To Defend or Not to Defend? How Responses to Negative Customer Review Affect Prospective customers’ Distrust and Purchase Intention

Abstract

Negative online reviews are a ubiquitous problem that affects every online seller at some point. It can lead to prospective consumers’ distrust and decrease future purchase intention. Therefore, formulating a proper response is essential for minimizing these negative effects. Based on the ability–motivation paradigm and stability attribution, we find that apology works better when the alleged cause is relatively unstable (e.g., competence-based negative review) and when the seller has a high ability to change. However, when the alleged cause is relatively stable (e.g., integrity-based negative review) or when the seller has a low ability to change, we show that it is better for the seller to defend its reputation. In addition, we demonstrate that a remedial action plan in the seller's response can reinforce the motivation to change communicated through apology. Thus, coupled with a remedial action plan, apology works better than defending one's reputation, regardless of the negative online review type.

Behavioral Segmentation of Baby Food Consumers: Risk Areas, Possible Solutions. The Case of Ukraine

“…the birth of two or more children. Nevertheless, here too we find rather sad statistics of Divorce rate (table 1) (Reva, 2018;Global competitiveness Report, 2019;World Happiness Report, 2019; The World: Total Fertility Rate, 2019; Quality of Life Index for Country by Numbeo, 2019;Zhao et al, 2020). (1960,(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018) It is noteworthy that according to the Human Development Index (HDI) (consisting of life expectancy, per capita income and educational attainment), Norway has been in the lead for 10 consecutive years (Human Development Report, 2019), yet the country ranks 142nd in the world birth rating.…”

How Do Observers React to Companies’ Humorous Responses to Online Public Complaints?

“…Overall, Study 2 confirms the general superiority of affiliative humor over aggressive humor in terms of observers’ reactions. Moreover, it compares the effectiveness of these two strategies with an accommodative recovery, which has been considered the most effective strategy to restore observers’ attitudes toward companies (Zhao, Jiang, and Su 2020). Interestingly, our results demonstrate that a tactic based on affiliative humor is as effective as an accommodative recovery to generate a reasonable level of purchase intentions.…”

“…Online public complaints are clearly on the rise with the omnipresence of social media in all facets of consumers’ lives. Companies are warranted in providing appropriate responses to online public complaints because many other consumers—labeled “observers”—can witness firms’ responses, and then, these observers form their attitudes in accordance with firms’ actions (Hogreve, Bilstein, and Hoerner 2019; Javornik, Filieri, and Gumann 2020; Johnen and Schnittka 2019; Lee and Song 2010; Zhao, Jiang, and Su 2020). Such observers are more likely to engage in positive behaviors when firms address online complaints with an accommodative recovery by offering apologies and compensation (Johnen and Schnittka 2019; Lee and Song 2010).…”

“…Importantly, we compare the effects of the two types of humor with those of an accommodative recovery (i.e., a firm’s efforts to resolve a current service failure by apologizing or offering compensation), which remains the gold standard in terms of online recovery (Johnen and Schnittka 2019; Lee and Song 2010; Zhao, Jiang, and Su 2020). As illustrated in Figure 1, the two processes of our framework (humor appreciation vs. negative motives) allow an understanding of why humor can be a reasonable recovery tactic from an observer’s perspective, even when compared with an accommodative recovery.…”

“…In this context, companies need to respond in an appropriate manner because their post could be witnessed not only by the dissatisfied customer but also by (possibly) thousands of observing future customers (Hogreve, Bilstein, and Hoerner 2019; Johnen and Schnittka 2019). The service literature uniformly judges that providing an accommodative recovery (e.g., apologies and compensation) is the most effective recovery strategy to restore observers’ positive attitudes (Javornik, Filieri, and Gumann 2020; Lee and Song 2010; Schaefers and Schamari 2016; Zhao, Jiang, and Su 2020). However, anecdotal evidence suggests that companies do not always use an accommodative strategy and that they sometimes prefer using humor as an alternative response.…”