The power to voice my hate! Exploring the effect of brand hate and perceived social media power on negative eWOM
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-10-2020-0423 |
| Published date | 29 July 2021 |
| Date | 29 July 2021 |
| Pages | 652-675 |
| Subject Matter | Strategy,International business |
| Author | Isha Sharma,Kokil Jain,Ritu Gupta |
The power to voice my hate! Exploring the
effect of brand hate and perceived social
media power on negative eWOM
Isha Sharma, Kokil Jain and Ritu Gupta
Abstract
Purpose –Consumerbrand relationship literature has recentlyseen a surge of studies on brand hate, its
antecedents and outcomes. Hate alone will not driveconsumers to engage in negative electronicword-
of-mouth (eWOM) and indicatesthe interplay of other social relationship factors that can strengthen the
effect of brandhate on negative eWOM. The purpose of this study is to integrate the emergingconcept of
brand hate and perceived socialmedia power with the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to expandthe
understandingof negative eWOM.
Design/methodology/approach –Data is collected through a survey conducted among university
students based in the NationalCapital Region of Delhi in India. The research model is empirically tested
using structuralequation modeling in AMOSv23.
Findings –The three TPB dimensions, including brand attitude, subjective norms and individual’s
propensity to anthropomorphize, are found to influence brandto hate significantly. The other perceived
control factorsincluded in the model, perceived homophily and socialmedia self-efficacy, were found to
affect perceived social mediapower, which, in turn, is crucial in predicting consumers’ engagement in
negativeeWOM behavior, both directly and throughinteraction with brand hate.
Originality/value –The study contributes to brand hate literature and offers a novel perspective by
advocatingthe role of consumers’ propensityto anthropomorphize in augmenting feelingsof brand hate.
Keywords Negative eWOM, Brand hate, Theory of planned behavior, Perceived social media power
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Internet and social media have fueled attention toward social media marketing and online
consumer behavior among marketers and academics. As of April 2020, almost 4.57 billion
people are using the internet, with China, India and the USA having the highest number of
internet users (Clement,2020). A recent report indicates that social media users spend over
2 h per day networking across an average of eight social media platforms and messaging
apps (Chaffey, 2020). As social media brought the world virtually closer, a significant
increase in consumer complaints and anti-branding behavior has been observed (Kucuk,
2016, 2019b). Inarguably, consumers are now more empowered in their relationship with
brands as social media enables them to voice their dissatisfaction following a negative
experience. Communication on social media has changed the dynamics of how consumers
and brands interact with each other (Lee et al., 2012). These digital platforms can often be
seen streaming with consumers’anger and hateful emotions.
Prior research has emphasized the effectiveness of word-of-mouth (WOM) communication
because of its source credibility (Trivedi, 2017). The demarcating attribute of electronic
word-of-mouth (eWOM) is the supposed independence of the message source (Bao and
Chang, 2014) as the user has no personal motive to speak for (positive eWOM) or against
Isha Sharma is based at the
School of Administrative
Studies, York University,
Toronto, Canada.
Kokil Jain is based at Amity
International Business
School, Amity University,
Noida, India.
Ritu Gupta is based at the
Department of Commerce,
PGDAV College, New
Delhi, India.
Received 30 October 2020
Revised 15 April 2021
18 June 2021
Accepted 21 June 2021
PAGE 652 jJOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES jVOL. 16 NO. 4 2022, pp. 652-675, ©Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1558-7894 DOI 10.1108/JABS-10-2020-0423
(negative eWOM) a brand. While the benefits of positive WOM communication have been
widely established, negative eWOM can have a relatively more potent impact on
consumers’ appraisal of brands (Lim and Chung, 2011). The concept of “negativity bias”
proposed by Kanouse (1984) supports that people tend to recall and weigh negative
information more heavily than positive ones (Ito et al.,1998;Fossati et al.,2003).
Consequently, it can lead to long-term dilution of brand equity (Bambauer-Sachse and
Mangold, 2011;Verhagen et al.,2013) and provide an opportunity for competitors to exploit
negative information about a brand to their advantage (Balaji et al.,2016). In a recent study,
Kuo and Nakhata (2019) indicated that negative eWOM before the purchase could
decrease consumer satisfaction and influence purchase decision-making. Hence,
discerning the underlying mechanism that drives negative eWOM behavior is vital for
academics and marketers alike.
Extant studies focusing on online consumer behavior have explored various factors that
affect consumers’ propensityto engage in eWOM (Loureiro and Sarmento, 2019). Recently,
Whiting et al. (2019) propounded that altruism, seeking resolution, expressing negative
emotions and vengeance are the primary motives driving negative eWOM behavior. Other
studies have identified multiple factors affecting engagement in negative eWOM. Among
them, some key factors include opinion congruency and social influence (Chun and Lee,
2016), taking revenge or helping other customers (Dixit et al.,2019); social relationship
factors (Chu and Kim, 2011;De Keyzer et al., 2019) and cognitive dissonance and social
support (Balaji et al., 2016). In addition, a recent stream of work has identifiedbrand hate as
a significant predictor of negative eWOM (Kucuk, 2016,2018,2019a, 2019b;Zarantonello
et al., 2016;Hegner et al., 2017b;Fetscherin, 2019;Joshi and Yadav, 2020;Zhang and
Laroche, 2020; Author).
It is evident from the extant literature that the phenomenon of negative eWOM is driven by
multiple factors that require frequent discussion. Whiting et al. (2019) call for the need for
revised theories and frameworks for expanding the understanding of eWOM behavior.
Often, before deciding to engage in eWOM, consumers shall assess its implications and
consequences, which make eWOM a planned behavior, arising out of specific motivations
(East, 2000;Fu et al.,2015). In this vein, the current study integrates the variables of the
theory of planned behavior (TPB) (attitude, subjective norms and behavioral control) (Ajzen,
1991) with brand hate and perceived social media power to examine the determinants of
negative eWOM behavior.
The extended TPB model includes three distinct behavioral control factors: individual
anthropomorphic tendency, perceived homophily and social media self-efficacy. It is
argued that consumers with a higher propensity to anthropomorphize shall assess their
relationship with brands as interpersonal, generating stronger feelings of hate as they
ascribe intentionality to the brand for their negative experience. This individual tendency to
anthropomorphize has been recently conceptualized as “reverse anthropomorphism” by
Kucuk (2020), who discussed that consumers might ascribe evil intentions to brands, thus
leading to brand hate. Earlier, Hur et al. (2015) posit that the propensity to
anthropomorphize can inhibitone’s perceived control. It is, therefore, posited to serve as an
internal control factor that influences brand hate. On the other hand, perceived homophily
and social media self-efficacy represent the social relationship dimensions that facilitate
power perceptions on social media.
Our research intention is to uncover the determinants of negative eWOM using the
theoretical lens of the TPB through brandhate and social media power. It provides a deeper
theoretical understanding of the psychological mechanisms underpinning negative eWOM
transmission and extends the understanding of the emerging and managerially relevant
subject of brand hate. As the social media user base continues to grow, managers must
understand the drivers of negative eWOM behavior to develop effective web care
strategies.
VOL. 16 NO. 4 2022 jJOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES jPAGE 653
To continue reading
Request your trial