The effects of online negative word‐of‐mouth on dissatisfied customers: A frustration–aggression perspective

Abstract

Conceptualizing how customers construe online negative word‐of‐mouth (nWOM) following failure experiences remains unsettled, leaving providers with inconclusive recovery strategy programmes. This empirical study recognizes online nWOM as a co‐created encounter between the complainant (i.e., the initiator of the online nWOM) and the recipient (i.e., the consumer who engages with the online nWOM), examining their idiosyncrasies to discern their understanding of the experience. It introduces frustration–aggression theory to online WOM literature, recognizing that it can support a higher‐order understanding of phenomena. Through phenomenological hermeneutics, interviews and focus groups, data were collected from millennials in Albania and Kosovo that provided accounts of nuanced and distinctive online nWOM realities. The emerged insights extended extant theory to a three‐fold online nWOM typology (i.e., lenient online nWOM, moderate online nWOM and severe online nWOM) recognizing the negative impact customers have on a provider, which is controlled by frustration–aggression tags. Frustration–aggression variations across online nWOM led to the construct of three types of customers that engage in online nWOM, namely tolerable online nWOM customers, rigorous online nWOM customers and confrontational online nWOM customers. Findings culminated with satisfactory recovery strategies aligned to customer inferences regardless of the nWOM context.

Consumer guilt and green banking services

“…Third, it shows the effect of PCE on AGB and NWOM about banks that disregard the environment, following the need to have a greater understanding of PCE (Kang et al., 2013; Kautish et al., 2019). Fourth, it shows the mediating role of NWOM on the effect of PCE on IGB, following the need to advance understanding regarding negative word‐of‐mouth (Azemi et al., 2020). Finally, it shows the effect of NWOM about banks that disregard the environment on IGB, following the need to promote green banking services (Bryson et al., 2016; Lymperopoulos et al., 2012; Patterson & McEachern, 2018) that increase the consumers’ well‐being (Atik et al, 2020).…”

“…Third, PCE is an important variable in the understanding of green consumer behaviour as indicated by its role in affecting AGB and NWOM about banks that disregard the environment, thus supporting the literature on PCE (Kang et al., 2013; Kautish et al., 2019). Finally, NWOM can be used to predict large scale, aggressive potential harm by the customers against a service provider as indicated by their choice preferences that differ from the previous ones (Azemi et al., 2020; Patterson & McEachern, 2018).…”

“…The finding by this study that a greater level of PCE leads to a more favourable AGB implies that banks have opportunities to promote their green banking services, because the customers have a more favourable evaluation towards the services (Bryson et al., 2016). In addition, the finding that a greater level of PCE leads to greater NWOM communication regarding banking services that disregard the environment implies that banks should discontinue supporting unsustainable projects in order to reduce their customers’ frustration and aggression to harm such banks (Azemi et al., 2020).…”

“…Compared to PWOM, NWOM “is more emotional in nature, is associated with dissatisfaction, and is almost twice as likely to influence the receiver's opinion of the firm” (Sweeney, Mazzarol, & Soutar, 2005, p. 331). NWOM is crucial, because negative information persists amongst customers, even when such information is countered (Azemi, Ozuem, & Howell, 2020; Chiosa & Anastasiei, 2018). Importantly, customers often use NWOM as the basis for their decision making (Chou & Yao, 2012).…”

Coping with multiple identities related to meat consumption

“…Thompson, 1997). Hermeneutic and phenomenological lenses have been fruitful in prior research when exploring consumers' realities, including how they construct identity (Ahuvia, 2005;Azemi et al, 2020). Previous research has found that interviewees are reluctant to share rich identity-related information in group settings, so data were collected in one-on-one interviews (Bisogni et al, 2002).…”