How much do you like a person who loves the brands you hate? We investigated an effect we call the brand negativity bias, which occurs when an unfavorable brand reduces the attitudes toward an associated target product or person. Using a person perception paradigm in the context of brand placements, Experiment 1 established that unfavorable brands reduced attitudes toward a new digital product (i.e., a movie) in which the brand was placed. Experiment 2 showed this effect was driven by a reduced ability to connect with the character in the movie who was associated with an unfavorable brand in two serial processes (lower perceived similarity leading to lower empathy). These results provide the first evidence showing how unfavorable brands can reduce empathy between people. Supporting the brand negativity bias, we found that unfavorable brands yielded stronger effects across every evaluative outcome suggesting that unfavorable brands held more influence over consumer judgment compared to favorable brands. Lastly, these results add a layer of complexity to B2B partnerships and tell a cautionary story of when unfavorable brand associations transfer between entities.

Brands motivate consumers to engage in positive, supportive as well as negative, oppositional actions (e.g., Gregoire, Tripp, and Legoux 2009; Lovett, Peres, and Shachar 2013; Wolter 2015). However, although extensive research has been afforded to positive and negative brand-related communication by consumers of a brand (e.g., Baker, Donthu, and Kumar 2016; Berger 2014; Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014; King, Racherla, and Bush 2014), attention on negative brand-related communication by non-consumers is lacking. Yet, brands are constantly subjected to negativity, slander, avoidance, and hate (e.g., Zarantonello et al. 2016) from consumers who are psychologically, behaviorally, and ideologically disconnected from them (Hegner, Fetscherin, and van Delzen 2017). Accordingly, researchers have expounded that it is imperative to investigate – in addition to positive brand outcomes and brand development strategies – negative brand outcomes and brand defense strategies (Veloutsou and Guzman 2017). Responding to such calls, this study focuses on the construct of online brand derision. Online brand derision is conceptualized as the volitional act of avoiding, openly ridiculing, discrediting, or denigrating a brand in the online environment. Correspondingly, drawing from diverse literature streams such as brand-related communication, social identity theory, and social dominance theory, this study develops and tests a framework of the antecedents of brand derision in the online environment. Results from analysis of data gathered from 320 respondents reveal that some consumers are likely to perceive a discord between themselves and the users of a brand, which along with an oppositional self-categorization of the self and the brand, influences hostile cognitive judgments and attitudinal evaluations regarding the brand. Consequently, animosity toward the brand influences online brand derision. The results further indicate support for the moderating effects of consumers’ social dominance orientation and extraversion on brand animosity’s influence on brand derision. Based on the findings, several theoretical and managerial implications as well as directions for future research are offered.

Procrastination is an irrational choice to delay high-priority work in order to avoid its unpleasantness, despite the fact that the negativity will not cease if the work still remains undone. We hypothesized that (1) people underestimate the future negativity (i.e., delay neutralization) and (2) in order to complete work in a timely manner, one should project oneself into the future so as to recognize that the negativity associated with an activity does not diminish over time. Especially, negative future thinking that is unrelated to the consequence was hypothesized to reduce delay neutralization of negativity. In the present study, undergraduate students made a series of choices between delayed-but-longer and immediate-but-shorter assignment by employing an inter-temporal choice paradigm. We tracked how positive and negative episodic future thinking influenced the degree to which negativity is neutralized over time (Experiment 1). Following this, we confined the experimental condition to negative thinking about the future (Experiment 2). Participants neutralized negativity involved in assignment as a function of time, suggesting that procrastination arises from the delay neutralization of the negativity. Critically, such neutralization was significantly reduced when participants imagined a negative future event, but this did not occur when they imagined a positive future event (Experiment 1), or when participants did not think about the future (Experiment 1, 2). Our findings suggest that, prior to making a decision between work and indulgence, imagining negative future events can be an effective way to reduce the neutralization of delayed negativity and, in turn, procrastination.

오늘날 우리들의 다양한 삶과 환경에는 기능적인 제품들이 위치 하고 있으며, 대부분의 사물에 인공지능(AI) 기술이 적용 됨으로써 사용자들의 사고와 상상력은 확장되고 있다. 그러나 21세기 기능주의 디자인이 정교한 기술을 기반으로 생산되고 있는 것이 사실이지만, 동일성 문제로부터 자유로울 수 없게 되었으며, 더불어 대량생산과 획일화된 소비문화에 의한 심각 한 부작용들이 나타나고 있다. 기능주의에 내재되어 있는 이러한 문제들은 이미 1970년 후반부터 논의되어 왔음에도 불구 하고 기능주의의 병폐는 여전히 수정 또는 보완되지 못하고 있는 상황이다. 따라서 기능주의 디자인에 내재된 문제를 확인 하기 위해서는 그 출발점으로 회귀할 필요가 있는 것이다. 본 연구에서는 기능주의 디자인의 문제점을 발견하기 위해 루이스 멈퍼드의 기술철학적 사유의 세계를 기반으로 하였다. 제 2.1 단원에서는 멈퍼드 관점에서의 기계 즉, 기능주의의 모체이자 기계의 근원으로 지목된 중세시대의 수도원과 시계 그리고 군대의 특성을 살펴보았으며, 제 2.2. 단원에서는 기계와 기능주의 그리고 디자인과의 관계에 대하여 고찰하였다. 기계의 3가지 기원과 해당 요소들에 대한 속성을 규명하게 된다면, 21세기 산업디자인 환경에서 나타나고 있는 문제에 대 한 근원적 접근이 가능할 것으로 예상되었기 때문이다. 이에 본 연구를 통해 향후 21세기 산업디자인이 지향해야 할 목표 와 70년대 이후 지금까지 문제로 거론되었던 기능주의에 대한 새로운 시각과 나아갈 길을 모색할 수 있을 것으로 기대를 해 본다.

한국어 교육 분야에서 ‘부사’는 수의적인 문장 성분으로 쓰이는 까닭에 다른 품사에 비해 연구가 많이 이루어지지 못하였으며, 더불어 효율적인 교육 방안 또한 제시되지 못하고 있는 실정이다. 이에 본고에서는 호응 정보를 가지는 부정부사 ‘전혀, 별로’를 중심으로 한국어 교재와 실제 언어 자료(말뭉치)의 분석을 거쳐 초급 학습자를 위한 기본적인 호응 관계의 분포를 알아보고 중․고급 학습자를 위한 다양한 용례를 말뭉치에서 추출하여 한국어 교육에 응용해 보고자 한다.