Why do some companies get more backlash than others? - Scholar Q&A with Shupei Yuan

The news has been full of stories about companies pulling back their DEI efforts. Some companies are in the headlines for abandoning their values, while others have been able to do so under the radar with little to no outrage/consequences. In response to these different reactions from the public, scholars Shupei Yuan, Northern Illinois University, and Haoran Chu, University of Florida, want to uncover why certain companies get different treatment after halting their sociopolitical efforts. In this Q&A, Yuan talks about how they plan to learn why some companies receive different reactions, how moral typecasting can explain public perceptions and how the research can help communicators manage backlash. Yuan and Chu have been funded by the Page Center multiple times. The project is part of the Page Center’s 2026 Call for Ethics of Generative AI in Public Communication.

Where did the inspiration for your project come from?

My colleague, Dr. Chu, and I were having a casual chat one day, and I told him that my students are boycotting Target because the company pulled back from its DEI initiatives. He then told me that Disney had also been quietly pulling back on the DEI initiatives, but backlash against the company was less visible in the public conversation. It was clear that even though two companies were doing similar things, the reactions from the public were very different. So it got us wondering, why do different companies that are of similar sizes and popularity get treated differently? It seems like there's something going on, and we want to explore that.

How did you find a theory to help guide your research?

We actually started looking at some psychology research, and found this idea of moral typecasting in the Theory of Dyadic Morality. The theory posits that moral agents are typically seen as powerful, intentional and responsible for outcomes, whereas moral patients are seen as vulnerable to harm, coercion or retaliation.

How will you test this theory in the context of your project?

We want to conduct a series of experiments that test this theory across DEI and climate/sustainability contexts and across progressive versus conservative policy shifts. Participants will evaluate organizational course corrections after getting exposed to agent, patient or neutral typecasting conditions. We want to look at perceived responsibility, authenticity, trust, moral outrage, punitive intent, and engagement.

What was your thought process in testing this theory in both DEI and climate/sustainability contexts?

We think that even though there will be a sociopolitical element in both of these scenarios, they will have fundamental differences that we want to explore. For example, in the DEI context, we are seeing that companies are pulling back these efforts in real-time, so we knew we definitely wanted to test that for ecological validity. For the science communication side, we are wondering if having scientific evidence behind a campaign will make it more difficult to justify why companies are not standing firm in their efforts.

What are you hoping industry professionals will take from this project?

We are hoping that by conducting this study, we can help practitioners anticipate a chain reaction if these events occur. We want to give tangible advice that says “if you find yourself in this situation, this is how you should communicate and this is how you should expect the public to react".

What is the Page Center’s role in this project?

We are really grateful that Page Center can fund this work. Dr. Chu and I were a part of another research call a few years ago regarding prosocial communication. That call, as well as this one, has really helped shape our research trajectory to be focused on these prosocial outcomes for organizations. Dr. Chu and I were having a discussion about real events that are impacting our students, and it fit perfectly with the research call. I think that shows that the Page Center wants to be involved in timely, important work that is impacting society today.