“ Sense of online betrayal , brand hate , and outrage customers ’ anti-brand activism ”

The current study develops a research model and explores the correlation between customer sense of online betrayal, brand hate, and anti-brand activism. The outrage customers’ anti-brand behaviors consist of negative online word of mouth, online public complaining, and online boycott. Data from an online survey of 383 online shoppers were used to test seven proposed hypotheses. The partial least square–structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was adopted to assess the measurement and structural model. The findings showed that the sense of online betrayal positively and significantly affects brand hate and anti-brand behaviors. In addition, brand hate is also the leading cause of customers’ anti-brand actions. The present study highlights the mediation role of brand hate in eliciting revenge from consumers subjected to online betrayal. This study also gives some recommendations to customers to stop the misconduct behaviors of online betrayals, such as spreading their betrayal cases to friends and relatives via social media, then asking for supports and help from governmental and legal agencies and participating in boycotts; raising boycott movements against the betraying brand should be considered as the most extreme punishment.


INTRODUCTION
Currently, concepts of customer-brand relationship have emerged and attracted academic researchers and practitioners; however, most studies focus on the "bright" side (Curina et al., 2020;Fetscherin, 2019), whereas the negative characteristics, including brand hate, brand avoidance, brand distrust, brand retaliation, and brand boycott, seem to have been less studied (Nguyen, 2021). Customer demand for brand reparation of product/service failures (Grégoire & Fisher, 2008) get even with the firm for fairness (Lee et al., 2013) as the compensation for psychological and beneficial loss (Reimann et al., 2018) tend to increase along with the development and spread of online communities.
The sole aim of businesses anywhere is to pursue the profit maximization regardless of the adverse side effects on society's well-being and sustainability. On the first hand, firms have been creating and providing goods and services to improve society's quality of living and well-being (Ibarra et al., 2018). However, Castillo et al. (2021) claimed that under the pressure of maximizing the gains, firms must face the options of breaking ethical barriers and social standards to attract more customers and exploit more profit from current customers. First, to appeal to customers, firms often use misleading advertisements to

Customer sense of betrayal (SOB)
Sense of betrayal, the so-called perceived betrayal, is defined in the literature of psychology as "a breach in honoring an expected behavior or norm associated with trust" (Elangovan & Shapiro, 1998). Customer sense of betrayal occurred when people perceive their expectations in purchasing and consumption are not met or when they assume brands telling a lie to them, taking advantage of them (Caldwell et al., 2009), cheating, trying to exploit, breaking promises, and disclosing confidential information (Elangovan & Shapiro, 1998). It was also the customer's negative feelings when they perceived a firm intentionally violates the fairness norm or standard necessary in the context of the typical relationship (Finkel et al., 2002;Ward & Ostrom, 2006). Therefore, Grégoire and Fisher (2008) stated that customer sense of betrayal is considered an emotional reaction which illustrates why loyal customers confront brands and become their most critical opponents.
According to Tan et al. (2021), customers endure a feeling of betrayal consuming a product/service failure, which represents poor product/service performance, late delivery, or employees behaving rudely to customers. Reimann et al. (2018) added other reasons of taste, quality, price, and durability. The morality-related factors, which violate the norms and standards of brand-customer relationships, could be the reasons, such as riffed off, lying, misled, and cheating (Reimann et al., 2018).
From the perspective of individuals or customers, the emotional perception of being betrayed is not easy to accept and forgive because before perceiving betrayal, consumers already supported the brand by selecting and purchasing its products and services. Hence, the sense of betrayal critically negatively influences the customer attitude towards the brand and results in the extreme emotions of anger, sorrow, frustration and disappointment, dissatisfaction, and disengagement (Hedva, 2001) when the victim realizes the relationship and values mean much more minor than profit purpose of the seller (Leonidou et al., 2018). When customers believe that the brand was violating and exploiting them for profit purposes, the feelings of psychological loss, self-directed disappointment, and anger emerge (Reimann et al., 2018).

Brand hate (BH)
Brand hate is commonly interpreted as intense or extreme negative emotions and impulsive responses (Kucuk, 2019). It is also the dark side of brand liking, brand love, or brand preference (Khan & Lee, 2014). According to Duplex's Theory of Hate, brand hate has multiple components that manifest differently on different occasions (Sternberg, 2003). This theory introduced three key emotions of brand hate, such as disgust, contempt, and anger. The interpersonal hate relationship is also categorized in seven distinct taxonomies from mild to the extreme: cool, cold, hot, simmering, boiling, seething, and burning hate (Sternberg, 2003;Fetscherin, 2019). From a different approach, Zarantonello et al. (2016) contended that brand hate has two components: active and passive hate.
Brand hate could result in brand avoidance, negative word of mouth, public complaining, and brand retaliation. Consumers who avoid a brand by not consuming it at all, or moving to a competitor, are said to be engaging in brand avoidance (Hegner et al., 2017). The negative brand word of mouth, the so-called private complaining, is a casual interaction between friends and relatives about their opinions on services and products (Wetzer et al., 2007). The public complaining refers to the wider public such as state agencies, customer protection services, and the business itself (Fetscherin, 2019

Anti-brand activism
Anti-brand activism is customer behaviors negatively responding to brands, such as culture jamming, active resistance, brand disapproval, and brand boycotting (Romani et al., 2015) due to customer negative perceptions and emotions associated with corporations and brands (Iyer & Muncy, 2009 (Hollenbeck & Zinkhan, 2006) has commonly considered the movement of the whole community rather than the individual consumer. In the literature on brand hate, researchers often examine four types of customer reactions: brand avoidance, individual complaints, public complaints, and brand retaliation. However, under the circumstance of betrayal, the reactions must be more substantial and extreme. Thus, this study analyzes the relationship between the sense of online betrayal, brand hate, and three dominant online anti-brand actions: negative online word of mouth, online public complaining, and online boycotting. Brand avoidance seems to be mild action that should not be considered the reactions of betrayed experienced customers.

Negative online word-of-mouth
Word of mouth is an essential aspect for customers who are eager to get information about the brand and its products/services (Laczniak et al., 2001). It is thought to have a more powerful and more decisive influence on customers' evaluation and perception than the commercial information provided by brands' advertisements (Martin & Lueg, 2013) because of the credibility of sources (Richin, 1984). Hence, according to Wang et al. (2010), the information provided by word of mouth is considered the best source of reference data for customers.
Although word of mouth can be positive or negative, Bone (1995) argued that the negative type is more influential than the positive one since it appears transparently. Before making a purchase decision, the customer has little knowledge and information about the product and service; thus, he/she accesses the Internet to read comments and reviews, opinions, and rankings of the others (Nuseir, 2019). When customers experience dissatisfaction with product quality, service performance, or other failures (

Online public complaining
According to Grégoire et al. (2010), the public complaining is mass-oriented or addresses the larger audiences. The audiences are third parties: media businesses, customer protection agencies, and public organizations that have the authority to put to justice and order brands to resolve problems (Grégoire & Fisher, 2006).
The online environment provides an open, fair, and transparent space to all citizens. Here customers can easier raise their voice and make complaints than in a regular offline environment. Timesaving, no cost, and less effort are advantages of an online environment. Customers no longer have to spend money or time visiting a consumer protection office or consulting an attorney. They stay at home and share their genuine discomfort stories on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms. Online forums will assist them in sharing, disseminating, and consulting on consumer retribution solutions (Trip & Grégoire, 2011). In the circumstance of online betrayal, the customer may proactively adopt this action to denounce the firm's misconduct to the public and share their experience among a broader public to remind other of the brand betrayal (Grégoire & Fisher, 2006). Moreover, Fetscherin (2019) proved the significant influence of brand hate on public complaining.

Online boycott
Consumer boycotting behavior is a prominent marketing issue. Consumer boycott is connected to corporate social responsivity (CSR) and brand vulnerability (Ali, 2021). Consumers tend to boycott big and global brands rather than local or small brands. A consumer boycott is considered a consumer's decision to refuse to buy products produced by businesses or countries (Tilikidou & Delistavrou, 2011 ). An online boycott may spread out faster than the offline because the information and updates can be delivered to others instantly regardless of time zone, region, race, nationality, social class, age, and gender differences (Delistavrou et al., 2020).
This study intends to investigate the role of customers' feelings of betrayal while shopping online as a crucial antecedent of brand hate and anti-brand actions such as negative word of mouth, online public complaints, and online boycott efforts. Thus, the hypotheses are proposed as follows:

METHODOLOGY
A four-phase procedure was used. First, literature was reviewed to construct the general model of the study. The study collected pre-validated constructs and measurement items and developed the structured questionnaire. Six original measures were verified and altered to meet the online environment's research setting before being translated into Vietnamese. The pilot test survey was con-veniently delivered to twenty scholars, marketing practitioners, and experienced online shoppers to validate the credibility and understandability of constructs. Second, the official questionnaire was randomly delivered to 500 online shoppers via their Facebook and Instagram accounts. Gratitude online vouchers have been given to encourage the respondents. Third, the collected data were re-checked, screened to delete in-completed and non-logical responses. Finally, 383 valid responses were obtained, which can be officially used for further statistical analysis. To perform descriptive and inferential statistical processes, SPSS 25 and Smart PLS 3.3 statistical software were used. This study includes five multidimensional constructs with a total of 20 items and five demographical variables. Measurement constructs were taken from earlier studies, with several modifications to meet the actual research setting of the online environment and betrayal circumstances (Appendix A). To measure the customer sense of betrayal, the study used the findings of  The discriminant validity is checked in the second phase to see how dissimilar it is from other constructs (Hair et al., 2017). According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), the square root of the AVE must be more extensive than its corresponding correlation coefficients, showing satisfactory discriminant validity. Table 1 revealed that the square roots of the AVE for each variable exceed the corresponding correlations. As a result, the study assumes that the measurement model showed adequate convergent and discriminant validity.  (Table 4).
Additionally, as shown in    Table 4 demonstrates that all path coefficients were statistically significant due to their p-values being less than 0.05. As a result, all hypotheses of this study are supported. Hair et al.

DISCUSSIONS
The majority of past research has been on analyzing how the antecedents such as economic, political, and product-related factors affect customer's brand hate and its outcomes as anti-brand activities. However, only several articles investigated the customer's emotions and reactions when experiencing the betrayal situation. Hence, this study offers novel insights into customer sense of betrayal in the online shopping environment. Customer sense of online betrayal has been proved to have a significant and positive effect on brand hate and anti-brand activism, e.g. negative word of mouth, public complaints, and boycott decision. Among three punished behaviors, customer sense of online betrayal has the most substantial influence on negative online word of mouth intention, then the online boycott decision and the online public complaining. The paper adds to the literature and provides practitioners with recommendations.
The current study extends the knowledge of customer betrayal in the online business environment. Customer sense of online betrayal was confirmed to be an influencing factor of brand hate and anti-brand online activism. These findings corroborate findings of Grégoire and Fisher (2006) (2021). In addition, the present study examined the online boycott as an extreme action of brand revenge. The online boycott constructs used in this study were developed from an offline environment and adjusted to fit with online environment characteristics. In summary, for customers who experience a sense of betrayal when shopping online, brand hate emerges, and they will seriously take anti-brand actions against and punish betraying brands as a way of demanding fairness and brand reparation.
From a managerial standpoint, this study indicates that when a brand engages in unethical or fraudulent activity to abuse, exploit, deceive, or betray clients, they will experience unpleasant emotions and start anti-brand actions. Therefore, the business should pay attention to actions against the misconducted behaviors. First, posting negative reviews, feedback, and rankings on social network individual accounts is often the first anti reaction of customers. Second, they send betrayal cases and disputes to consumer production, government, and legal agencies to seek support and consult. Then, the information of the betrayal cases also could be presented in online public groups where people often share their own stories and wait for the comment of other members. This method is costless but very effective.
The boycott is the "knockout" and most extreme action both from brand and financial benefits. Customer boycott (both online and offline) seems to be an effective method to hurt unethical firms and prevent them from betraying other customers. Raising or participating in the online boycott movement or being an active member of the online boycott group are recommended actions that betrayed customers should consider halting the spread of online betrayal. Not only limited in the scope of an individual or small group of consumers as in offline environment, but the online environment also supports spreading the negative word of mouth, attracting the concerns of communities and governmental agencies, then the boycott movement. When being boycotted and avoided by the online community, brands have little chance to hide their dishonest behaviors, explaining their failures, and controlling the crisis. The customer sense of online betrayal is just the starting point for a big fire of brand attack. Hence, the lesson that any brand must keep in mind is never betraying customers in any aspect because the customer is the benefactor who spend time, effort, and money to support the brand and buy products; betrayed customer is the direct and shortest way to the end of the business life cycle.

CONCLUSION
For profit-maximizing purposes, businesses tend to execute misconducted behaviors such as selling deficit value products and broadcasting misleading advertising information that triggers a sense of betrayal. Notably, in the online business environment, the betrayal behaviors seem to be more severe than the typical offline businesses due to the missing face-to-face interactions between the sellers and the buyers. This study shed light on customer sense of betrayal in the online shopping environment and addressed a gap in marketing research by examining the role of customer perception of betrayal as the leading cause of customer's brand hate and anti-brand behaviors. The research results confirmed the positive effects of customers' sense of betrayal on customer brand hate and negative online word of mouth, public online complaining, and online boycott.
The current study investigates three types of anti-brand behavior of customers (negative online word of mouth, public online complaining, and online boycott) in responses to a misconducted brand. Hence, other behaviors could be examined additionally, such as forgiveness, brand switch, rejection reconciliation, or demands for repairing. Regarding brand hate, the effects of betrayal perception on each level of hate should also be considered for more profound understanding of customer's emotional reactions in terms of feeling loss.    Table A5. Online boycott (OB)

Item code Statements
OB1 I will join an anti-fan group on the Internet against betraying brand OB2 I will never again buy any product of a betraying brand OB3 I feel guilty if I buy the product of a betraying brand OB4 I feel ashamed when others know me consuming the product of a betraying brand

OB5
For me, boycotting is effective means to demand a betraying brand repairing its misconducts