Online complaints have emerged as a pivotal avenue for customers to voice their dissatisfaction. In this context, bystanders, as third-party observers, actively engage in evaluating and judging these complaints. However, studies pertaining to bystanders in online customer complaints remain limited. Therefore, this study aims to integrate deontic justice theory and attribution theory to construct a research model of bystanders’ support for online customer complaints.
Leveraging a questionnaire and two scenario experiments, SPSS 24.0 and AMOS 24.0 were used to examine the relationship between bystanders’ moral outrage and their support for online customer complaints, the mediating role of responsibility attribution and the moderating role of experience similarity and online anonymity.
Based on the statistical analysis, the results show that bystanders’ moral outrage significantly enhances their support for online customer complaints; responsibility attribution plays a mediating role between moral outrage and bystanders’ support for online customer complaints; experience similarity and online anonymity can moderate the relationship between moral outrage and bystanders’ support for online customer complaints.
The findings of this study not only enrich the literature on online customer complaints but also provide valuable insights for companies to understand the diffusion of online complaints and effective strategies with which to address them.
