Costello Research Market Research

How consumers react when they feel ‘betrayed’ by a brand

Katelynn C Hipolito — Mon, 03 Nov 2025 14:52:41 +0000

How consumers react when they feel ‘betrayed’ by a brand Katelynn C Hipolito Mon, 11/03/2025 - 09:52

A pair of �鶹��Ƶ marketing professors have unpacked the surprisingly intense and complicated emotional consequences of brand inauthenticity.

We all know what it’s like to discover—either gradually or all at once—someone else’s insincerity. Jessica Hoppner and Russell Abratt, marketing professors at the Donald G. Costello College of Business at �鶹��Ƶ, have found that an encounter with an inauthentic brand produces much the same effect.

Jessica Hoppner. Photo by �鶹��Ƶ.

“Authenticity is defined within the context of the brand-consumer relationship,” Hoppner says. In other words, it’s in the eye of the beholder—or in this case, the consumer. Inauthenticity occurs when a brand behaves in a way that appears to go against its perceived core values, or the consumer’s baseline expectations for that particular brand.

“This kind of inauthenticity causes problems for brand managers because for each person it’s a little bit different, and that makes it really hard to navigate,” Hoppner says.

In their recently published paper in the Journal of Product & Brand Management, Hoppner and Abratt trace the emotional cause-and-effect of brand inauthenticity, offering rare insight into this slippery phenomenon.

The paper was co-authored by Ryan White of Winona State University.

The researchers recruited 218 survey participants using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform. Respondents were asked to write about an experience of brand inauthenticity and answer a series of questions about that experience and steps they took afterward. The results were analyzed in light of concepts drawn from psychological research, such as appraisal theory and balance theory.

Surprisingly, participants named a wide range of brands (156 in all), only 25.2 percent of which appeared on Interbrand’s Top 100 Best Global Brands List. “It covered large brands, small brands, all different sectors,” says Hoppner. “It’s not constrained to consumer products or the brands that we would normally think about.”

The survey responses showed that customers experienced brand inauthenticity as a betrayal of sorts, with emotional implications comparable to those of human-to-human betrayal.

Brand inauthenticity triggered a complex mix of emotional responses in consumers. Anger, anxiety, and disappointment were the principal motifs across the sample, but individual reactions could include one, two, or even all three. The strength of reactive emotions varied according to the perceived severity of the betrayal.

Further, the researchers found that the three main emotional responses led to different behaviors in consumers.

Abratt and Hoppner describe anger as a “hot emotion,” causing consumers to lash out at brands deemed inauthentic, through retaliation, complaints, and withdrawal of loyalty.

Anxiety inspired a less accusatory and more questioning response, as consumers groped for the deeper truth about this apparently two-faced brand. “Anxiety is very ambiguous,” Hoppner says. “When we’re anxious, it’s often because we don’t really know what happened, why it happened, who’s to blame, etc.” Consumers made anxious by brand inauthenticity actually increased their loyalty to the brand, and sought out more information to resolve the ambiguity.

Finally, disappointment led consumers to lapse into a self-protective passivity. Their central concern became not closure or redress, but rather avoiding further disappointment by turning their back on the offending brand.

Russell Abratt. Photo by �鶹��Ƶ.

Abratt and Hoppner advise brand managers to think twice before launching a rote response in hopes of winning back consumers alienated by perceived inauthenticity. Anger and anxiety show up very differently, and disappointment may not show up at all in any conventionally measurable way. When addressing inauthenticity after the fact, a brand’s best bet may be to ask questions and listen closely before attempting to fix the problem.

Of course, the ideal approach would be to avoid being seen as inauthentic in the first place. That would mean understanding the actual relationships consumers have with the brand, which may differ from how managers view the brand’s value proposition. It may also entail intentional, proactive reshaping of those relationships.

“I think the real issue for firms is to understand who they are,” Abratt says. “In other words, brands have to talk about their identity. And once they have figured that one out, they have to have training amongst their employees and say, ‘this is what we stand for. This is what we do.’ Communicate that to your markets and your community, and make sure that you allow the community and customers to talk back with you.”

“I think the real issue for firms is to understand who they are,” Abratt says. “In other words, brands have to talk about their identity. And once they have figured that one out, they have to have training amongst their employees and say, ‘this is what we stand for. This is what we do.’ Communicate that to your markets and your community, and make sure that you allow the community and customers to talk back with you.”

— Russell Abratt, marketing professor at the Donald G. Costello College of Business at �鶹��Ƶ

In This Story

Jessica Hoppner

Russell Abratt

Topics

Marketing - Costello

Marketing Faculty Research

Costello Research Brand Management

Costello Research Market Research

Costello Research Social Influence

Marketing Area

Costello College of Business

Costello College of Business News

Costello College of Business Faculty Research

Research

“Doing well by doing good?" There’s a framework for that

Jennifer Anzaldi — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 15:38:03 +0000

“Doing well by doing good?" There’s a framework for that Jennifer Anzaldi Wed, 07/02/2025 - 11:38

Today’s customers don’t just buy products—they buy into what a company stands for. It is no longer just low prices or flashy marketing that target the latest trends. Stakeholders are asking harder questions: Does this company treat its workers fairly? Are they harming the environment?

In a recent study published in the Journal of Brand Management, Russell Abratt, a marketing professor at the Costello College of Business at �鶹��Ƶ, tackles a key strategic challenge: How companies can move beyond shallow social and environmental messaging to meaningfully shift consumer perceptions. Joining Abratt on this research team are co-authors Emmanuel Silva Quaye of University of Witwatersrand and Nicola Kleyn of University of Pretoria.

Russell Abratt

When a brand is described as being true to themselves, holding values of fairness, a concern for society, and an obligation to goodness, it becomes what they call a conscientious corporate brand. These are brands who are trusted to do the right thing consistently and authentically.

But trust alone is not enough. Companies want to know: Does being conscientious also deliver better business outcomes?

Building on their 2023 work, which introduced a framework for developing conscientious corporate brands, the research team now offers empirical evidence that this framework not only enhances brand trust but also leads to the response companies are hoping for—responsible branding can drive tangible value.

“Firms in order to succeed these days really need to go beyond profits,” says Abratt. “You’ve got to be ethical in whatever you do. You’ve got to be socially aware. And you’ve also got to be very, very conscientious about what you are doing.”

To further investigate Abratt’s 2023 framework and understand what changes stakeholder perceptions, the researchers conducted two experiments with South African participants. Each participant was shown a scenario involving a fictional construction company: the control group highlighted traditional business goals such as efficiency and profitability, and the experimental group emphasized ethical leadership, social impact, and environmental sustainability. The results were striking.

“We saw very clearly the differences between the control group and the experimental group,” Abratt explains. Participants viewed the purpose-driven, socially engaged version of the company as significantly more conscientious, responsible, and authentic than the version focused purely on business efficiency.

Their research identified four elements in a chronological sequence that contribute to conscientious corporate branding: organizational purpose, brand authenticity, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and ethical organizational culture. These are not separate strategies; they reinforce each other.

“Firms in order to succeed these days really need to go beyond profits,” says Abratt. “You’ve got to be ethical in whatever you do. You’ve got to be socially aware. And you’ve also got to be very, very conscientious about what you are doing.”
— Russell Abratt, Instructional Professor, Marketing

The first element of this sequence is organizational purpose. A company must begin by defining why it exists beyond just profits. Next is authenticity. “Authenticity leads to trust,” says Abratt. “The more authentic that an organization is perceived to be, the more positive perceptions the stakeholders have.” The paper finds that authenticity acts as a bridge that connects an organization’s purpose to stakeholders’ perceptions of conscientious corporate branding.

Next is the third element: corporate social responsibility. This must be integrated, not performative. “Developing a corporate social responsibility strategy should be part of the organization’s overall strategy,” says Abratt. “It should not be seen as greenwashing, as added on and fake.”

Lastly, an ethical organizational culture is created by top leadership through example and prioritizing ethical values across the organization.

According to Abratt, “In order for a firm to say this is our purpose beyond profits, they’ve got to have a top leadership that says these are our values. This is what we stand for. Then that needs to be typicalized throughout the organization.”

So what does this mean for business leaders? It means that building a conscientious brand is no longer just a marketing strategy—it’s a business imperative. But the real challenge lies in making sure those sustainable actions resonate with consumers to ultimately result in success. Can companies do well by doing good?

Looking ahead, Abratt and his colleagues hope to expand their research to other industries and other countries or regions to test whether their results are generalizable to other contexts.

“Brands that have a purpose beyond profit are the ones that are going to be seen by stakeholders in a more positive light. And if they are seen in a more positive light, those stakeholders, especially customers, are likely to support that particular organization,” Abratt concludes.