Underdog effects: the role of consumption domain and retail crowding

Abstract

Purpose When communicating with consumers, firms frequently highlight their underdog status to evoke a favorable attitude. Previous research has confirmed consumer preference for underdogs over top dogs in various domains. However, very little research has been conducted on the business types and decision contexts in which underdog effects produce the most impact. This paper aims to investigate some of the unexplored boundary conditions of underdog effects and addresses two issues: consumption domain and retail crowding. Design/methodology/approach Two experiments with a 2 (biography: underdog or top dog) × 2 (consumption domain: hedonic or utilitarian) × 2 (retail crowding: adequately crowded or uncrowded) factorial between-subjects design were conducted to test hypotheses. The two experiments differ in the consumption domains and the approaches used to depict crowding conditions. Furthermore, the first experiment targeted college students and the second experiment targeted online consumer panels across various age groups. Findings Underdog effects were more easily evoked when the consumption domain was more hedonic than utilitarian. In addition, retail crowding was an informational cue for judging acceptance of underdog businesses and enhanced the evaluation when the retail environment was adequately crowded rather than uncrowded. This role of crowding was also evident for top-dog businesses when consumers perceived high risk in the businesses. Originality/value This is the first study to distinguish between hedonic and utilitarian consumption domains with underdog effects and to demonstrate a positive effect of crowding as an informational cue, indicating acceptance by other consumers.

Effect of underdog (vs topdog) brand storytelling on brand identification: exploring multiple mediation mechanisms

“…Most research on underdog-style brand stories have embraced self-consistency theory to explain their superior effectiveness in terms of the fact that most people at some point in their lives have considered themselves as underdogs (Li and Zhao, 2018; Kim et al , 2019; Tezer et al , 2019). As a result of their own underdog disposition, consumers develop a stronger sense of identity with brands that are weaker but determined to improve (Shirai, 2017). To a minor extent, the effectiveness of underdog-style brand stories has also been explained in terms of other contextual drivers, such as the type of consumption domain (hedonic vs utilitarian: Shirai, 2017; Li and Zhao, 2018), the retail environment (crowded vs uncrowded: Li and Zhao, 2018) and the individual’s psychological distance from the brand (Kao, 2019).…”

Interaction of the underdog with equality and scarcity

“…Furthermore, Jun et al (2015) argued that the personality trait of empathy influences the underdog effect on brand attitude and thus purchase intentions. Overall, these studies and others on underdog effects have clearly established a positive relationship between underdog brand positioning and consumer’s purchase intentions (Shirai, 2017; McGinnis et al , 2017; Kao, 2015; Jun et al , 2015; Paharia et al , 2010). The topic of underdog effect has, however, received little attention in brand positioning despite its high prevalence.…”

“…This positive attitude also influences consumer choices as the perceived value and preference of those brands increase (Salehzadeh and Pool, 2017; Moriuchi and Jackson, 2017; De Cannière et al , 2009; Sheth et al , 1991). Recent research has shown that brand positioning emphasizing the disadvantageous, less privileged condition of a brand (underdog) has been used in practice and has continuously gained research interest (Shirai, 2017; Kao, 2015; Jun et al , 2015; Paharia et al , 2010, 2014). The underdog brand biography by Paharia et al (2010) is one of the most commonly employed in business.…”

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the impacts on impulse buying behavior: A literature review

“…Social stimuli involve the number, type, and behavior of people that appear within the store, including other buyers and salespeople (Robert, 2001), including crowded behavior, employee attitudes, and social interaction between consumers and salespeople that can stimulate impulse buying (Turley & Milliman, 2000). Among these social stimuli, perceived crowding was found the most influential factor of impulse purchase (Miyuri, 2017). This means that the presence and interaction of other shoppers within the store can increase the possibility of impulse purchases.…”

“…Year Contribution the individual's needs Agarwal 2015 Proved that personal traits, including demographic such as gender, income can trigger impulse purchase Miyuri 2017 Perceived crowding was found the most influential factor of impulse purchase Tran 2020 Changing context of society opened out various ways of defining the term Source: Collected and summarised by the authors…”