Purpose-This study aims to examine the effects of gender-based clothing labels on Generation Z consumers' product choice and brand love and how these effects are moderated by consumers' self-identified masculinity-femininity identity, fashion innovativeness and opinion leadership and self-esteem. Design/methodology/approach-Three between-subjects online experiments were conducted using US Gen Z participants to examine the effects of gender-based clothing labels ("men's," "women's," "unisex" and unlabeled) on their clothing choices and brand love. Analysis of variance and regressions were used to test the hypothesized main and interaction effects grounded in the social identity theory. Findings-Across studies, "men's" labels generated the highest purchase intentions, whereas "women's" labels elicited the least favorable evaluations, while "unisex" and unlabeled conditions were generally well received. Traditional masculinity and femininity moderated these effects, whereas fashion innovativeness and opinion leadership did not. Self-esteem moderated responses to the "men's" and "unisex" labels. Purchase intention predicted brand love. Originality/value-This research integrates continuum-based self-reported gender identity, innovativeness and self-esteem into labeling research, revealing nuanced pathways through which inclusive and gender-neutral branding strategies influence Generation Z consumers' evaluations and engagement.
Purpose Recent branding literature emphasises the need to understand how negative online brand engagement damages consumer-brand relationships through its effects on brand trust and digital brand advocacy. This study aims to examine whether schadenfreude moderates these effects and whether its buffering capacity differs across the two outcomes. Design/methodology/approach A quantitative PLS-SEM design was used with purposive sampling. Responses were collected from 314 participants using a questionnaire measured on a five-point Likert scale. Findings Negative online brand engagement significantly reduced brand trust and digital brand advocacy. Schadenfreude weakened this negative effect on digital brand advocacy but did not moderate the negative engagement–trust or trust–advocacy relationships. Practical implications Brand managers should treat trust protection and advocacy recovery as distinct priorities. Competitive contrast framing may sustain advocacy during negative engagement but should complement substantive trust-recovery efforts and reflect cultural norms governing competitive emotions. Originality/value This study integrates cognitive dissonance theory and the frustration-aggression hypothesis to explain how negative online brand engagement damages consumer–brand relationships. It positions schadenfreude as an outcome-specific competitive brand emotion that buffers digital brand advocacy but not brand trust, extending brand engagement research beyond its positively valenced and predominantly Western foundations.
Purpose This study aims to investigate how open (vs closed) branding – a permissive (vs restrictive) governance stance toward unauthorized consumer appropriation of brand-related intellectual property – shapes perceived brand status. It examines reference group association as the mediator and product status relevance as a boundary condition. Design/methodology/approach Five between-subjects online experiments (n = 958) tested the hypotheses. Studies 1a–3 used single-factor designs manipulating branding strategy (open vs closed branding), with Study 1a adding a no-response baseline. Study 4 used a 2 (branding strategy: open vs closed branding) × 2 (product status relevance: high vs low) design. Findings Open branding produces lower perceived brand status than closed branding. This relative status disadvantage arises because open branding weakens associations with higher-status reference groups and is stronger when product status relevance is high. Practical implications Firms should treat open branding as an intellectual property governance signal rather than a generic engagement tactic. Particularly for high-status-relevant products, managers should selectively govern participation, collaboration partners and core status-bearing symbols to preserve the brand’s desired reference group associations. Originality/value This article extends open branding research beyond its common focus on attitudinal benefits by identifying a symbolic status cost of permissive intellectual property governance. It explains this cost through reference group association and establishes product status relevance as a boundary condition, clarifying when and why status dilution occurs.
Purpose Ordinary consumers can promote brands through like-based social endorsements on social media. This study aims to develop a research model to examine the influences of two types of social endorsement on consumers’ tribal and evangelistic behaviors as well as the mediating effects of two identification processes on these influences. The findings enrich the understanding of consumers’ roles as brand promoters. Design/methodology/approach An online experiment was conducted among 329 participants recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. Multivariate analysis of variance and variance-based structural equation modeling were used for data analysis. Findings The results indicate that social endorsement has significant direct effects on brand tribalism and evangelism. Social endorsement is a self-expressive behavior that initiates brand–self and brand–social connections. These two identification processes facilitate the establishment of brand tribalism and evangelism with varying magnitude. The findings suggest that brand tribalism drives brand evangelism, highlighting the crucial role of end users in promoting brands on social media. Practical implications This study enriches the understanding of the active role of customers and the impact of consumer–brand relationships on brand evangelism by providing insights into how social endorsement contributes to strong brand support. The findings suggest that social endorsement, brand tribalism and brand evangelism are powerful marketing-related assets that should be leveraged by marketing managers to strengthen dyadic consumer–brand relationships, defend their brand against criticism and attract new customers. Originality/value The findings advance the knowledge of how brands are promoted on social media. The results suggest that social endorsement, brand tribalism and brand evangelism are emerging forms of customer-driven brand promotion that uniquely contribute to a brand’s promoter economy.
Purpose This study aims to investigate the differential impact of transactional versus relational gift types on consumer patronage intention following business-to-consumer brand crises, specifically examining the mediating role of perceived brand responsibility (PBR) and three key boundary conditions. Design/methodology/approach Five scenario-based experiments (n = 998) were conducted. The research utilized ANOVA and Hayes’ PROCESS macro to test a moderated mediation framework involving crisis nature, brand narrativity and initial consumer trust. Findings Results demonstrate that relational gifts outperform transactional gifts in enhancing patronage intention. This effect is fully mediated by perceived brand responsibility. The advantage of relational gifts is significantly amplified in internal crises, high-narrativity communication, and among consumers with high initial brand trust. Practical implications Managers should prioritize relational over transactional gifts in high-accountability crises. Effective recovery requires integrating precrisis trust building and narrative-driven communication to optimize the symbolic value of remedial actions. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is among the first to integrate gift-giving theory into brand crisis management. It moves beyond traditional informational strategies to reveal how behavioral remediation and social exchange logic repair consumer-brand relationships.
