Going against the Tide: How Self-Construal Moderates Receptivity towards Popular Brand Activism

IF 9.8 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Business Research Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-06 DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115228
Geetanjali Saluja , Eugene Y. Chan
{"title":"Going against the Tide: How Self-Construal Moderates Receptivity towards Popular Brand Activism","authors":"Geetanjali Saluja ,&nbsp;Eugene Y. Chan","doi":"10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many brands in today’s marketplace choose to take a public stance on socio-political issues. For example, some brands have indicated support for or opposition to Israel, while there are brands that support or oppose same sex-marriages. This research examines the type of consumers to whom a brand supporting or opposing socio-political issues might appeal. Specifically, we focus on consumers with independent versus interdependent self-construal. Four studies offer evidence that independents consider brand activism that opposes prevailing public opinions regarding socio-political issues as “bold” and “courageous”. By contrast, independents and interdependents equally favor brands that support such majority public opinion. We discuss the limitations of these results and offer guidance for future researchers and brand managers. We situate our findings within the American political discourse and marketplace, discuss the relevance of our results for brands that are interested in activism, and acknowledge limitations to our work.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15123,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Research","volume":"190 ","pages":"Article 115228"},"PeriodicalIF":9.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296325000517","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many brands in today’s marketplace choose to take a public stance on socio-political issues. For example, some brands have indicated support for or opposition to Israel, while there are brands that support or oppose same sex-marriages. This research examines the type of consumers to whom a brand supporting or opposing socio-political issues might appeal. Specifically, we focus on consumers with independent versus interdependent self-construal. Four studies offer evidence that independents consider brand activism that opposes prevailing public opinions regarding socio-political issues as “bold” and “courageous”. By contrast, independents and interdependents equally favor brands that support such majority public opinion. We discuss the limitations of these results and offer guidance for future researchers and brand managers. We situate our findings within the American political discourse and marketplace, discuss the relevance of our results for brands that are interested in activism, and acknowledge limitations to our work.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
逆潮流而行:自我解释如何调节大众品牌行动主义的接受度
当今市场上的许多品牌选择在社会政治问题上采取公开立场。例如,有些品牌表示支持或反对以色列,而有些品牌支持或反对同性婚姻。这项研究考察了支持或反对社会政治问题的品牌可能吸引的消费者类型。具体来说,我们关注的是具有独立与相互依存自我构造的消费者。四项研究提供的证据表明,独立人士认为反对有关社会政治问题的主流公众意见的品牌行动主义是“大胆”和“勇敢”的。相比之下,独立人士和相互依赖人士同样青睐那些支持多数公众意见的品牌。我们讨论了这些结果的局限性,并为未来的研究者和品牌管理者提供了指导。我们将我们的发现置于美国政治话语和市场中,讨论我们的结果与对激进主义感兴趣的品牌的相关性,并承认我们工作的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.30
自引率
10.60%
发文量
956
期刊介绍: The Journal of Business Research aims to publish research that is rigorous, relevant, and potentially impactful. It examines a wide variety of business decision contexts, processes, and activities, developing insights that are meaningful for theory, practice, and/or society at large. The research is intended to generate meaningful debates in academia and practice, that are thought provoking and have the potential to make a difference to conceptual thinking and/or practice. The Journal is published for a broad range of stakeholders, including scholars, researchers, executives, and policy makers. It aids the application of its research to practical situations and theoretical findings to the reality of the business world as well as to society. The Journal is abstracted and indexed in several databases, including Social Sciences Citation Index, ANBAR, Current Contents, Management Contents, Management Literature in Brief, PsycINFO, Information Service, RePEc, Academic Journal Guide, ABI/Inform, INSPEC, etc.
期刊最新文献
Building social legitimacy through NGOs partnerships: evidence from micro-multinationals I hereby consent: Leveraging consent management and chatbot anthropomorphism to influence information disclosure and usage intentions Do the environmental underperformance intensity and duration affect corporate green innovation? evidence from the Chinese manufacturing industry The influence of national contexts on hybrid tensions, and how to manage them through business model innovation Demands, resources, and employee wellbeing during the Covid-19 pandemic: “traditional” values as psychological buffer
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1