Search results

This study examines a controversial issue (biotechnology) and how news disputes about misinformation related to the issue impacts individuals' attitudes toward a biotechnology company and their trust in the media source.

This study conducts a 2 (risk: low vs. high) x 2 (pre-existing attitude: anti gene-editing technology vs. pro gene-editing technology) x 2 (dispute message: absent vs. present) x 2 (media source: Buzzfeed vs NYT) factorial online experiment using a Qualtrics panel (N = 1,080) to examine the impact on individuals' attitudes toward a biotechnology company and trust in the media source.

Results indicate that dispute messages enhance attitudes toward the company but decrease trust in media sources. Interaction effects between pre-existing attitude and the dispute message, along with perceived risk and the dispute message, illustrate stark differences in how individuals with favorable vs. unfavorable pre-existing attitudes assessed the company after viewing the dispute message.

This study applies arguments from extant literature about prebunking and debunking misinformation. Specifically, this study investigates how dispute messages, a form of debunking through source derogation, actually impact individuals' perceptions of media credibility and/or their attitudes about the content they are reading. The study findings also reveal new insights regarding the interaction between pre-existing attitudes and perceived risk, as well as how dispute messages interact with each of the aforementioned factors.

This study examines the interplay between media-induced emotional crisis framing (anger vs sadness) and message sidedness of crisis response on publics’ attribution of crisis responsibility as well as subsequent company evaluation and supportive behavioral intention.

A 2 (emotion: anger vs sadness) x 2 (crisis response: one-sided vs two-sided) online experiment was conducted among 161 participants in the USA.

Results showed that anger-inducing media framing of the crisis elicited higher levels of crisis responsibility attribution and more negative company evaluation, compared with sadness-inducing media framing. One-sided message response was more effective than two-sided message response in lowering attribution of crisis responsibility when sadness was induced, but no difference was found under the anger-induced condition. Attribution of crisis responsibility fully mediated the effects of emotional crisis framing on company evaluation and supportive behavioral intention toward the company.

This study is among the first to examine the interaction effect between emotional media framing and response message sidedness in an ambiguous crisis. Drawing on the interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks, this study integrates the situational crisis communication theory, appraisal-tendency framework and message sidedness in persuasion literature. As such, it contributes to theoretical development in crisis communication and offers communication managers guidance on how to effectively address emotionally framed crises.

During COVID-19 restrictions, people spent more time in cyberspace and consuming health-related information. An increase was also observed in mediated caring messages or health-relevant information sent to one another. This study aims to explore how the information and interactions around COVID-19 can provide a good learning opportunity for public health, specifically related to eHealth literacy and eHealth promotion.

While mainstream literature has concentrated on experimental designs and a priming effect, this study inspects psychological distance related to a health threat under real-life circumstances. The article adopted a survey approach and utilized PLS-SEM techniques to examine the proposed hypotheses.

Results indicated that whereas closer social support correlates with closer psychological distance and less usage of the social media approach, more substantial COVID-19 impacts were associated with closer psychological distance but greater use of social media. Since both closer psychological distance and social media approach contribute to eHealth literacy, social support from closer and virtual social networks should be embraced but utilized through different routes and for different purposes. The timing of messages but not psychological distance affects people's social media approach, indicating that morning messages should be employed. Moreover, eHealth literacy mediates timing preferences and leads to a preference for eHealth communication earlier in the day. Overall, morning messages create a virtuous circle during a health crisis.

This paper establishes a mechanism of virtuous cycles for eHealth communication during a health threat. Additionally, it bridges existing research gaps by expanding chronopsychology and CLT in the health domain using an empirical approach, a real-life case and an extension of performance regarding information-seeking and utilization.

The purpose of this study is to develop a model for investigating the sharing of harmful messages by employees using social media using the conspiracy theory from a socio-legal perspective. This study also examines the moderating role of different demographic parameters such as age, gender and education toward sharing harmful messages using social media.

Using the conspiracy theory and social impact theory as the foundation of this study, the authors developed theoretical model and validated it using the structural equation modeling technique with 342 participants from various organizations across Europe and Asia. The study also used different statistical measures to understand the demographic impacts toward sharing harmful messages.

It was found that epistemic, existential and social motives significantly and positively influence employees’ inappropriate message-sharing and seeking behavior, which in turn influences them to share harmful messages on social media. The study also indicates that there are some moderating impacts of employee demography toward sharing harmful messages using social media platforms.

This study investigates the antecedents of sharing harmful messages using social media by employees. The present study could be useful for the organizations leaders as well as policymakers and legal fraternity. The study uses a limited number of feedback to validate the model. Also, this is a cross-sectional study which is another limitation of this study.

This study has proposed and validated a theoretical model by using the conspiracy theory as well as the social impact theory which is unique. Moreover, this study adds value to the existing literature on the harmful impacts of social media and its societal impacts. Besides, the validated model of this study has a high explanatory power which is another uniqueness of this study.

This study aims to explore how source type can influence organizational assets proposed by source credibility theory (SCT) when paired with matched situational crisis communication theory (SCCT) strategies for accidental, preventable, and victim crises. Crisis communication delivered online provides an invaluable outlet for organizations to disperse information to stakeholders quickly. It has been shown that receivers of this information have motivational assumptions about sources having their own agenda for producing content. Thus, it is important to explore how sources tasked with delivering crisis responses can influence perceptions of the sincerity and credibility of the message.

The researchers conducted a 3 (crisis response: matched accidental, matched preventable, matched victim) × 3 (source type: organization, CEO, The New York Times) online between-subjects experimental design (N = 623).

By identifying how the source disseminating crisis responses influences message perceptions, findings from this study recognize how the crisis response is situated in a greater context. Since perceived sincerity and credibility were found to influence message acceptance and reputation, making intentional decisions that acknowledge both within a crisis communication strategy may benefit both future practice and research applications.

The current study advances understandings afforded by SCCT, along with SCT, by experimentally testing the influence of these variables within crisis responses on outcomes such as account acceptance and organizational reputation.

This study aims to explore the spillover effects of data breaches from a consumer perspective in the e-commerce context. Specifically, we investigate how an online retailer’s data breach affects consumers’ privacy risk perceptions of competing firms, and further how it affects shopping intention for the competitors. We also examine how the privacy risk contagion effect varies depending on the characteristics of competitors and their competitive responses.

We conducted two scenario-based experiments with surveys. To assess the spillover effects and the moderating effects, we employed an analysis of covariance. We also performed bootstrapping-based mediation analyses using the PROCESS macro.

We find evidence for the privacy risk contagion effect and demonstrate that it negatively influences consumers’ shopping intention for a competing firm. We also find that a competitor’s cybersecurity message is effective in avoiding the privacy risk contagion effect and the competitor even benefits from it.

While previous studies have examined the impacts of data breaches on customer perceptions of the breached firm, our study focuses on customer perceptions of the non-breached firms. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is one of the first to provide empirical evidence for the negative spillover effects of a data breach from a consumer perspective. More importantly, this study empirically demonstrates that the non-breached competitor’s competitive response is effective in preventing unintended negative spillover in the context of the data breach.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how hospitality companies can best explain controversial corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to consumers who may not agree with the CSR activity. This research explores message framing through emotional and cognitive appeals to influence consumer perceptions of the Gideon Bible in USA hotel rooms. The study uses the theory of deontic justice to measure the impacts of messaging on consumer perceptions of the morality of the Gideon Bible as suicide prevention in hotels and its relation to controversial CSR initiatives.

The study uses an experimental study design via a self-administered survey to analyze participants’ perceptions of the placement of the Gideon Bible in hotel rooms and participants’ attitudes toward CSR initiatives based on deontic justice and religion using different message framing conditions.

Results show that religion was a major determinant of attitude towards the Gideon Bible, but the sentiment analysis also revealed that negative perceptions can be mitigated through message framing via emotional and cognitive appeals. Additionally, the cognitive appeal did impact CSR perceptions, as did identifying as Christian. Moral outrage emerged as a significant moderator for the relationships between message framing, attitudes toward the Gideon Bible and CSR.

This study provides an extension of deontic justice research to examine justice traits in accepting controversial CSR.

This paper aims to examine how content relevancy influences consumers’ preference to receive and share fake news. Further, it investigates how these receivers perceive the social image of the people who share fake news. Finally, this study examines how brand strength and valence and credibility of fake content influence consumer’s word-of-mouth recommendations, purchase intentions and attitude toward the brand.

Three experiments were conducted to test the hypotheses. The data was analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance and PROCESS techniques.

Findings indicate that people prefer to receive and share relevant content, even if it is fake. Sharing fake news conveys the sender’s sociability but also creates a negative perception of narcissism. Individuals are more likely to recommend a brand if the fake news is perceived as credible and positive (vs negative). Finally, brand-strength can help brands to negate the harmful effects of fake news.

Future research can explore the role of group dynamics, tie-strength and media richness (text, image and videos) in the dispersion of fake news and its impact on brands.

Marketers should communicate and educate consumers that sharing fake content can harm their social image, which can reduce information dispersion. Marketers should also improve brand-strength that can protect the brand against the adverse impact of fake news.

This study contributes to the emerging literature on fake news by studying the impact of fake news on consumer intentions and attitudes toward the brand, which are critical for the success of any brand.

Prior research has advanced several explanations for social media influencers' (SMIs’) success in the burgeoning computer-mediated marketing environments but leaves one key topic unexplored: the moderating role of SMIs in service failure and recovery strategies.

Drawing on a social constructivist perspective and an inductive approach, 59 in-depth interviews were conducted with millennials from three European countries (Italy, France and the United Kingdom). Building on social influence theory and commitment-trust theory, this study conceptualises four distinct pathways unifying SMIs' efforts in the service failure recovery process.

The emergent model illustrates how source credibility and message content moderate service failure severity and speed of recovery. The insights gained from this study model contribute to research on the pivotal uniqueness of SMIs in service failure recovery processes and offer practical explanations of variations in the implementation of influencer marketing. This study examines a perspective of SMIs that considers the cycle of their influence on customers through service failure and recovery.

The study suggests that negative reactions towards service failure and recovery are reduced if customers have a relationship with influencers prior to the service failure and recovery compared with the reactions of customers who do not have a relationship with the influencer.

This paper refines the Digital Media–Arena (DMA) framework to address the diversity of stakeholders contributing to the production, (re)appropriation and (re)distribution of organisational messages in digital environments. It also presents a case analysis for the purpose of demonstrating the applicability of the revised conceptual framework to a critical situation.

Grounded in key public relations, corporate communication and strategic communication research, this study first extends the DMA framework by introducing six new forms of media-arenas. Next, the study takes a public sector perspective to analyse the revised framework against a critical situation involving the Finnish prime minister in summer 2022.

The application of the revised DMA framework to analyse the critical situation shows the importance of mapping and understanding diverse discourses across multi-arenas and their communication role in a rapidly unfolding scandal surrounding the prime minister of Finland. Findings also reveal the diversity of stakeholder voices forming their own versions of organisational messages and sometimes converging organisational messages within and across DMAs.

The DMA framework can offer practical suggestions to guide communicators to make strategic choices in what, where, how and with whom they can communicate.

The revised DMA framework contributes expanding the field's knowledge of the strategic communicative use of the digital environment in typically highly volatile and multi-vocal situations by offering instrumental understanding of the conflicting challenge between subjugating and liberating organisational messages across the digital spectrum.