Is Cinderella resurging? The impact of consumers' underdog disposition on brand preferences: Underdog brand biography and brand status as moderators

Abstract

This research attempts to explore the moderating roles of underdog brand biography and brand status in the impact of consumers' underdog disposition on brand preferences. A total of 218 on-the-job graduate students were randomly assigned to a 2 (explicitness of underdog brand biography: implicit vs. explicit) × 2 (brand status: emerging brands vs. established brands) factorial design. Results show that consumers with strong underdog disposition are likely to generate stronger brand preferences for established brands accompanied with explicit underdog brand biographies than emerging brands accompanied with explicit underdog brand biographies; in contrast, consumers with strong underdog disposition are likely to engender no differential brand preferences for emerging brands accompanied with implicit underdog brand biographies over established brands accompanied with implicit underdog brand biographies. Moreover, consumers with a weak underdog disposition are likely to engender stronger brand preferences for established brands than emerging brands, regardless of the explicitness of underdog brand biography.

When the Underdog Positioning Backfires! The Effects of Ethical Transgressions on Attitudes Toward Underdog Brands

“…The underdog brand positioning does not focus on specific attributes, but rather stresses the underdog's humble background and noble, passionate, determined struggles. This positioning delivers symbolic benefits (Paharia et al, 2011;McGinnis et al, 2017), and the related positive effect is explained by the identity mechanism (McGinnis and Gentry, 2009;Paharia et al, 2011;Kao, 2015) grounded in the self-brand connection principle (Fournier, 1998;Aaker et al, 2004). Consumers support the underdog because its story reflects the underdog aspects of the consumers' own lives.…”

“…We contend that severely negative attitude changes are induced under autonomy-related (vs. community-related) ethical transgressions. This reasoning is based on consumers' basic supporting motivation toward the underdog brand (McGinnis and Gentry, 2009;Paharia et al, 2011;Kao, 2015). Identification with the underdog is the very mechanism that may explain the backfiring effect on the underdog positioning in the case of autonomy-related ethical transgressions.…”

“…Underdog brand positioning and its positive effects have been investigated in many studies that have confirmed consumers' support motivations for underdog brands (McGinnis and Gentry, 2009;Paharia et al, 2011;Kao, 2015;McGinnis et al, 2017;Goldschmied et al, 2018). However, none of the previous studies have mentioned potential risks involved with the underdog positioning, particularly in the moral domains.…”

“…Consumers tend to feel like underdogs in everyday life. Their disadvantaged experiences in society become a driving force in their positive attitudes toward underdogs (McGinnis and Gentry, 2009;Paharia et al, 2011;Kao, 2015). According to the literature on interpersonal reactivity, accurate perspective, judgment, and response are possible when individuals experience a similar situation; thus, greater empathy is anticipated from those in identical situations (Bernstein and Davis, 1982;Davis, 1983;Snodgrass, 1985;Piff et al, 2010).…”

Must the underdog win? The moderation effect of product type in the underdog effect of brand stories

“…() indicated the underdog effect is an underexplored area and an intriguing phenomenon in consumer research. Previous research has concluded that individuals prefer to connect themselves to winners and disconnect themselves from losers, implying that underdog brands are likely to be unfavorably evaluated (Kao, ). However, Paharia et al.…”