Does The Fine Bro's Psychological Reactance Theory?

Psychological reactance Theory
Freedom of behaviour is an important aspect of human life (Fogarty, 1997). When the ‘Fine Bro’s’, a popular YouTube channel attempted to trademark the word ‘react’, the YouTube community openly protested through acts reflective of reactance theory (See Appendix A.) A successful trademark meant that content creators using the reaction format, a format where a personality reacts to a popular video and offers their opinion, were at potential risk of having their videos taken down by the Fine Bro’s. Baraniuk (2016) reported how the Fine Bro’s lost an alarming rate of subscribers which severely affected their business, illustrating an attempt to show hostility toward the company; a key principle of reactance theory
The Guardian (2016) reported how Manny Pacquiao made the controversial attribution that homosexuals lack common sense and that unlike animals, homosexuals are unable to distinguish between same-sex partners. According to Attribution theory (Haider-Markel, & Joslyn, 2008), Pacquiao had attributed homosexual behaviour to lack of common sense, an internal attribute related to intelligence (See Appendix B). Furthermore, behaviours attributed an internal cause, like those illustrated by Pacquiao, are more negatively perceived (Malle, 2011). This is because internal characteristics of behaviour are assumed to have a degree of controllability (Haider-Markel, & Joslyn, 2008). To elaborate, when obesity was believed to be caused by laziness, an internal attribute, then the exhibiting behaviour was deemed their responsibility and would receive less support than if the cause was deemed uncontrollable - having genetic, external factors (Sakalli, 2002; Haider-Markel, & Joslyn,
Deindividuation theory (Postmes & Spears, 1998) explains how membership in a large group places individuals in an agentic state where they act on behalf on their group’s beliefs. Bowles (2016) mentions how aggression is typically experienced through online forums where a community of people with shared beliefs congregate. Therefore, their aggressive behaviours seem to be a result of the shared ideals of each user which simultaneously reduces personal identity and encourages the conformity toward a group identity (Postmes & Spears, 1998). As Deindividuation theory explains, people tend to behave in ways they would not when in a group because of the anonymity it allows, meaning individuals lose the self-awareness and act on behalf of the group's ideals (Postmes & Spears,