4 ms·

It's about consistency. Consistency is our nearly obsessive desire to be (and appear to be) consistent with what we have already done (buying an iPhone, for exa

It's about consistency. Consistency is our nearly obsessive desire to be (and appear to be) consistent with what we have already done (buying an iPhone, for example). Once we've made that choice, we encounter personal and interpersonal pressures to behave consistently with that commitment. If you're interested in this sort of behaviour, you might try Robert Cialdini's book, Influence, the Phychology of Persuasion (http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/). [Edit] I'm an idiot. I forgot that I wrote a post about this a while ago - here's a summary of Cialdini's (and related) stuff: https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a3-9c32-176ad141b86f https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a.... It's about influence, and to that end discusses some of our behavioural traits.

netcan 12y ago
I agree, but I think it runs in other directions as well. People rush to attack companies and find unlikely conspiratorial and malicious motivations for companies' actions too. I think the reality is that we're not all that logical. We're logical too, but logic is only part of how we form opinions. A lot of it is some sort of habit. If you see bourgeoisie conspiracy and class conflict as a driving force in the world, your version of events is likely to be whatever supports that. If you see corporate conspiracy everywhere… If you see governments accumulating power everywhere.. If you see a Google conspiracy everywhere.. But I tend to side with you. There's something offensive about the loyalty consumers have to big brands. The relationship just isn't mutual, which gives it an unsavory slavish flavor.
- jackweirdy 12y ago
  I think people just like looking right. Part of that is jumping on others' choices when something bad happens, and defending themselves when others do the same.
  - netcan 12y ago
    It's amazing how many desires of its own our mind has. The desire to be good members of a group. The desire to be consistent, even if it leads us to be consistently wrong. The desire for big explanatory abstractions at the expense of interpreting reality to fit into them. I don't know about you guys, but I'm struggling with this damned primate brain.
- colomon 12y ago
  For my taste, brand loyalty is drastically less harmful and unsavory than the equally troublesome loyalty to political parties. (At least in the US, can't say about elsewhere.)
  - Yetanfou 12y ago
    Brand loyalty does more personal harm as it turns individuals into milch cows. As to whether loyalty to a political party or orientation is harmful depends on whether that loyalty is balanced - will the party stand up for issues you care about? The bigger the party, the smaller the chance they will. It does not get much bigger than the D/R split in the US while still maintaining the semblance of choice.
    - rconti 12y ago
      Unfortunately, political loyalty lasts far longer than brand loyalty.
  - specialist 12y ago
    Political party membership is about identity, not brand loyalty. Related, but distinct.
    - uptown 12y ago
      I'd argue it's likely both identity and brand loyalty. Identity, because it gives individuals a language with which to declare ones self, and those that classify individuals a way of referring to groups of people. Brand loyalty, because it results in individuals supporting a political agenda that may run counter to their personal or philosophical self-interests.
  - netcan 12y ago
    I'm not sure I agree, but I think I can see where you're coming from. Political parties and loyalty to them tend to devolve into something fairly absurd. But, at least this is using the instinct for what it's meant to be used for. Making factions and tribes and getting your tribe into power. If the tribe Chiefdom is up for grabs, get your clan's main man the hat. That's what this instinct is designed to do. Loyalty to a brand of shoes or phone or whatever and developing a tribalism over that is a weird absurdity. With a prospective chief (or president) there is at least the theoretical possibility that your candidate represents your interests and gets your support that way. With brand loyalty, we can't even pretend that's possible. You're loyal to the brand because of an instinct being hijacked, for sure. It's like being loyal to a fictional character, being sad because a couple break up in a soap opera, or getting a mouse all excited with a pheromone soaked cue tip.
CSMastermind 12y ago
I would also highly recommend Influence. Preemptive word of advice for anyone looking for the audiobook version: it's under the title Influence: Science and Practice. Which is the title of the textbook version of the book.

netcan 12y ago

I agree, but I think it runs in other directions as well. People rush to attack companies and find unlikely conspiratorial and malicious motivations for companies' actions too. I think the reality is that we're not all that logical. We're logical too, but logic is only part of how we form opinions. A lot of it is some sort of habit. If you see bourgeoisie conspiracy and class conflict as a driving force in the world, your version of events is likely to be whatever supports that. If you see corporate conspiracy everywhere… If you see governments accumulating power everywhere.. If you see a Google conspiracy everywhere.. But I tend to side with you. There's something offensive about the loyalty consumers have to big brands. The relationship just isn't mutual, which gives it an unsavory slavish flavor.

jackweirdy 12y ago
I think people just like looking right. Part of that is jumping on others' choices when something bad happens, and defending themselves when others do the same.
- netcan 12y ago
  It's amazing how many desires of its own our mind has. The desire to be good members of a group. The desire to be consistent, even if it leads us to be consistently wrong. The desire for big explanatory abstractions at the expense of interpreting reality to fit into them. I don't know about you guys, but I'm struggling with this damned primate brain.
colomon 12y ago
For my taste, brand loyalty is drastically less harmful and unsavory than the equally troublesome loyalty to political parties. (At least in the US, can't say about elsewhere.)
- Yetanfou 12y ago
  Brand loyalty does more personal harm as it turns individuals into milch cows. As to whether loyalty to a political party or orientation is harmful depends on whether that loyalty is balanced - will the party stand up for issues you care about? The bigger the party, the smaller the chance they will. It does not get much bigger than the D/R split in the US while still maintaining the semblance of choice.
  - rconti 12y ago
    Unfortunately, political loyalty lasts far longer than brand loyalty.
- specialist 12y ago
  Political party membership is about identity, not brand loyalty. Related, but distinct.
  - uptown 12y ago
    I'd argue it's likely both identity and brand loyalty. Identity, because it gives individuals a language with which to declare ones self, and those that classify individuals a way of referring to groups of people. Brand loyalty, because it results in individuals supporting a political agenda that may run counter to their personal or philosophical self-interests.
- netcan 12y ago
  I'm not sure I agree, but I think I can see where you're coming from. Political parties and loyalty to them tend to devolve into something fairly absurd. But, at least this is using the instinct for what it's meant to be used for. Making factions and tribes and getting your tribe into power. If the tribe Chiefdom is up for grabs, get your clan's main man the hat. That's what this instinct is designed to do. Loyalty to a brand of shoes or phone or whatever and developing a tribalism over that is a weird absurdity. With a prospective chief (or president) there is at least the theoretical possibility that your candidate represents your interests and gets your support that way. With brand loyalty, we can't even pretend that's possible. You're loyal to the brand because of an instinct being hijacked, for sure. It's like being loyal to a fictional character, being sad because a couple break up in a soap opera, or getting a mouse all excited with a pheromone soaked cue tip.

CSMastermind 12y ago

I would also highly recommend Influence. Preemptive word of advice for anyone looking for the audiobook version: it's under the title Influence: Science and Practice. Which is the title of the textbook version of the book.