IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/doi10.1086-671465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When, Why, and How Controversy Causes Conversation

Author

Listed:
  • Zoey Chen
  • Jonah Berger

Abstract

How does controversy affect conversation? Five studies using both field and laboratory data address this question. Contrary to popular belief, controversial things are not necessarily more likely to be discussed. Controversy increases likelihood of discussion at low levels, but beyond a moderate level of controversy, additional controversy actually decreases likelihood of discussion. The controversy-conversation relationship is driven by two countervailing processes. Controversy increases interest (which increases likelihood of discussion) but simultaneously increases discomfort (which decreases likelihood of discussion). Contextual factors such as anonymity and whether people are talking to friends or strangers moderate the controversy-conversation relationship by impacting these component processes. Our framework sheds light on how, when, and why controversy affects whether or not things are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Zoey Chen & Jonah Berger, 2013. "When, Why, and How Controversy Causes Conversation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(3), pages 580-593.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/671465
    DOI: 10.1086/671465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/671465
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/671465
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/671465?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Diptiman Banerji & Ramendra Singh & Prashant Mishra, 2020. "Friendships in marketing: a taxonomy and future research directions," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(3), pages 223-243, December.
    2. Yuhsiang, Lin & Lichung, Jen, 2024. "The impact of consumer heterogeneity in the product life cycle on the diffusion patterns of user reviews and sales," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Sara Kim & Rocky Peng Chen & Ke Zhang, 2016. "Anthropomorphized Helpers Undermine Autonomy and Enjoyment in Computer Games," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(2), pages 282-302.
    4. Basu, Shankha & Savani, Krishna, 2017. "Choosing one at a time? Presenting options simultaneously helps people make more optimal decisions than presenting options sequentially," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 76-91.
    5. Guyt, Jonne Y. & Datta, Hannes & Boegershausen, Johannes, 2024. "Unlocking the Potential of Web Data for Retailing Research," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 130-147.
    6. Caroline Moraes & Finola Kerrigan & Roisin McCann, 2020. "Positive Shock: A Consumer Ethical Judgement Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(4), pages 735-751, September.
    7. Wu, Yuanyuan & Liu, Tianjiao & Teng, Lefa & Zhang, Hui & Xie, Chenxin, 2021. "The impact of online review variance of new products on consumer adoption intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 209-218.
    8. Ana Babić Rosario & Kristine Valck & Francesca Sotgiu, 2020. "Conceptualizing the electronic word-of-mouth process: What we know and need to know about eWOM creation, exposure, and evaluation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 422-448, May.
    9. Selma Kadić-Maglajlić & Maja Arslanagić-Kalajdžić & Milena Micevski & Nina Michaelidou & Ekaterina Nemkova, 2017. "Controversial Advert Perceptions in SNS Advertising: The Role of Ethical Judgement and Religious Commitment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 141(2), pages 249-265, March.
    10. Kunal Swani & Lauren I. Labrecque, 2020. "Like, Comment, or Share? Self-presentation vs. brand relationships as drivers of social media engagement choices," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 279-298, September.
    11. Monahan, Lisa & Espinosa, Jennifer A. & Langenderfer, Jeff & Ortinau, David J., 2023. "Did you hear our brand is hated? The unexpected upside of hate-acknowledging advertising for polarizing brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    12. Yimin Cheng & Xiaoyu Zhou & Kai Yao, 2023. "LGBT-Inclusive Representation in Entertainment Products and Its Market Response: Evidence from Field and Lab," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 1189-1209, April.
    13. Mengran Xu & Rebecca Walker Reczek & Richard E. Petty, 2023. "Need to evaluate as a predictor of creating and seeking online word of mouth," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 697-712, December.
    14. Larissa Diekmann & Claas Christian Germelmann, 2021. "Leftover Consumption as a Means of Food Waste Reduction in Public Space? Qualitative Insights from Online Discussions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-30, December.
    15. Friedmann, Enav & Weiss-Sidi, Merav & Solodoha, Eliran, 2024. "Unveiling impact dynamics: Discriminatory brand advertisements, stress response, and the call for ethical marketing practices," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    16. Tobias Maiberger & David Schindler & Nicole Koschate-Fischer, 2024. "Let’s face it: When and how facial emojis increase the persuasiveness of electronic word of mouth," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 119-139, January.
    17. Hu, Miao & Chen, Jie & Chen, Qimei & He, Wei, 2020. "It pays off to be authentic: An examination of direct versus indirect brand mentions on social media," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 19-28.
    18. Jin, Liyin & Huang, Yunhui, 2014. "When giving money does not work: The differential effects of monetary versus in-kind rewards in referral reward programs," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 107-116.
    19. Shmargad, Yotam & Watts, Jameson K.M., 2016. "When Online Visibility Deters Social Interaction: The Case of Digital Gifts," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-14.
    20. Kai Gehring & Matteo Grigoletto, 2023. "Analyzing Climate Change Policy Narratives with the Character-Role Narrative Framework," CESifo Working Paper Series 10429, CESifo.
    21. Stephen, Andrew T. & Lehmann, Donald R., 2016. "How word-of-mouth transmission encouragement affects consumers' transmission decisions, receiver selection, and diffusion speed," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 755-766.
    22. Can, Umit & Alatas, Bilal, 2019. "A new direction in social network analysis: Online social network analysis problems and applications," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 535(C).
    23. He, Yi & You, Ya & Chen, Qimei, 2020. "Our conditional love for the underdog: The effect of brand positioning and the lay theory of achievement on WOM," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 210-222.
    24. Joaquin Sanchez & Carmen Abril & Michael Haenlein, 2020. "Competitive spillover elasticities of electronic word of mouth: an application to the soft drink industry," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 270-287, March.
    25. Bruce I. Carlin & Li Jiang & Stephen A. Spiller, 2018. "Millennial-Style Learning: Search Intensity, Decision Making, and Information Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3313-3330, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/671465. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.