Alleviating Negative Spillover of a Brand-Harm Crisis: Sensegiving vs. Sensehiding in a Competitor’s Denial Response Strategy

A brand-harm crisis not only affects the scandalized brand, but may also influence competing brands. Thus, marketers of competing brands need to develop response strategies for reducing negative spillover effects. This research takes a competitor’s perspective and introduces two types of response strategies used to convey a sense of denial: sensegiving and sensehiding. It also investigates how the effects of response strategies are contingent upon brand relatedness and individual thinking styles. The results from three experimental studies show that using a sensegiving strategy reduces negative spillover effects more than using a sensehiding strategy. Additionally, the studies suggest that the observed difference in the effects of response strategy tends to be greater when the level of brand relatedness is high than when it is low. However, individual thinking styles (holistic vs. analytic) seem to have little impact on consumers’ responses to the two denial strategies. This research contributes to the brand-harm crisis literature and provides novel insights into a competitor’s response to potential negative spillover effects.

Towards the development of a questionnaire of post transgression motives and behaviours /

The primary purpose of this study was to develop a questionnaire that assesses both forgiveness-seeking motives and behaviours. This questionnaire was based on the premise that, following the commitment of an offense in the context of a relationship, a perpetrator will be motivated to reduce the damage that has taken place. The . ' questionnaire examined several motives that a perpetrator might have for seeking forgiveness. These motives were divided into five proposed domains of posttransgression concerns: God, Self, Victim, Others/Society, and Relationship. Within these domains, the following more specific types of concern were explored: Avoidance of punishment, concern about public image, emotional well-being, self-image, sense of fairness/justice, loss of relationship, loss or gain of power, and loss of ability to trust. The questionnaire also assessed which behaviours (approach and avoidance) a perpetrator might use in order to address these concerns. In addition, this study explored whether or not the severity of the situation and the personality of the perpetrator influenced post transgression motives and behaviours. Participants were 221 individuals from the community and Brock University. They filled out a questionnaire package that assessed personality traits, social desirability, and forgiveness-seeking motives and behaviours. In order to answer items assessing motives and behaviours, participants were asked to imagine themselves as perpetrators in three hypothetical transgression scenarios. These scenarios ranged in severity fi^om low to high. Participants were asked to rate their motives and behaviours both in an immediate time frame (immediately following the transgression) and in the long-term (in order to move on from the situation). Results indicated that the motivation items could be classified into the following subscales:Concern about God, Damaged Self-worth Concerns, Justice Concerns, Impression Management Concerns, Victim and Others Concerns, and Relationship Concerns. The behaviour items formed the following subscales: Approach, Avoidance, Denial and Hiding, and Groveling. Results also indicated differences in motivations and behaviours based on the severity of the situation as well as the personality (assessed using the HEXACO inventory) of the perpetrator.

Comitum princeps tu mihi eris: Rape and the Distribution of Auctoritas in Ovid's Fasti

In Ovid’s Fasti, the rape narratives of Callisto, Lara, Flora, and Carna contain the common themes of the distribution of auctoritas and/or the subversion of auctoritas. While all four characters are victims of rape, Callisto loses auctoritas as a result of her rape by Jupiter, whereas Flora and Carna gain auctoritas from their rapes by Zephyrus and Janus respectively. Since Ovid associated Augustus with Jupiter on more than one occasion in the poem, it appears that readers were meant to see a parallel between Jupiter’s dealings with auctoritas in these narratives and Augustus’ exercise of his auctoritas over Rome. Zephyrus’ and Janus’ bestowal of auctoritas upon their victims was intended to be a foil for Jupiter’s denial of auctoritas to Callisto and strict regulation of his own auctoritas, which Lara’s narrative exemplifies, in order for Ovid to criticize the overwhelming nature of Augustus’ auctoritas, as well as specific Augustan policies.

Letter - John Diefenbaker to Sean O'Sullivan, 17 November 1967

The letter mentions that Diefenbaker had just received a letter from O'Sullivan. Diefenbaker mentions that he will be leaving for New York where he will be honoured with the Shevchenko award at the World Conference of Free Ukrainians. He is being recognized for bringing world attention to the denial of freedom to Ukraine and to the Baltic States. He joins a list of past recipients that include: President Truman, President Eisenhower and Vice-President Humphrey.