Search results

This research uses the distinction between communal relationships (based on mutual care and concern) and exchange relationships (based on the principle of quid pro quo) to propose a framework that predicts differences in the shape of consumer response function to increasing levels of brand transgressions.

The paper proposes a conceptual model based on insights from prior research on brand relationships.

The premise being proposed in this paper is that exchange-oriented consumers, being focused on the balance of inputs and outcomes, base their evaluations on an objective assessment of the final outcome, such that their response function will be relatively proportional to increasing levels of brand transgression. On the other hand, communally oriented consumers are concerned with whether or not the relationship partner cares for them, such that up to a point brand transgressions are overlooked while beyond a threshold there is a sudden negative shift in brand evaluations. These consumers thus exhibit a step-function response to brand transgressions.

This paper proposes a conceptual framework and leaves it to future researchers to test it empirically.

Managers now have a toolkit to better manage instances of product and service failure.

Findings from this model can be applied to better manage interpersonal relationships too.

This paper proposes a model that shows how and why consumers might differ in their response to brand transgressions. Further, this is a dynamic model in that it traces the response function of the consumers at increasing levels of transgressions.

We propose that brands with strong associations and dedicated customers may be vulnerable if customers perceive them as exploiting their relationship.

We start by reviewing the literature on brand meaning, brand attachment, brand relationships, and brand transgressions. The extant literature implies that as a result of their willingness to sustain their brand relationship, highly attached consumers will either discount negative information about a brand or attribute the responsibility for the negative information to some external factors. We propose, on the other hand, that when negative information dilutes the reason for brand attachment, the norm of the consumer–brand relationship is violated (brand transgression). Then we argue that highly attached consumers of that brand will react more negatively (when compared to consumers not feeling highly attached) toward the brand.

We introduce a typology of brand transgressions against the (1) expressive, (2) exclusive, (3) expert, and (4) empathic nature of brands. We discuss the possible effects of attachment levels on consumers’ reactions after such brand transgressions. Additionally, we articulate the moderating effects of four consumer motives (need for self-enhancement, need for uniqueness, need for risk avoidance, and need for justice) on consumer reactions.

Our reasoning counters the literature suggesting that highly attached consumers of a brand will engage in relationship-sustaining behaviors. We contribute to the brand-transgression literature by providing a more structured and detailed definition of brand transgressions by classifying them under four distinct types.

This study aims to examine how cultural tightness at the national level and individual level influences consumer attitudes toward a brand's wrongdoing depending on the brand's country of origin and severity of the transgression.

Employing data from two tight-culture countries (China and South Korea) and a loose-culture country (the USA), two experiments were conducted to examine the proposed hypotheses.

The authors found that although consumers across cultures universally punish strong (vs weak) transgressions more severely, consumers in a tight-culture country, China, are more forgiving of a local (vs foreign) brand in both strong and weak transgression conditions, and forgiveness is higher for the strong transgression. Moreover, this buffering effect observed for Chinese consumers is stronger for those with high personal cultural tightness in the strong transgression condition. However, it emerges only in the weak transgression condition for South Korea, another tight-culture country. As hypothesized, no buffering effect for a local brand was found in a loose-culture country, the USA. Consumers from a loose culture assess transgression severity independently, and the punishment is harsher for strong transgressions than for weak transgressions.

This study fills a research gap by revealing that consumers from tight (vs loose) cultures would react differently to brands following a transgression depending on the brand's country of origin. It provides implications by examining how national-level and individual-level cultural tightness jointly affect post-transgression attitudes. It also presents a more nuanced perspective that the local brand's buffering effect is contingent on the degree of tightness and severity of transgression, even in similar culturally tight countries.

This paper aims to examine the role of religiosity on consumers’ forgiveness when celebrities get involved in transgression. The celebrity’s reaction and its impact on consumers’ forgiveness is tested as well. In addition, consumers’ attitudes towards the brand and celebrity as well as purchase intention for the endorsed brand are examined both before and after the transgression.

Data (n = 356) were collected through a self-administered online survey and analysed though structural equation modelling in AMOS 26.

The results show that consumers’ attitude towards celebrity, brand and purchase intention gets weaker once the celebrity gets into transgression. Consumers tend to forgive more if the celebrity apologises (vs denies) for the wrongdoing. The hypothesised relationship between attitude towards celebrity and purchase intention did not sustain after the transgression. In addition, consumers’ intrinsic religiosity strengthens the relationship between attitude towards the celebrity and purchase intention.

The findings of this research present valuable implications for brands practitioners. Brands should formulate actionable contingency plans to mitigate the negative ramifications of celebrity transgressions. Specifically, intrinsic religiosity and celebrity apologies should assist consumers in forgiving the transgression and negate the implications that could have arisen if the celebrity instead denied the transgressions.

This research extends the previous research by examining religiosity and forgiveness within the context of celebrity transgressions. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the first few research studies to consider the role religiosity plays in consumers’ intention to forgive celebrity transgressions.

This paper aims to examine the impact that brand transgressions, and the effect of an apology or lack thereof, have on consumers’ intentions to co-create with a brand, perceived brand equity and brand love, and compares these effects on brands that are viewed positively versus brands that are viewed negatively.

Two studies were deployed. In the first study, a 2 × 2 between subjects factorial design using fictitious brands is used to test the hypotheses. The second study seeks to replicate the findings of the first study by using a brand connected to a real retailer.

Regardless of a brand issuing an apology or not, co-creation, higher perceived brand equity and increased levels of brand love, are more likely to occur when a consumer views a brand as being positive versus negative. However, the results vary when the consumer has a prior level of knowledge and a stronger relationship with a brand.

This paper focuses on consumers between the ages of 18 and 29 years. While the findings of Study 1 are mostly replicated in Study 2, a more generalizable sample could create additional insights into the impact of brand transgressions and issuing or not an apology.

The findings of this paper add to the current literature on co-creation, brand equity, brand love and theory of reasoned action, in terms of the impact of an apology, or lack thereof, on brand transgressions and consequent consumer responses.

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.

Moral transgressions committed by person-brands can negatively impact consumers through the transgression’s diagnosticity (severity, centrality and consistency). This paper aims to test how a transgression’s centrality and consistency impact important consumer perceptions and behavioral intentions toward a person-brand, holding constant the transgression in question. These outcomes are crucial for person-brands to understand how to minimize and manage the impact of a given transgression.

This paper uses three online consumer experiments to manipulate transgression diagnosticity via centrality and consistency and identifies the resulting impact on consumer-brand identification, trustworthiness and consumer digital engagement intentions through PROCESS models.

High-diagnosticity transgressions lower consumer digital engagement intentions regarding the person-brand and their endorsed products. This effect is serially mediated by consumer-brand identification, as predicted by social identity theory, and by perceived trustworthiness of the person-brand.

Person-brands should emphasize the nondiagnostic nature of any transgressions in which they are involved, including a lack of centrality and consistency with their brand, and guard against the appearance of diagnostic transgressions.

This paper shows that transgression diagnosticity impacts consumer engagement through the pathway of consumer-brand identification and trustworthiness. It also manipulates aspects of diagnosticity that can be influenced by the person-brand (centrality and consistency) while holding the transgression constant. As such, this paper extends the literature on transgressions, on person-branding strategy, and on social identity theory.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of two types of narcissism (rivalry and admiration) on consumer–brand forgiveness (CBF) following a brand transgression. This research also examines how narcissism interacts with transgression type to shape forgiveness intentions.

Data were collected through an online survey of 634 UK consumers, focussing on two different types of transgressions (public vs private). The formulated hypotheses were tested through moderated mediation analysis.

The results highlight that only narcissistic rivalry (and not admiration) moderates the relationship between transgression type and blame attributions. Although the type of transgression seems to affect CBF, forgiveness levels do not vary across the two transgression types. Finally, as expected, blame attributions shape forgiveness intentions.

The results of this research highlight that blame attributions are affected by the type of narcissism. Thus, identifying the type of narcissism will allow brands to allocate their resources more effectively in order to design recovery strategies that would promote CBF and restore brand trust.

The paper responds to calls for a better understanding of forgiveness through the use of personality traits and focusses on two dimensions of narcissism. This paper also uses a novel transgression typology, which is objective in nature. The results illustrate that narcissism has a differential role in shaping blame attributions and CBF.

Brand transgressions, characterized by service failure, are a frequent theme for marketing scholars. Their impact on satisfaction, trust and brand loyalty is of high interest. However, in assessing the influence of those events on third-party consumers, the literature is still lacking. The purpose of this paper is to explore how social distance explains the reactions of close and distant third-party consumers toward other consumers during a brand transgression event. Anger is analyzed as a driver of this process.

Two experiments were conducted. Both studies presented a 3 (social distance: victim vs close third party vs distant third party) by 2 (severity: low vs high) between-subjects design. Respondents were asked to read a transgression scenario in a mobile phone service (study 1) and in a restaurant (study 2) and then completed scales that measured their affective reactions and evaluations of the relationship – satisfaction, trust, and loyalty intention – with the transgressing brand.

The results showed that transgression severity intensifies the effect of the brand transgression on consumer’s anger. Victims and close third parties demonstrated higher levels of anger compared to distant third-party consumers. In the case of severe transgressions, an experience of anger contagion between victims and close third-party consumers was responsible for the negative effect on the relationship evaluation of the transgressing brand compared to distant third-party consumers.

This study extends previous research about how social distance influences consumer-brand relationships and demonstrates the mediating role played by affective anger contagion.

This study aims to develop and test a new research model of consumer response to celebrity transgression. It examines the effects of celebrity past transgression and philanthropic histories in influencing consumer acceptance (i.e. forgiveness and blame) of a single celebrity transgression behavior and the subsequent endorsement potential of the transgressed celebrity. It also examines consumer acceptance of celebrity transgressions from the gender perspective.

By using real celebrities, this study conducted a 2 (transgression history: high vs low) × 2 (philanthropic history: high vs low) × 2 (celebrity gender: male vs female) between-subject online experiment with 823 US young adults.

Results showed that forgiving (blaming) the transgressed celebrity was positively (negatively) associated with the celebrity’s endorsement potential. Transgression history had a significantly negative indirect effect on endorsement potential via its negative effect on forgiveness and positive effect on blame. Philanthropic history mitigated the negative indirect effect of transgression history on endorsement potential only for male celebrities, not female celebrities.

This study contributes to the current human brand and celebrity transgression literature and fills the research gap by using real male and female celebrities to incorporate the real history of celebrities as determinants of consumer judgment of celebrity transgression. This study also makes its unique contributions by focusing on the celebrity-related outcomes and demonstrating the moderating roles of past philanthropic behaviors and celebrity gender for their potential to mitigate the negative effects of transgression history on consumer responses to a single transgression.