Can you imagine an ad for an expensive jacket, boldly telling its target buyers, “Don’t Buy This Jacket”? Beside the handsome blue sports jacket are the admonitions: Reduce — don’t buy what you don’t need; Repair — we help you repair your old jacket; Re-use – sell or pass on your old gear; Recycle — we take back your old jackets.
Patagonia, a leading American outdoor clothing brand, launched a campaign on Black Friday in the run-up before the Christmas 2011 shopping rush, urging consumers not to buy their jacket. Despite their “efforts” not to sell, sales increased by approximately 30% in the nine months following the ad. What gives?
The Knowledge Hub (KH of the Circle Economy group) made a business case study of this marketing phenomenon. “With this ad, the company aspired to raise consumer awareness regarding the consequences of over-consumption, especially in the textile industry… each piece of Patagonia clothing — despite being made from recycled materials — emits far more greenhouse gas (GHG) than it weighs, in addition to increased use of freshwater for production purposes.”
People were made aware that Patagonia was admittedly contributory to the environment issues but was zealously improving its products to lessen environmental damage. “Don’t buy this jacket!” Consume (buy) only what you need. This counter-intuitive move within the context of a business environment brought the company increased revenues, but only because the company is indeed acting upon its mission of being a sustainable company. Patagonia has shown its success of adherence to sustainability principles through growth levels in their top line, margins, and market share, the case study concluded.
But some observers say Patagonia used clever reverse psychology marketing to achieve its revenue goals while keeping its image of being a fierce advocate for environmental sustainability. Wizard of Ads, a marketing and advertising company that offers services to help businesses strategize, calls the Patagonia ad a “breakthrough” in bold, effective marketing. Advertising has three primary objectives: to inform, to persuade, and to remind. That, the Patagonia ad effectively did!
“By telling you NOT to buy the jacket, Patagonia is making your resistance work in their favor. You see the ad, and now you sort of want the jacket, just due to reactance. Plus, the unexpected headline really grabs attention and ensures the ad breaks through the clutter. Even better, Patagonia gets the added bonus of demonstrating their commitment to sustainable, eco-friendly business practices.” (wizardofads.org)
It’s called “reactance.” When someone tries to tell you what to think or do — that automatic resistance you feel is called reactance by psychologists (Ibid.). “An Empirical Study on Reverse Psychology Applied in Advertising Messages,” by the Asian Journal of Empirical Research (archive.aessweb.com) showed that this technique has been applied by marketers in advertising in which a negative message or tagline (e.g., “don’t buy the product”) is used to motivate consumers to make a purchase.
“Psychological reactance theory advocates that reactance occurs when people react to restore a freedom when it is eliminated or threatened to be eliminated. The expected response to an advertising message of not doing something is to do it.
“Results suggested that the application of reverse psychology in advertising enables marketers to create awareness and raise interest of consumers. It is also interesting to find out that 40.8% of subjects were uncomfortable with the messages but showed interest in them,” the study concluded.
Doctors and healthcare professionals warn that, “While it can be seen as a way of managing another person’s behavior, reverse psychology can also be used as a form of manipulation. The idea behind reverse psychology is that by pushing for the opposite of what you want, the other person will choose to engage in the behavior that you desire. The person who is the subject of this tactic generally doesn’t realize what is happening and may not be fully aware of the other person’s true motives (verywellmind.com, April 4, 2023).
Manipulation cannot be justified because it is untrue and insincere and violates the other person. “Yet even if you didn’t know it at the time, there’s a chance that you’ve used reverse psychology to try to get someone to do something at some point in your life. The most ordinary example is that of parents using reverse psychology to get their kids to do what they want them to do. A parent might tell their child not to pick up their toys in their room in the hope that the child will actually do the opposite (Ibid.).
Yes, reverse psychology is often used on children due to their high tendency to respond with reactance, a desire to restore threatened freedom of action. It is a negative emotional reaction to being persuaded and thus choosing the option which is being advocated against. This may work especially well on a person who is resistant by nature, while direct requests work best for people who are compliant (Psychology Today. Retrieved 2018-09-22).
Marketing and sales strategies often utilize reverse psychology to encourage people to buy goods and services. “Marketers’ understanding of consumer behavior has provided particularly valuable insights into voter behavior which is an important strand in the success of political marketing. As a theory, it has come a long way and holds a key position in the coming times” (“Political Marketing: an emerging theory,” Suman Si). Of course, political leaders obviously use marketing strategies “to inform, to persuade, and to remind” the public of their platforms and directions, and the “packaging” of their personas. In her book, The Political Marketing Game (2011), author Jennifer Lees-Marshment talks of “what works in political marketing, drawing on 100 interviews with practitioners. It also shows that authenticity, values and vision are as much a part of winning strategy as market-savvy pragmatism.”
Is the self-induced, deafening political noise distracting the country from the Sisyphean task of catching up to regional economic development, a market-savvy strategy by opposing political leaders now preparing for the critical mid-term elections in 2025? Perhaps also laying the groundwork for the presidential elections in 2028?
“The feud between the Marcos administration and the Dutertes has been making headlines, deteriorating further after Vice-President Sara Duterte disclosed that she had asked someone to kill President Marcos, First Lady Liza Marcos, and Speaker Martin Romualdez if an alleged plot to assassinate her is carried out. Law enforcement agencies have launched probes to determine the Vice-President’s possible legal liability” (The Philippine Star, Nov. 29, 2024).
Tensions rose after former president Rodrigo Duterte called on the military to “correct” what he labeled a “fractured government,” a comment that the Justice department said was “bordering on sedition” (Ibid.). Star columnist Boo Chanco described how “the House quad comm hearings have taken the nature of a Netflix miniseries. The revelations were not shocking in the sense that they did not surprise us. We suspected as much all the while but we are now getting confirmation from some of the key people involved. Good thing the UniTeam broke up or all these would have remained secrets” (The Philippine Star, Oct. 18, 2024).
Sara Duterte seems masochistic and suicidal with her open cursing of President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., and revealing how she has contacted hired killers to get him and his family if she were assassinated for fighting him. But her stance to the Filipino people seems to be — this is what I am, take me as I am. (So much like her father, Rodrigo Duterte.) Maybe she is employing reverse psychology on the electorate — she wants to run for President after Marcos Jr.’s six year, no-reelection term. “Don’t vote for me” means “Vote for me,” for impressionable voters who elected her father the way he was, in 2016.
“Let us not impeach Sara Duterte,” Marcos Jr. surprisingly declared, in the face of two impeachments vs. VP Sara filed in House (Rappler, Nov. 29, 2024).
Was Marcos Jr. using reverse psychology to strongly suggest that Sara should be impeached?
Like, “Do not buy this jacket.”
Amelia H. C. Ylagan is a doctor of Business Administration from the University of the Philippines.
