Ambivalence and Reputation Stability: An Experimental Investigation on the Effects of New Information

Abstract

This paper explores how the degree of underlying ambivalence toward a certain organization influences the stability of people's reputation judgments when new information is provided as well as how this information, in turn, influences people's sense of ambivalence. Results from one experiment demonstrate that individuals who are highly ambivalent toward an organization display a greater amount of change in reputational judgments when exposed to new information (either positive or negative) compared with those who are less ambivalent. The results also indicate that ambivalence scores change significantly after people are exposed to new information, suggesting that people use new information to diminish their sense of ambivalence when possible. Taken together, the results of the study suggest novel theoretical and practical implications for reputation management. Corporate Reputation Review (2015) 18, 87-98.

Corporate Social (Ir)responsibility and Corporate Hypocrisy: Warmth, Motive and the Protective Value of Corporate Social Responsibility

“…These items were based on Aaker et al (2010). In order to rule out that the different prior-CSR scenarios also differed in believability, participants were asked to judge CSR scenarios' believability, following Mariconda and Lurati (2015). Sample items in the scale were "How believable is the article you just read?"…”

Optimizing the Organizational Crisis Communication Portfolio

“…The more unlike than past situations the current emergency (Coombs 2004 ), and the better the pre-crisis reputation, the more the organization can build upon (Claeys and Cauberghe 2015 ). Evidence suggests positive predispositions towards organizations are less prone to major changes after receiving crisis related news (Claeys and Cauberghe 2015 ; Coombs and Holladay 2014 ) than for example ambivalent predispositions (Mariconda and Lurati 2015 ). Taken together, literature highlights (a) to generally invest in corporate reputation, to (b) use it wisely in crisis situations and to (c) adequately respond to the aspects of reputation that are endangered by the crisis.…”

Fashionably late: Strategies for competing against a pioneer advantage

“…An internet survey administered via Amazon Mechanical Turk (hereinafter MTurk), an online crowdsourcing marketplace of human capital validated for conducting experiments and surveys (Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011;Mariconda & Lurati, 2015;Paolacci, Chandler, & Ipeirotis, 2010), was used to gather data. The data collected are classified as a convenience sample because MTurk does not verify respondents' information.…”