Relating badly to brands

Abstract

Abstract Our commentary focuses on the negative pole of Park et al.'s Attachment–Aversion continuum. We argue that the distinction between positively‐ and negatively‐valenced relationships matters, and open opportunities to further our knowledge about what makes a brand relationship “bad.” Two theoretical extensions are offered: (1) additional negativity dimensions beyond brand–self distance including pathology, power, and self‐ versus brand‐focused emotionality; and (2) distinctions between neutrality and variations of emotional ambivalence “in the middle” of the Attachment–Aversion spectrum. Our call is for a science of negative relationships concerning the negative outcomes, processes, states, and attributes of consumers' relationships with brands.