Attributional influences on consumers' desires to communicate about products

Abstract

Three studies examined attributional antecedents of selected consumer communications about products. Study One used the critical incident technique to examine the types of attributions consumers make about product performance when they want to complain to or compliment a firm. Studies Two and Three systematically manipulated causal inferences to determine their effects on consumer desire to complain to a firm, compliment a firm, warn against, or recommend a product to other consumers. Results indicate that attributional locus (buyer‐related versus seller‐related), controllability (under volitional control versus uncontrolled), and stability (fluctuating versus stable) influence consumers' desires to communicate about products.

Dissatisfied consumers’ complaint behaviour concerning product failure of major electrical household appliances – a conceptual framework *

“…Consumers infer reasons for why a product performs well or badly and these reasons influence how they respond (Folkes, 1984;Curren & Folkes, 1987). It is not merely the judgement that the product has failed that determines consumer response (Folkes, 1984).…”

“…It is not merely the judgement that the product has failed that determines consumer response (Folkes, 1984). Weiner's causal dimensions (locus of causality, controllability and stability) have been linked to a variety of attributional consequences (emphasising distinctions among various behaviours, intentions and affects) following product failure (Curren.& Folkes, 1987;Folkes, 1988Folkes, & 1990Ployhart & Harold, 2004). …”

“…Locus of causality is also related to consumers' communications about negative outcomes. When the reasons for consumers' dissatisfaction are company-related, consumers are more inclined to complain to retailers and engage in negative word-of-mouth about products than when the reasons are consumer-related (Richins, 1983;Curren & Folkes, 1987;Swanson & Kelly, 2001). Additionally, external attributions may cause consumers to experience anger toward the company and they may consequently desire to do it harm.…”

“…However, when failures are viewed as controllable, blame is targeted at the perceived entity that had control (Laufer, 2002). When retailers are thought to have control over the cause of product failure, consumers feel angry and desire revenge more than when they are believed to lack control (Folkes, 1984;, 1990Folkes et al, 1987). Anger intensifies as outcome importance increases; hence consumers will be more likely to complain to the company and/or public/private third parties, distance themselves from the company, refuse to repurchase the company's product and warn others against product purchase as opposed to uncontrollable, external product failures (Folkes et al, 1987;Folkes, 1988;Blogett & Granbois, 1992;Swanson & Kelly, 2001).…”

“…When retailers are thought to have control over the cause of product failure, consumers feel angry and desire revenge more than when they are believed to lack control (Folkes, 1984;, 1990Folkes et al, 1987). Anger intensifies as outcome importance increases; hence consumers will be more likely to complain to the company and/or public/private third parties, distance themselves from the company, refuse to repurchase the company's product and warn others against product purchase as opposed to uncontrollable, external product failures (Folkes et al, 1987;Folkes, 1988;Blogett & Granbois, 1992;Swanson & Kelly, 2001). Telling others about product failure enables individuals to vent their anger, to gain social support for the validity of these negative feelings and may allow them some means of retaliation by discouraging others from purchasing the product (Curren & Folkes, 1987).…”