The loss aversion mechanic here is kinda brutal when applied to fandoms. People tolerate artificial scarcity in products but applying it to artist access feels different, especially since the relationship is emotional not transactional. Cialdini's "separate utility from possession" defense is smart but most fans wont stop mid-panic to apply rational frameworks, thats the whole point of triggering reactance.
That's a great addition! I also believe both defences are open doors. What we can learn from Cialdini is more about how people are influenced, and it's up to us to decide to what extent those mechanisms are ethical. In a perfect world, brands would make that evaluation when strategising; in reality, we're far from that.
The loss aversion mechanic here is kinda brutal when applied to fandoms. People tolerate artificial scarcity in products but applying it to artist access feels different, especially since the relationship is emotional not transactional. Cialdini's "separate utility from possession" defense is smart but most fans wont stop mid-panic to apply rational frameworks, thats the whole point of triggering reactance.
That's a great addition! I also believe both defences are open doors. What we can learn from Cialdini is more about how people are influenced, and it's up to us to decide to what extent those mechanisms are ethical. In a perfect world, brands would make that evaluation when strategising; in reality, we're far from that.