Berger & Heath 2007 (JCR) — identity-signaling; consumers avoid choices of dissimilar others; non-peer cases actively de-persuade

Claim: Berger and Heath (2007) showed that in identity-relevant domains, consumers may actively avoid the choices of dissimilar others to maintain identity distinction. Choices function as identity signals; choosing what an out-group chose threatens the identity boundary.

Source: Berger, J., & Heath, C. (2007). "Where Consumers Diverge from Others: Identity Signaling and Product Domains." Journal of Consumer Research 34(2): 121–134.

Confidence: Verified.

For Candid: A GC reading a fashion-tech case study may experience it not as neutral information but as actively dissonant. Peer case studies persuade; non-peer case studies actively de-persuade. This compounds the [[goldstein-cialdini-griskevicius-2008-provincial-norms-hotel-towel]] effect — the issue is not just that out-group cases fail to be informative; they actively work against the pitch.

Implication for case-study libraries: a single well-documented case from a Cambridge mid-size framer is worth more than ten cases from tech companies. The wrong-group cases are not neutral filler; they are negative signal.