Figure 2
The diagram depicts a structural equation model linking five components: D No Response, D Apology, Blame, Reviewer Credibility, and Purchase Intentions. Arrows from D No Response and D Apology lead to Blame, with coefficients of negative 0.583 and negative 0.589, respectively, indicating a strong negative influence. Blame connects to Reviewer Credibility with a coefficient of 0.779, showing a strong positive effect. An arrow from Reviewer Credibility points to Purchase Intentions with a coefficient of negative 0.310, indicating a moderate negative relationship. The diagram follows a left-to-right flow, beginning with callout responses and ending with behavioural outcomes, illustrating how perceived responses influence blame assignment, which in turn affects perceptions of reviewer credibility and subsequent purchase intentions.Model results for Study 2
Note(s): DNoResponse compares the callout condition to the no response condition (reference group). DApology compares the callout condition to the apology condition (reference group). Item loadings can be seen in Supplementary Material 3. Blame was measured on a seven-point semantic differential scale where higher (lower) values indicate more blame placed on the service firm (reviewer). Parameter estimates are standardized
Source(s): Authors’ own work