Abstract: The ngative spillover effects from pruduct harm crisis are widespread. Then how to prevent or reduce the indirect effects from the focused brands? The results of the empirical analysis indicate that as far as the negative spillover of the competing brands in response to the product harm crisis is concerned, segmentation strategy is the best, and there is no significant difference between denial strategy and silence strategy. Compared with the high brand-commitment consumers, the product harm crisis can easily produce negative sillover effects on the low commitment consumers. With the increase of commitment level of the consumers, the impcat on reducement of negative spillover effects from crisis response of competing brands increases. These findings can offer some enlightment to them to respond actively to the negative spillover effects from product harm crisis.

Key words: product harm crisis; negative spillover effect; competing brand; coping strategies; consumer commitment