Exchange from the UK.

The paper examines 799 enforcement notices published by four exchanges through a behavioural science lens: HUMANS conceived by Hunt (2023) in Humanizing Rules: Bringing Behavioural Science to Ethics and Compliance.

The paper finds the effectiveness of the exchanges’ enforcement efforts to be a mixed picture as financial markets transition from the digital to artificial intelligence era. Humans remain a key cog in the wheel of market participants’ trading operations, albeit their roles have changed. Despite this, some elements of exchanges’ enforcement regimes have not kept pace with the move from floor to remote trading. However, in other respects, their efforts are or should be, effective, at least in behavioural terms.

The paper’s findings are arguably limited to exchanges based in Anglophone jurisdictions. The information published by the exchanges is variable, making “like-for-like” comparisons difficult in some areas.

The paper makes several recommendations that, if adopted, could help exchanges to increase the potency of their enforcement programmes.

A key aim of the paper is to shift the lens through which the debate concerning the efficacy of exchange-level oversight is conducted. Hitherto, a legal lens has been used, whereas this paper uses a behavioural lens.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the consumer response to brands offering gendered product differentiation (i.e. products “for her” or “for him”).

Across three experiments, the effect of gendered (vs gender-unrelated) product differentiation on perceived brand sexism and word-of-mouth intention was tested. The moderating effects of feminist identity (Studies 1 and 2), endorsement of sexist beliefs (Study 2) and basis (stereotypical vs biological) for product differentiation (Study 3) were also tested.

Consumers perceive brands that offer gendered product differentiation as sexist, which in turn leads to negative word-of-mouth intention. Moreover, consumers with a strong feminist identity are more likely to perceive brands that offer gendered product differentiation as sexist, whereas consumers who endorse sexist beliefs are less likely to do so. Finally, consumers respond negatively when the gendered product differentiation is based on a gender stereotype, but much less so when it seems based on a biological difference between sexes.

Although multiple brands offering gendered products have been denounced by consumers as sexist, no research has examined this phenomenon. This paper pioneers in examining the consumer response to brands offering gendered product differentiation and in demonstrating that consumers perceive such brands as sexist.