Examination of Product Recalls In Terms of Attribution Theory in the Marketing Context: A Qualitative MetaAnalysis

Öz

The product recalls have become a common practice for many firms in various industries since the number of defective and dangerous products are increasing. Even though this action –product recall – should aim to assure the well-being of consumers, it also creates opportunities to restore the damaged reputation of the corporation; by influencing the perceptions and expectations of the stakeholders. Understanding attribution theory and its applications may help scholars and marketers to choose the appropriate post crisis response strategies, to adjust messages and press releases, in order to shape the consumer attributions, which as a result may create opportunities to minimize the possible damage. The aim of this meta-analysis is to review the current global and Turkish literature in the light of attribution theory from the marketing context and propose a model. Results of this study show that there are number of factors that affect the consumer reactions to the product recalls. Those reactions appear as decrease in purchase intentions or purchases, loss of reputation, decreased firm value, and damage to the brand equity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Product recalls
• attribution theory
• consumer behavior
• meta analysis

ÜRÜN GERİ ÇAĞIRMALARIN ATIF TEORİSİ YÖNÜNDEN PAZARLAMA KONTEKSİNDE İNCELENMESİ: NİTEL META ANALİZİ

Öz

Arızalı ve tehlikeli ürünlerin sayısı arttıkça, ürün geri çağırmalar, çeşitli endüstrilerdeki birçok firma için yaygın bir uygulama haline gelmiştir. Her ne kadar bu eylemin – ürün geri çağırma – tüketicilerin sağlığını korumayı hedef alması gerekse de; bu eylem sayesinde şirketler, paydaşların algı ve beklentilerini etkileyerek hasar gören itibarlarını düzeltmek için de fırsatlar yaratmaktadır. Bu sebeple, atıf teorisini ve uygulamalarını anlamak, akademisyenlere ve pazarlamacılara, kriz sonrası müdahale stratejilerini seçmede, şirket mesaj ve basın bültenlerini belirlemede yardımcı olarak, tüketici algılarını etkilemek ve olası zararı en aza indirgemek için fırsatlar yaratabilecektir. Bu meta-analizin amacı, mevcut küresel ve Türk literatürünü, pazarlama bağlamında ve atıf teorisi ışığında gözden geçirmek ve bir model önermektir. Bu çalışmanın sonuçları, ürün geri çağırmalara yönelik tüketici tepkisini etkileyen birçok faktörün bulunduğunu göstermektedir. Bu tepkiler, satın alma niyetlerinde veya satın alımlarda azalma, firmanın itibar kaybetmesi, firma değerinde düşüş ve marka değerindeki hasar olarak kendini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ürün geri çağırma
• atıf teorisi
• tüketici davranışları
• meta analiz

Kaynakça

1. Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. Advances in experimental social psychology, 6(1), 1-62.
2. Bemmels, B. (1991). Attribution theory and discipline arbitration. ILR Review, 44(3), 548-562.
3. Boedecker, K. A., Morgan, F. W., & Saviers, A. B. (1998). Continuing duty to warn: Public policy and managerial views. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 127-131.
4. Burnkrant, R. E. (1975). Attribution theory in marketing research: Problems and prospects. Advances in Consumer Research Volume 02 (s. 465-470). Ann Abor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
5. Carvalho, S. W., Muralidharan, E., & Bapuji, H. (2015). Corporate Social ‘Irresponsibility’: Are Consumers’ Biases in Attribution of Blame Helping Companies in Product–Harm Crises Involving Hybrid Products? Journal of Business Ethics, 130(3), 651-663.
6. Chang, H. H., Tsai, Y.-C., Wong, K. H., Wang, J. W., & Cho, F. J. (2015). The effects of response strategies and severity of failure on consumer attribution with regard to negative word-of-mouth. Decision Support Systems, 71(1), 48-61.
7. Cleeren, K. (2015). Using advertising and price to mitigate losses in a product-harm crisis. Business Horizons, 58(2), 157-162.
8. Coombs, W. T. (2007). Protecting Organization Reputations During a Crisis: The Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163–176.

9. Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (1996). Communication and Attributions in a Crisis: An Experimental Study in Crisis Communication. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8(4), 279-295.
10. Cort, K. T., Griffith, D. A., & White, D. S. (2007). An attribution theory approach for understanding the internationalization of professional service firms. International Marketing Review, 24(1), 9-25.
11. Davis, J. J. (1994). Good Ethics Is Good for Business: Ethical Attributions and Response to Environmental Advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(11), 873-885.
12. Dawar, N., & Pillutla, M. M. (2000). Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), 215-226.
13. De Blasio, A., & Veale, R. (2009). Why say sorry? Influencing consumer perceptions post organizational crises. Australasian Marketing Journal, 17(2), 75-83.
14. De Matos, C. A., & Rossi, C. V. (2007). Consumer reaction to product recalls: factors influencing product judgement and behavioural intentions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(1), 109-116.
15. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
16. Folkes, V. S. (1984). Consumer Reactions to Product Failure: An Attributional Approach. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(4), 398-409.
17. Grunwald, G., & Hempelmann, B. (2010). Impacts of reputation for quality on perceptions of company responsibility and product-related dangers in times of product-recall and public complaints crises: Results from an empirical investigation. Corporate Reputation Review, 13(4), 264-283.
18. Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
19. Hsu, L., & Lawrence, B. (2016). The role of social media and brand equity during a product recall crisis: A shareholder value perspective. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 33(1), 59-77.
20. Jackson, G. C., & Morgan, F. W. (1988). Responding to Recall Requests: A Strategy for Managing Goods Withdrawal. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing , 152-165.
21. Jarrell, G., & Peltzman, S. (1985). The Impact of Product Recalls on the Wealth of Sellers. Journal of Political Economy, 93(3), 512-536.
22. Jolly, D. W., & Mowen, J. C. (1985). Product recall communications: The effects of source, media, and social responsibility information. Advances in Consumer Research, 12, 471-475.
23. Jones, E. E. (1976). How Do People Perceive the Causes of Behavior? Experiments based on attribution theoryoffer some insights into how actors and observers differ in viewing the causal structureof their social world. American Scientist, 64(3), 300-305.
24. Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions the attribution process in person perception. L. Berkowitz içinde, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 2 (s. 219-266). New York, NY: Academic Press.
25. Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (s. 192-238). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
26. Ketron, S. (2016). Consumer cynicism and perceived deception in vanity sizing: The moderating role of retailer (dis)honesty. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 33, 33-42.
27. Korkofingas, C., & Ang, L. (2011). Product recall, brand equity, and future choice. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(9-10), 959-975.
28. Kumar, S. (2014). A knowledge based reliability engineering approach to manage product safety and recalls. Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 5323–5339.
29. Laufer, D., & Coombs, W. T. (2006). How should a company respond to a product harm crisis? The role of corporate reputation and consumer-based cues. Business Horizons, 49, 379 — 385.
30. Lei, J., Dawar, N., & Gürhan-Canli, Z. (2012). Base-rate information in consumer attributions of product-harm crises. Journal of Marketing Research, 49(3), 336-348.
31. Magno, F. (2012). Managing product recalls: The effects of time, responsible vs. opportunistic recall management and blame on consumers’ attitudes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1309-1315.
32. Manusov, V., & Spitzberg, B. (2008). Attribution Theory: Finding good cause in the search for theory. L. A. Baxter, & D. O. Braithwaite içinde, Engaging Theories in Interpersonal Communication: Multiple Perspectives (s. 37-49). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33. Maxham III, J. G., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2002). A longitudinal study of complaining customers’ evaluations of multiple service failures and recovery efforts. Journal of marketing, 66(4), 57-71.
34. Mowen, J. C. (1980). On Product Endorser Effectiveness: A Balance Model Approach. Current issues and research in advertising, 3(1), 41-57. doi:10.1080/01633392.1980.10505293
35. Rhee, M., & Haunschild, P. R. (2006). The liability of good reputation: A study of product recalls in the US automobile industry. Organization Science, 17(1), 101-117.
36. Schwarz, A. (2012). How publics use social media to respond to blame games in crisis communication: The Love Parade tragedy in Duisburg 2010. Public Relations Review, 38(3), 430-437.
37. Settle, R. B., & Golden, L. L. (1974). Attribution Theory and Advertiser Credibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 11(2), 181-185.
38. Sparkman Jr, R. M., & Locander, W. B. (1980). Attribution theory and advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 219-224.
39. Swinyard, W. R., & Ray, M. L. (1977). Advertising-selling interactions: an attribution theory experiment. Journal of Marketing Research, 509-516.
40. Tennert, F. (2014). An attributional analysis of corporate reporting in crisis situations: The 2010 Toyota recall. Journal of Communication Management, 18(4), 422-435.
41. US Food and Drug Administration. (2016, 03 04). What is a recall? 02 28, 2017 tarihinde US Food and Drug Administration: https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Transparency/Basics/ucm194885.htm adresinden alındı
42. Vassilikopoulou, A., Lepetsos, A., Siomkos, G., & Chatzipanagiotou, K. (2009). The importance of factors influencing product-harm crisis management across different crisis extent levels: A conjoint analysis. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 17(1), 65 – 74.
43. Wei, J. Z. (2016). An empirical study of the Volkswagen crisis in China: customers’ information processing and behavioral intentions. Risk analysis, 36(1), 114-129.
44. Yavas, U. (1994). Research Note: Students as Subjects in Advertising and Marketing Research. International Marketing, 11(4), 35-43.
45. Zavyalova, A., Pfarrer, M. D., Reger, R. K., & Shapiro, D. L. (2012). Managing the message: The effects of firm actions and industry spillovers on media coverage following wrongdoing. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1079-1101.