Hostname: page-component-669899f699-rg895 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T20:19:38.853Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Peanut Butter, Salmonella Poisoning and Children: On Becoming ‘Involved’ and Angry Following a Company Crisis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Lyn McDonald  and
Charmine E.J. Härtel
Get access

Extract

Imagine the following scenario: your six-year-old daughter has come home sick from primary school with stomach cramps, diarrhoea and vomiting. You envisage a touch of gastro-enteritis – after all, it is common in kids – and expect it to blow over quickly. She's off her food and will only eat a few things, including peanut butter on toast. After a few days, her condition has worsened to the point that your family GP is considering hospitalising her. Later, you hear on the radio that Kraft, which initially only recalled eight brands of peanut butter, is recalling its entire peanut butter range due to possible contamination with salmonella bacteria from mouse droppings found in batches of roasted peanuts from a Kingaroy supplier (BRW 2.9.96). If this were you, chances are that you would feel angry because it is your daughter who has been affected. You are involved.

Type
Research Article
Information
Queensland Review , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , August 2000 , pp. 69 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Works Cited

Celsi, R.L and Olson, J.C. 1988. ‘The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes’. Journal of Consumer Research 15: 210–224.Google Scholar
Frijda, N.H 1993. ‘Moods, emotion episodes and emotions’. In Lewis, M. and Haviland, J.M. (eds) Handbook of Emotions. New York: Guildford Press, 381–403.Google Scholar
Härtel, C.E.J., McColl-Kennedy, J.R., and McDonald, L. 1998. ‘Incorporating attributional theory and the theory of reasoned action within an affective events theory framework to produce a contingency predictive model of consumer reactions to organizational mishaps’. Advances in Consumer Research 25: 428–432.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, B.K. 1996. ‘Components of consumer reaction to company-related mishaps: a structural equation model approach’. Advances in Consumer Research 23: 346–351.Google Scholar
McDonald, L. and Härtel, C.E J. 1999, December. ‘Use of affective events theory to explain the impact of company mishaps on consumer anger and purchase intentions’. Refereed Proceedings of the 13h International Conference of the Australia New Zealand Academy of Management, CD-ROM. Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.Google Scholar
Weiner, B. 1995. Judgments of Responsibility. New York: The Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, H.M and Cropanzano, R. 1996. ‘Affective events theory: a theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work’. Research in Organizational Behaviour 18: 1–74.Google Scholar