A Comparative Analysis of Credibility and Response Appropriateness Under Crisis

Le résumé fourni par la source

This research examines the impact of attribution and crisis response strategies on perceptions of credibility and response appropriateness in high-profile crises based on attribution theory and situational crisis communication theory. Specifically, study 1 analyzes the case of Wang Leehom, a public figure who faced a personal scandal, to understand how different attributions (internal vs. external) and response strategies (denial, defiance, and apology) influence audience reactions. Study 1 revealed significant relationships between attributions and perceptions of credibility, with varying moderating effects depending on the response strategy employed. Study 2 utilized a controlled experimental design (2x4 experimental groups) to further investigate these dynamics, confirming that while significant differences in response appropriateness emerged when combining denial and defiance, no differences were observed across all experimental groups. The findings suggest that perceptions are more sensitive to accountability signals than to the nuances between denial and defiance strategies. This research contributes to the theoretical understanding of attribution theory and situational crisis communication theory by demonstrating how different response strategies interact with attributions to shape credibility and appropriateness perceptions. Practical implications for crisis management and communication strategies are discussed, along with recommendations for future research on individual differences in crisis response evaluation.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.