Cultural Differences in Consumer Responses to Celebrities Acting Immorally: A Comparison of the United States and South Korea

Scandals involving celebrities’ moral transgressions are common in both Western and Eastern cultures. Existing literature, however, has been primarily based on Western cultures. We examine differences between South Korea and the United States (U.S.) in consumers’ support for celebrities engaged in moral transgressions and for the brands they endorse. Across six studies, we find that Korean (vs. U.S.) consumers show lower support for celebrities who engaged in moral transgressions. This effect occurs because Korean (vs. U.S.) consumers have a stronger belief that an individual’s competence and morality are interconnected. Thus, Korean (vs. U.S.) consumers are less likely to separate their judgments of celebrities’ morality and competence in professional performance, thereby lowering support for the celebrities. Building on the proposed mechanism, we identify the moderating role of transgression relevance. When a moral transgression is relevant (vs. not relevant) to the domain of the celebrity’s professional competence, the difference in celebrity support between the two countries is attenuated. This difference extends to the support for a brand endorsed by the celebrity transgressor when the brand retains the celebrity endorser, but not when the brand dismisses the endorser.