Pakistan's Online Shoppers: Reactions to Brand Inauthenticity and Recovery Strategies

Pakistan's Online Shoppers: Reactions to Brand Inauthenticity and Recovery Strategies

Authors

  • Mubarak Ali Research Scholar, Quaid–i–Azam School of Management Sciences, Islamabad, Pakistan
  • Najm Ud Din Saqib Research Scholar, Quaid–i–Azam School of Management Sciences, Islamabad, Pakistan
  • Nazia Batool Lecturer, Business Management, University of Baltistan, Skardu, Pakistan
  • Hajra Asghar Research Scholar, Quaid–i–Azam School of Management Sciences, Islamabad, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59075/jssa.v3i1.194

Keywords:

Brand inauthenticity, Perceived betrayal, Brand Sabotage, Demand reparation, customer trust, Brand recovery.

Abstract

The research explores how consumers in online shopping environments respond to brand inauthenticity with a particular focus on brand sabotage and compensation demands. Perceived betrayal is identified as an essential factor leading to negative cognitive and emotional reactions. When customers feel deceived by a brand, they often react with brand sabotage or by seeking refunds. The study using data from Pakistani online shoppers, analyzed these behaviors through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with Amos. The findings suggest that brand inauthenticity significantly drives perceived disloyalty resulting in brand degradation or demands for compensation. However, they also highlight that well-executed brand recovery efforts can significantly mitigate these adverse outcomes by restoring brand credibility. The study emphasizes the importance of quickly addressing customer dissatisfaction to maintain trust in the digital market place offering valuable insights for brands navigating the challenges of managing customer relationships in an era dominated by social media.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-17

How to Cite

Mubarak Ali, Najm Ud Din Saqib, Nazia Batool, & Hajra Asghar. (2025). Pakistan’s Online Shoppers: Reactions to Brand Inauthenticity and Recovery Strategies. Journal for Social Science Archives, 3(1), 1128–1153. https://doi.org/10.59075/jssa.v3i1.194
Loading...