品牌故事已成為企業行銷中重要策略工具，強調品牌創業初期資源匱乏但具奮鬥精神的落水狗品牌傳記以及資源充足的優勢狗品牌傳記皆已被廣泛應用於市場。然，在日常生活中品牌違規事件頻繁發生，過往研究卻鮮少探討事前接觸之品牌傳記所樹立的形象如何影響消費者在違規情境下的反應以及背後的心理機制。本研究聚焦於此，以解釋水平理論為核心，檢測事先使用之品牌傳記類型(落水狗vs. 優勢狗)，如何在發生道德違規時，影響消費者品牌寬恕、品牌態度與購買意願，並檢視品牌擬人化和違規相關性如何干擾品牌傳記類型的相對效果。
本研究共執行三個實驗，並有以下重要發現：(1)在品牌發生違規前，消費者對落水狗品牌傳記的品牌態度和購買意願優於優勢狗品牌傳記、(2)當品牌發生違規時，消費者的品牌寬恕會正向影響其對品牌的態度和購買意願變化、(3)若品牌傳記採用了更具畫面感與具象性的語言，事前使用擬人化的落水狗品牌傳記(vs. 優勢狗)，在品牌發生違規時，會使消費者產生較高的品牌寬恕、(4)事前使用優勢狗品牌傳記(vs. 落水狗)，在自己親身經歷的違規情境下，落水狗傾向低和道德認同低之消費者產生較高的品牌寬恕；事前使用落水狗品牌傳記(vs. 優勢狗)，在看到他人經歷的違規情境下較佳，會使情境記憶觸發程度較高之消費者產生較高的品牌寬恕、(5)當消費者落水狗傾向低、道德認同低、情境記憶觸發程度低的時候，優勢狗品牌傳記所發揮品牌修復效果較佳；當消費者落水狗傾向高、道德認同高、情境記憶觸發程度高的時候，落水狗品牌傳記效果較佳。
本研究結果對品牌傳記、品牌違規、品牌擬人化、違規相關性等跨領域研究具有學術理論貢獻，並能提供業者在使用品牌傳記作為宣傳時，預先思考傳記類型、傳記是否擬人化在未來品牌形象維護之效果，以提早做相應的合適設計。

Brand storytelling has become an important strategic tool in corporate marketing, and both underdog brand biographies—emphasizing a brand’s initial resource scarcity and perseverance—and top-dog brand biographies—highlighting abundant resources and competitive advantages—have been widely adopted in the marketplace. However, brand transgressions occur frequently in everyday life, and prior research has paid limited attention to how brand images established through pre-exposure to brand biographies influence consumers’ responses to transgression situations, as well as the underlying psychological mechanisms. Addressing this gap, the present study draws on Construal Level Theory to examine how previously employed brand biography types (underdog vs. top-dog) affect consumer brand forgiveness, brand attitudes, and purchase intentions following a moral transgression, and further investigates how brand anthropomorphism and transgression relevance moderate the relative effects of brand biography types.
This research consists of three experiments and yields several key findings. First, prior to a brand transgression, consumers exhibit more favorable brand attitudes and higher purchase intentions toward underdog brand biographies than toward top-dog brand biographies. Second, when a brand transgression occurs, consumer brand forgiveness positively influences changes in brand attitudes and purchase intentions. Third, when brand biographies employ more vivid and concrete language, prior exposure to an anthropomorphized underdog brand biography (vs. a top-dog biography) leads to higher brand forgiveness following a transgression. Fourth, in personally experienced transgression contexts, prior exposure to a top-dog brand biography (vs. an underdog biography) results in higher brand forgiveness among consumers with low underdog disposition and low moral identity; conversely, in observed transgression contexts, underdog brand biographies (vs. top-dog biographies) are more effective, eliciting higher brand forgiveness among consumers with high situational memory activation. Fifth, when consumers have low underdog disposition, low moral identity, and low levels of situational memory activation, top-dog brand biographies demonstrate stronger brand repair effects; in contrast, when consumers have high underdog disposition, high moral identity, and high situational memory activation, underdog brand biographies are more effective.
The findings of this study contribute to interdisciplinary research on brand biographies, brand transgressions, brand anthropomorphism, and transgression relevance by clarifying their interactive effects and underlying mechanisms. Moreover, the results provide managerial implications by suggesting that firms should strategically consider both the type of brand biography and whether to employ anthropomorphism when using brand stories for communication, as these narrative choices have important implications for future brand image protection and crisis recovery, allowing firms to design appropriate strategies in advance.

目錄
論文審定書 ..................................................................................................................... i
致謝 ................................................................................................................................ ii
摘要 .............................................................................................................................. iii
Abstract ......................................................................................................................... iv
目錄 ............................................................................................................................... vi
圖目錄 ........................................................................................................................ viii
表目錄 ........................................................................................................................... ix
第一章 緒論 .................................................................................................................. 1
一、 研究背景 .......................................................................................................... 1
二、 研究動機 .......................................................................................................... 6
三、 研究問題 ........................................................................................................ 12
四、 研究目的 ........................................................................................................ 12
第二章 文獻回顧 ........................................................................................................ 14
一、 品牌傳記(Brand Biography) ......................................................................... 14
二、 品牌違規(Brand Transgression) .................................................................... 16
三、 品牌擬人化(Brand Anthropomorphism) ....................................................... 29
四、 解釋水平(Construal-Level Theory, CLT) ...................................................... 30
第三章 假說推論與架構 ............................................................................................ 35
一、 研究架構 ........................................................................................................ 35
二、 假說推論 ........................................................................................................ 35
第四章 研究方法 ........................................................................................................ 43
一、 實驗一 ............................................................................................................ 43
二、 實驗二 ............................................................................................................ 84
三、 實驗三 .......................................................................................................... 121
第五章 結論與建議 .................................................................................................. 153
一、研究發現 ........................................................................................................ 153
二、研究意涵 ........................................................................................................ 164
（一） 理論意涵 .................................................................................................. 164
（二） 實務意涵 .................................................................................................. 167
三、研究限制與未來方向 .................................................................................... 171
第六章 參考文獻 ...................................................................................................... 175
一、中文文獻 ........................................................................................................ 175
二、英文文獻 ........................................................................................................ 175
附錄 ............................................................................................................................ 192
附錄一、前測一問卷 ............................................................................................ 192
附錄二、前測二問卷 ............................................................................................ 197
附錄三、實驗一問卷 ............................................................................................ 201
附錄四、實驗二問卷 ............................................................................................ 213
附錄五、實驗三問卷 ............................................................................................ 226

一、中文文獻
方璽、楊閔涵、林孟彥（2023）。誰愛看 AI 翻譯評論?調節焦點與解釋水平
理論之觀點。觀光休閒學報，29(1)，95-124。
周軒逸、江彥廷（2020）。負面競選廣告設計之效果：議題/形象訴求、醜化對
手之照片與漫畫與色調運用。傳播與社會學刊，51，141-198。
周軒逸、許婷媛 (2018)。哀兵與優勢者品牌傳記的相對效果: 以品牌概念形象,
產品知覺身體風險為干擾。企業管理學報，119，1-39。
周軒逸、李瑞清、吳秀玲（2017）。政治宣傳與抗拒說服-名人政治背書的廣告
效果研究。臺灣民主季刊，14(3)，45-101。

二、英文文獻
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building strong brands. New York: The Free Press.
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing
Research, 34, 347-356.
Aaker, J., Fournier, S & Brasel, S. A. (2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 1-16.
Abbott, H. P. (2002). The Cambridge Introduction to narrative. Cambridge
University Press.
Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of Inequity. The Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(5), 422-436.
Aggarwal et al. (2011). Scarcity messages. Journal of Advertising. 13
Aggarwal, P. & Law, S. (2005). Role of relationship norms in processing brand information. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 453-464.
Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2007). Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 468-479.
Ahluwalia, R., Burnkrant, R. E., & Unnava, H. R. (2000). Consumer response to negative publicity: The moderating role of commitment. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), 203-214.
Akdim, K., Belanche, D. & Flavián, M. (2021). Attitudes toward service robots: Analyses of explicit and implicit attitudes based on anthropomorphism and construal level theory. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 956-6119.
Allison, S. T., & Messick, D. M. (1985). Effects of experience on performance in a replenishable resource trap. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 943-948.
Albert, N., Merunka, D., & Valette-Florence, P. (2008). When consumers love their brands: Exploring the concept and its dimensions. Journal of Business Research, 61(1), 1062-1075.
Allen, D., Campbell, M., Johnson, S., & Wachtman, E. (2013). Brand story building.
Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423-1440.
Avnet, T., & Higgins, E. T. (2006). Response to comments on how regulatory fit affects value in consumer choices and opinions . Journal of Marketing Research, 43(1), 24-27.
Avery, J., Paharia, N., Keinan, A. & Schor, J. B. (2010), The strategic use of brand biographies. Research in Consumer Behavior, 12, 213-229.
Baumeister, R. F., Stillwell, A. M., & Heatherton, T. F. (1994). Guilt: An
interpersonal approach. Psychological Bulletin, 115(2), 243-267.
Baek, T. H., Bakpayev, M., Yoon, S., & Kim, S. (2022). Smiling ai agents: How
anthropomorphism and broad smiles increase charitable giving. International Journal of Advertising, 41(5), 850-867.
Bonifield, C., & Cole, C. (2007). Affective responses to service failure: Anger, regret, and retaliatory versus conciliatory responses. Market Lett, 18, 85-99.
Brakus, J. J., Schmitt, B. H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52-68.
Bratu, S. (2019). Can social media influencers shape corporate brand reputation? Online followers’ trust, value creation, and purchase intentions. Review of Contemporary Philosophy, 18, 157-163.
Casidy, R., & Shin, H. (2015). The effects of harm directions and service recovery strategies on customer forgiveness and negative word-of-mouth
intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 27(1), 103-112.
Çelik, S., Tektaş, Ö. O., & Kavak, B. (2024). The effect of service recovery
on socially distant third-party customers: An experimental research on
emotions, forgiveness, repatronage intention and wom. Journal of Service
Theory and Practice, 34(4), 519-542.
Cesario, J., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from feeling right. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(3), 388-404.
Choi, W., Kim, T., & HA. (2023). Do job-relevance and severity of celebrity athlete’s transgression matter? Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 23(8), 2138-2143.
Chou, P, F. (2015). An analysis of the relationship between service failure, service recovery and loyalty for low cost carrier travelers. Journal of Air Transport Management, 47, 119-125.
Chung, E., & Beverland, M.B. (2006). An exploration of consumer forgiveness following marketer transgressions. Advances in Consumer Research, 33(1), 98-99.
Chen, F., Sengupta, J., & Zheng, J. (2023). When products come alive: Interpersonal communication norms induce positive word of mouth for anthropomorphized products. Journal of Consumer Research, 49(6), 1032-1052.
Chiu, H. C., Hsieh, Y. C., & Kuo, Y. C. (2012). How to align your brand stories with your products. Journal of Retailing, 88(2), 262-275.
Cierniak , G. , Scheiter , K. and Gerjets , P. 2009 . Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load. Computers in Human Behavior , 25(2), 315-324 .
Colquitt, J. A. (2004). Does the justice of the one interact with the justice of the many? Reactions to procedural justice in teams. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89(4), 633-646.
Cremer, D. D. & Hiel, A.V. (2006). Effects of another person's fair treatment on one's own emotions and behaviors: the moderating role of how much the other cares for you. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(2), 231-249.
Dabija, D. C., & Băbuţ, R. (2014). Empirical study on the impact of service,
communication and corporate social responsability on the image of romanian retail brands. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, 906-912.
Deligoz, K., & Ünal, S. (2021). The effect of anthropomorphic mascot on the
purchasing intention of consumers: An experimental study. Sosyoekonomi,
29(50), 229-254.
Delbaere, M., McQuarrie, E. F., & Phillips, B. J. (2011). Personification in
advertising: Using a visual metaphor to trigger anthropomorphism. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 121-130.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Einwiller, S. A., Fedorikhin, A., Johnson, A. R., & Kamins, M. A. (2006). Enough is enough! When identification no longer prevents negative corporate associations. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 34, 185-194.
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864-886.
Escalas, J. E. (2004). Narrative processing: building consumer connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1-2), 168-180.
Escalas, J. E. (2007). Self-referencing and persuasion narrative transportation versus analytical elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 421-429.
Exline, J. J., Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., Campbell, W. K., & Finkel, E. J. (2004). Too proud to let go: Narcissistic entitlement as a barrier to forgiveness Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 894-912.
Fetscherin, M., & Sampedro, A. (2019). Brand forgiveness. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 28(5), 633-652.
Finkel, E. J., Rusbult, C. E., Kumashiro, M., & Hannon, P. A. (2002). Dealing with betrayal in close relationships: Does commitment promote forgiveness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 956-974.
Finsterwalder, J., Yee, T., & Tombs, A. (2017). Would you forgive Kristen Stewart or tiger woods or maybe lance armstrong? Exploring consumers' forgiveness of celebrities' transgressions. Journal of Marketing Management, 33, 1204-1229.
Folkes, V. S. (1984). Consumer reactions to product failure: An attributional
approach. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(4), 398.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343-353.
Folger, R., & Kass, E. E. (2000). Social comparison and fairness: A counterfactual simulations perspective. Handbook of Social Comparison, 423-441.
Fog, K., Budtz, C., & Yakaboylu, B. (2005). Storytelling: Branding in practice. South Asian Journal of Management, 12(3), 92-95.
Garretson, J. A., & Niedrich, R. W. (2004). Spokes characters : Creating character trust and positive brand attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 25-36.
Gino, F., Ayal, S., & Ariely, D. (2009). Contagion and differentiation in unethical behavior: The effect of one bad apple on the barrel. Psychological Science, 20(3), 393-398.
Gohary, A., Hamzelu, B., & Pourazizi, L. (2016). A little bit more value creation and a lot of less value destruction! exploring service recovery paradox in value context: A study in travel industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 20, 189-203.
Grégoire, Y., & Fisher, R. J. (2008). Customer betrayal and retaliation: when your best customers become your worst enemies. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 246-261.
Grégoire, Y., Tripp, T. M., & Legoux, R. (2009). When customer love turns into
lasting hate: The effects of relationship strength and time on customer
revenge and avoidance. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 18-32.
Gregoire, Y., Ghadami, F., Laporte, S., Senecal, S., & Larocque, D. (2018). How can firms stop customer revenge? The effects of direct and indirect revenge on post-complaint responses. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46, 1052-1071.
Gu, Y., & Chen, R. (2021). How does money phrasing influence intention to donate: The role of construal level and fit. Psychology & Marketing, 38(11), 1911-1927.
Han, B. (2023). The relationship between perceived brand globalness/localness and purchase intention: Exploring the role of consumer-brand identification with underdog positioning. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 32(4), 632-644.
Han, B., & h M. (2020). Interaction of the underdog with equality and scarcity. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 38(2), 254-267.
Hansen, J., &Wanke, M. (2010). Truth from language and truth from fit: The impact of linguistic concreteness and level of construal on subjective truth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(11), 1576-1588.
Haynes, G. A., & Olson, J. M. (2006). Coping with threats to just-world beliefs: Derogate, blame, or help? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(3), 664-682.
Homans, G. C. (1961), Human Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, New York:
Harcourt.
Idson, L. C., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Imagining how you’d feel:
The role of motivational experiences from regulatory fit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(7), 926-937.
Joireman, J., Grégoire, Y., Devezer, B., & Tripp, T. M. (2013). When do customers offer firms a second chance following a double deviation? The impact of inferred firm motives on customer revenge and reconciliation. Journal of Retailing, 89(3), 315-337.
Johnson, A., Matear, M., & Thomson, M. (2011). A coal in the heart: Self-relevance as a post-exit predictor of consumer anti-brand actions. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(1), 108-125.
Jung, N. Y. & Seock, Y. K. (2017). Effect of service recovery on customers’
perceived justice, satisfaction, and word-of-mouth intentions on online
shopping websites. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 37, 23-30.
Kao, D. T., Wu, P. H., & Yu, A. P. I. (2017). The impact of construal level on brand preferences: Ad metaphors and brand biography as moderators. Asia Pacific Management Review, 22(1), 52-59.
Kardes, F. R., Cronley, M. L., & Kim, J. (2006). Construal-level effects on preference stability, preference-behavior correspondence, and the suppression of competing brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 135-144.
Kennedy, E. & Guzmán, F. (2016). Co-creation of brand identities: Consumer and industry influence and motivations. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 33(5), 313-323.
Kennedy, E. & Guzmán, F. (2021), No matter what you do, i still love you: An
examination of consumer reaction to brand transgressions. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 30(4), 594-608.
Kim, Y., & Lee, H. (2023). Humanizing Chatbots for Political Campaigns: How Do Voters Respond to Feasibility and Desirability Appeals from Political Chatbots? Interacting with Computers, 35(1), 40-48.
Kim, Y., & Park, K. (2020). When the underdog positioning backfires! The effects of ethical transgressions on attitudes toward underdog brands. Frontiers in Psychology, 11.
Kim, K., Lee, S., & Choi, Y. K. (2019b). Image proximity in advertising appeals: Spatial distance and product types. Journal of Business Research, 99, 490-497.
Kim, Y., Park, K., & Lee, S. S. (2019). The underdog trap: The moderating role of transgression type in forgiving underdog brands. Psychology & Marketing. Psychology and Marketing, 36(1).
Kim, Y., Park, K., & Lee, S. S. (2022). Human-like underdog brands: How brand personality affects self-service technology adoption. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 50(4), 1-13.
Kim, H., Rao, A. R., & Lee, A. Y. (2009). It's time to vote: The effect of matching.
Kross, E., Ayduk, O., & Mischel, W. (2005). When asking “why” does not hurt
distinguishing rumination from reflective processing of negative emotions. Psychological Science, 16(9), 709-715.
Kim, Y., Ho, T. H., Tan, L. P., & Casidy, R. (2023). Factors influencing consumer forgiveness: A systematic literature review and directions for future research. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 33(5), 601-628.
Kim, J., Allison, S. T., Eylon, D., Goethals, G. R., Markus, M. J., Hindle, S. M., & McGuire, H. A. (2008). Rooting for (and then abandoning) the underdog.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(10), 2550-2573.
Lee, A. Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bring the frame into Focus: The influence of
regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 86(2), 205-218.
Lerner, M. J. (1975). The justice motive in social behavior: Introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 1-19.
Li, Y., & Zhao, M. (2018). Must the underdog win? The moderation effect of
product type in the underdog effect of brand stories. Asian Journal of Social Psychology. 21(4), 237-245.
Li, Y., & Zhao, M.(2021). Underdog or top dog brand story? The role of self-
construal and need of uniqueness. Frontiers in psychology, 12.
Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (1998). The role of feasibility and desirability
considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal
construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 5-18.
Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2014). Traversing psychological distance. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(7), 364-369.
Lin, C. H., & Chen, M. Y. (2015). Being hooked by a brand story: A view of regulatory focus. European Journal of Marketing, 49(5-6), 692-712.
Lin, W. (2006). Correlation between personality characteristics, situations of service failure, customer relation strength and remedial recovery strategy. Services Marketing Quarterly, 28(1), 5-88.
Liviatan, I., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2008). Interpersonal similarity as a social distance dimension: Implications for perception of others’ actions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1256-1269.
Lude, M., Prügl, R. & Rauschendorfer, N. (2023). Who let the dogs out? How
underdog biographies told by family firms affect consumers’ brand attitude. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 32(5), 774-787.
Lundqvist, A., Liljander, V., Gummerus, J., & Van Riel, A. (2013). The impact of storytelling on the consumer brand experience: the case of a firm originated story. Journal of Brand Management, 20, 283-297.
Malle, B. F. (2006). The Actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: A (surprising)meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,132(6), 895-919.
Mattila, A., Hanks, L., & Wang, C. (2014). Others service experiences: Emotions, perceived justice, and behavior. European Journal of Marketing, 48(3-4), 552-571.
McGinnis, L. P., & Gentry, J. W. (2009). Underdog consumption: An exploration into meanings and motives. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 191-199.
McCollough, M. A., Berry, L. L., & Yadav, M. S. (2000). An empirical investigation of customer satisfaction after service failure and recovery. Journal of Service Research, 3(2), 121-137.
Mccullough, M. E., Rachal, K. C., & Worthington, E. L. (1997). Interpersonal
forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 321-336.
Merchant, A., Ford, J. B., & Sargeant, A. (2010). Charitable organizations’
storytelling influence on donors’ emotions and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 63, 754-762.
Merz, M. A., Zarantonello, L. & Grappi, S. (2018). How valuable are your
customers in the brand value co-creation process? The development of a
customer co-creation value (CCCV) scale. Journal of Business Research, 82(1), 79-89.
Mourey, J. A., Olson, J. G., & Yoon, C. (2017). Products as pals: Engaging with anthropomorphic products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 414-431.
Nager, K. (2017). Support for the underdog brand biography: Effects on consumer attitude and behavior. Journal of Marketing Communications, 477-493.
Newton, J. D., Wong, J., & Casidy, R. (2018). Deck the halls with boughs of holly to soften evaluations of service failure. Journal of Service Research, 21, 389-404.
Ok, C., Back, K, J., & Shanklin, C. W. (2007). Mixed findings on the service
recovery paradox. The Service Industries Journal, 27(6), 671-686.
Oba, D., Howe, H. S., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2024). Brand teasing: How brands build strong relationships by making fun of their consumers. Journal of Consumer Research. 26-117.
Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 84(4), 429-434.
Paharia, N., Keinan, A., Avery, J., & Schor, J. B. (2011). The underdog effect: The marketing of disadvantage and determination through brand biography. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(5), 775-790.
Perkins, A. W., & Forehand, M. R. (2012). Implicit Self-Referencing: The Effect of Nonvolitional Self-Association on Brand and Product Attitude. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(1), 142-156.
Pinel, E. C., Long, A. E., Landau, M. J., Alexander, K., & Pyszczynski, T. (2006). Seeing I to I: A pathway to interpersonal connectedness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(2), 243-257.
Puzakova, M., & Aggarwal, P. (2018). Brands as rivals: Consumer pursuit of
distinctiveness and the role of brand anthropomorphism. Journal of Consumer Research ,45(4), 869-888.
Puzakova, M., Kwak, H., & Rocereto, J, F. (2009). Pushing the envelope of brand and personality: Antecedents and moderators of anthropomorphized brands. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 413-420.
Puzakova, M., Kwak, H., & Rocereto, J. F. (2013). When humanizing brands goes wrong: The detrimental effect of brand anthropomorphization amid product wrong doings. Journal of Marketing, 77(3), 81-100.
Romani, S., Grappi, S., Zarantonello, L. & Bagozzi, R. P. (2015). The revenge of the consumer! How brand moral violations lead to consumer anti-brand
activism. Journal of Brand Management, 22(8), 658-672.
Ruan, W., & Deng, F. (2024). Stop unsafe behaviors: Matching strategies of social norms and anthropomorphized roles in tourism safety communication. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 60, 177-191.
Rusbult, C. E., Verette, J., Whitney, G. A., Slovik, L. F., & Lipkus, I. (1991).
Accommodation processes in close relationships: theory and preliminary
empirical evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 53-78.
Schumacher, A., & Mai, R. (2024). Organizational top dog (vs. underdog) narratives increase the punishment of corporate moral transgressions: When dominance is a liability and prestige is an asset. Journal of Business Ethics, 194(1), 19-36.
Schroll, R., Schnurr, B., & Grewal, D. (2018). Humanizing products with
handwritten typefaces. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(3), 648-672.
Septianto, F., & Kwon, J. (2022). Too cute to be bad? Cute brand logo reduces consumer punishment following brand transgressions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(4), 1108-1126.
Shankar, A., Elliott, R., & Goulding, C. (2001). Understanding consumption:
contributions from a narrative perspective. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(3-4), 429-453.
Sheng, S., Bao, Y. & Pan, Y. (2007). Partitioning or bundling? Perceived fairness of the surcharge makes a difference. Psychology & Marketing, 24(12), 1025-1041.
Siamagka, N. T. (2023). Explaining consumer brand forgiveness through the lens of narcissism. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 41(3), 360-374.
Son, J., & Jin, B. E. (2019). When do high prices lead to purchase intention? Testing two layers of moderation effects. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 31(5), 1516-1531.
Solja, E., Liljander, V., & Söderlund, M. (2018). Short brand stories on packaging: an examination of consumer responses. Psychology & Marketing, 35(4), 294-306.
Soderberg, C. K., Callahan, S. P., Kochersberger, A. O., Amit, E., & Ledgerwood, A. (2015). The effects of psychological distance on abstraction: Two meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 525-548.
Srivastava, M., & Gosain, A. (2020). Impact of service failure attributions on
dissatisfaction: Revisiting attribution theory. Journal of Management Research,20(2), 99-112.
Tezer, A., Bodur, O., & Grohmann, B. (2022). When goliaths win and davids lose:The moderating role of perceived risk in brand biography effects. Psychology & Marketing. 39(1), 27-45.
Thai, M., Wenzel, M., Quinney, B., Woodyatt, L., & Okimoto, T. (2024). Keeping score:Past victimization reduces offender's conciliatory sentiments for their present transgressions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 54(6), 1228-1246.
Tomlinson, E. C., Dineen, B. R., & Lewicki, R. J. (2004). The road to reconciliation:Antecedents of victim willingness to reconcile following a broken promise. Journal of Management, 30(2), 165-187.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463.
Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 83-95.
Tsarenko, Y., & Tojib, D. (2015). Consumers' forgiveness after brand transgression: The effect of the firm's corporate social responsibility and response. Journal of Marketing Management, 31, 1851-1877.
Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2001). The psychology of own versus others’
treatment: Self-oriented and other-oriented effects on perceptions of procedural justice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(10), 1324-1333.
Van Riel, C. B., & Van den Ban, A. (2001). The added value of corporate logos-An empirical study. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3-4), 428-440.
Wadhwa, M., & Zhang, K. (2015). This number just feels right: The impact of
roundedness of price numbers on product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(5), 1172-1185.
Weitzl, W., & Einwiller, S. (2019). Intervening failure attribution perceptions and nwom with online service recovery actions: An abstract. Finding New Ways to Engage and Satisfy Global Customers, 743-743.
Xie, Y. & Peng, S. (2009). How to repair customer trust after negative publicity: The roles of competence, integrity, benevolence, and forgiveness. Psychology and Marketing, 26(7), 572-589.
Xu, H. F., Bolton, L. E., & Winterich, K. P. (2021). How do consumers react to
company moral transgressions? The role of power distance belief and
empathy for victims. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(1), 77-101.
Yagil, D., & Luria, G. (2016). Customer forgiveness of unsatisfactory service:Manifestations and antecedents. Service Business, 10, 557-579.
Zhao, M., & Xie, J. (2011). Effects of social and temporal distance on consumers responses to peer recommendations. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 486-496.