The literature suggests that double deviation—an initial service failure followed by an unfair or ineffective recovery—is a key driver of online vengeance. Building on this, and using appraisal theory of emotions, this paper develops an appraisal-layer framework that, across three studies, tests three amplifiers—resource-congruent injustice, intrinsic service criticality, and negative social cues—to explain when online travel agencies' problems escalate into vindictive negative word-of-mouth (VNWOM). Study 1 offers an extension of the matching hypothesis to double-deviation contexts: congruent resource loss (distributive unfairness after outcome failures; interactional unfairness after process failures) increases VNWOM intentions, whereas procedural congruence does not. Study 2 proposes intrinsic service criticality as the baseline importance of a service type (e.g., cost at risk, interdependence with other trip elements, reversibility) that shapes appraisals before any failure occurs; Studies 2A–2B show flights/accommodations were perceived as more critical than car rentals on this dimension, and higher criticality predicts stronger VNWOM under identical double-deviation scripts, independent of perceived severity. Study 3 identifies negative social cues (exposure to others’ negative reviews) as an amplifying factor of consumer online vengeance and shows that this effect on VNWOM intentions is only modestly and partially mediated by anger. Theoretically, the study introduces appraisal-layer amplifiers that sway how double deviations are interpreted in OTA contexts. Practically, it offers guardrails to avoid same-domain “double hits,” prioritize high-criticality bookings, and respond transparently to negative reviews to curb VNWOM.
扫码关注我们
求助内容:
应助结果提醒方式:
