A Tale of Two 'States': Partisan Differences in Consumer Response to Brand Activism

Political ideology has become associated with one of the most salient identities in the current environment (Iyengar and Krupenkin, 2018; Van Bavel and Pereira, 2018). Research in the last decade has demonstrated its significant impact across a variety of factors such as openness to new experiences (Van Hiel et al. 2000), moralitybased judgments (Silver and Silver 2017), collectivism and interdependence (Janoff-Bulman 2009), and consumer behavior (Crockett and Wallendorf 2004). For example, it has been found to influence response to persuasive appeals and sustainable behavior such as recycling intentions (Kidwell et al. 2013). In recent times, a phenomenon called 'brand activism' where the brand takes a stand on controversial socio-political issues (Moorman 2020; Mukherjee and Althuizen 2020; Vredenburg et al. 2020) has emerged. This can hurt brands by alienating consumers opposed to the issue (Mukherjee and Althuizen 2020). Given the significance of political ideology-based differences in consumer response in the marketplace (Crockett and Wallendorf 2004; Jost 2017), it is critical to understand whether and how it might influence consumer response to brand activism. Past work has shown that conservatives (vs. liberals) favor self-responsibility and personal control in solving problems (Everett et al. 2020; Eidelman et al. 2012; Jost 2017). They also exhibit greater compliance with social order and prefer statusquo (Jung et al. 2017). The current research thus seeks to examine how brand activism might influence brand attitudes and willingnessto-pay (WTP), and whether political ideology moderates this effect. Both affective (positive and negative) and cognitive (brand-value identification) routes as drivers of these effects are tested. Authentic Activism versus Slacktivism. Consumers can either see the brand as genuinely engaged with the issue or as just engaging in 'slacktivism' or inauthentic brand activism, seen largely as an opportunistic involvement via marketing messages (Kristofferson, White, and Peloza 2014; Vredenburg et al. 2020). Thus, it is important to empirically assess how consumers respond to it, and whether the effect is distinct for conservatives versus liberals. Affective route as a driver. When dissatisfied with the brand, consumers can experience an array of negative emotions (Patterson, Brady, and McColl-Kennedy 2016; Wetzer, Zeelenburg, and Pieters 2007), leading to negative brand consequences (Kähr et al. 2016; Sen, Gurhan-Canli, and