Causal attributions and brand‐relationships are known to determine how consumers react to brand transgressions. Considering both transgression controllability and brand‐relationship strength, the authors show that self‐construal moderates consumer reactions to brand transgressions. Three studies using different product and service failure scenarios demonstrate that consumers who have independent self‐construals are more forgiving when the brand has no control over the transgression, regardless of brand‐relationship strength. However, consumers who have interdependent self‐construals are more forgiving when they have strong relationships with the transgressing brand, even if the brand is at fault. Furthermore, the salience of justice concerns versus expectancies for long‐term brand‐relationships underlies the self‐construal effects on consumer forgiveness.

Among the top customer complaints regarding retailers are experiences of exclusionary treatment in the form of explicit condescension or implicit disregard. However, little is known about how consumers respond to different instances of exclusion in retail or service settings. This research focuses on how customers respond cognitively and emotionally when frontline staff reject or ignore them and on how retailers can recover from such service failures. Findings from six studies using exclusion as a hypothetical scenario or a real experience demonstrate that direct negative feedback leads customers to feel rejected and to form concrete low-level mental construals, while a lack of attention leads customers to feel ignored and to form abstract high-level construals. Explicit rejection (implicit ignoring) causes consumers to form more (less) vivid mental imagery of the exclusionary experience and to activate a concrete (abstract) mindset, resulting in preferences for tangible (intangible) and visual (textual) compensation options. Retailers are advised to align their compensation with construal levels to increase post-recovery customer satisfaction, customer reviews, intended loyalty, and brand referral behavior.

The authors of this study identify an alternative frame of communication for persuading people who feel socially excluded to behave in ways that benefit individual and social wellbeing, regardless of future connection possibilities. The authors suggest that socially excluded (included) consumers tend to rely on affect (cognition) in processing information, and to consequently prefer persuasive messages based on feelings (reasons). The effect occurs because people tend to ruminate about exclusionary events, which depletes self‐regulatory resources. Thus, distraction that interferes with rumination can mitigate the social exclusion effect on affective processing. The authors present findings from five studies across various paradigms promoting personal and social wellbeing (i.e., donating blood, recycling, and consuming healthful foods) and discuss the theoretical and policy implications.