Breaking the sound of silence: Explication in the use of strategic silence in crisis communication
Breaking the sound of silence: Explication in the use of strategic silence in crisis communication
Abstract: Crises present organizations with the “rhetorical exigency” to enact control (Heath, 2004, p.167). Silence is not an option. This study, as the first empirical examination of Le et al. (2019)’s seminal study on silence in crisis communication, examines, first, if silence can be strategically used as a bona fide strategy; second, under what circumstances should silence be broken; and third, when silence is broken, how it affects a) organizational reputation, b) societal risk perception, and c) the publics’ crisis information sharing intention. An online experiment was conducted using a nationally representative sample in the United States. The stimuli used in this study consisted of two components: 1) an explanation about a fictitious company; and 2) two types of silence breaking (forced vs. planned) embedded in each stimulus accordingly after the same crisis incident. Results show that the effect of silence-breaking type on crisis information sharing intention was mediated by societal risk perception, which is conditioned by participants’ level of perceived organizational reputation.
Related Research
-
The Best of Both Worlds: The Crisis Communication Think Tank (CCTT) Approach to The Quest for Crisis Management KeystoneYan Jin. (forthcoming), “The Best of Both Worlds: The Crisis Communication Think Tank (CCTT) Approach to The Quest for Crisis Management Keystone,” Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. Abstract: This […]
-
Viewing violent policing videos contributes to trauma outcomes beyond experiences with police: A minority health perspective approachGlenna L. Read, Yan, H, & Bailey, R. “Viewing violent policing videos contributes to trauma outcomes beyond experiences with police: A minority health perspective approach,” paper to be presented at […]