This study investigated the effects of crisis response strategies on the attribution of an organization’s crisis responsibilities and relationship quality outcomes and determined the linkages among relationship quality outcome indicators. This study found that none of the tested crisis response strategies were helpful in reducing public blame surrounding the featured organization’s responsibility in the crisis. This study also found that the presence of crisis itself tends to negatively affect the relationship quality and that the publics examined were not influenced by the use of crisis response strategies.
AnS.-K.ChengI. (2010). Crisis communication research in public relations journals: Tracking research trends over thirty years. In CoombsW. T.HolladayS. J. (Eds.), Handbook of crisis communication (pp. 65-90). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
2.
BrownK.WhiteC. (2011). Organization-public relationship and crisis response strategies: Impact on attribution of responsibility. Journal of Public Relations Research, 23, 75-92.
3.
CoombsT. (2000). Crisis management: Advantages of a relational perspective. In LedinghamJ.BruningS. (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management (pp. 73-94). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4.
CoombsW. (2004). A theoretical frame for post-crisis communication: Situational crisis communication theory. In MartinkoM. (Ed.), Attribution theory in the organizational sciences: Theoretical and empirical contributions (pp. 275-296). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
CoombsT. (2007b). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10, 163-176.
7.
CoombsT.HolladayS. (1996). Communication and attribution in a crisis: An experimental study in crisis communication. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8, 279-295.
8.
CoombsT.HolladayS. (2001). An extended examination of the crisis situation: A fusion of the relational management and symbolic approaches. Journal of Public Relations Research, 13, 321-340.
9.
CoombsT.HolladayS. (2008). Comparing apology to equivalent crisis response strategies: Clarifying apology’s role and value in crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 34, 252-257.
10.
CoombsT.HolladayS. J. (2009). Further explorations of post-crisis communication: Effects of media and response strategies on perceptions and intentions. Public Relations Review, 35, 1-6.
Fearn-BanksK. (2007). Crisis communications: A casebook approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
GarbarinoE.JohnsonM. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63, 70-87.
14.
HaighM.DardisF. (2008). Impact of crisis on corporate social responsibility and organization-public relationships. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
15.
HonL.GrunigJ. E. (1999). Measuring relationship in public relations. Paper presented to the Institute for Public Relations, Gainesville, FL.
16.
HosmerL. T. (1996). Research notes and communications: Responses to “Do good ethics always make for good business?”Strategic Management Journal, 17, 501.
17.
HuangY.-H. (2008). Trust and relational commitment in corporate crises: The effects of crisis communicative strategy and form of crisis response. Journal of Public Relations Research, 20, 297-327.
18.
JeongS. (2009). Public responses to an oil spill accident: A test of the attribution theory and situational crisis communication theory. Public Relations Review, 35, 307-309.
19.
JoS.HonL. C.BrunnerB. R. (2004). Organization-public relationships: Measurement validation in a University setting. Journal of Communication Management, 9, 14-27.
20.
KelleyH. H.ThibautJ. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York, NY: Wiley.
21.
KiE.-J.HonL. (2007a). Testing the linkages among the organization-public relationship and attitude and behavioral intentions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 19, 1-23.
22.
KiE.-J.HonL. (2007b). Reliability and validity of organization-public relationship measurement and linkages among relationship indicators in a membership organization. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84, 419-438.
23.
KimY. (2001). Searching for the organization-public relationship: A valid and reliable instrument. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 799-815.
24.
KimY.LeeE. (2005). The impact of the organization-public relationship on perceptions toward the crisis and image restoration strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, New York.
25.
KwonI.-W. G.SuhT. (2004). Factors affecting the level of trust and commitment in supply chain relationships. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 40(2), 4-14.
26.
LedinghamJ. A.BruningS. D. (1998). Relationship management in public relations: Dimensions of an organization-public relationship. Public Relations Review, 24(1), 55-65.
27.
LeeE. (2007). Organization-public relationships and crisis communication. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
28.
McAuleyE.DuncanT.RussellD. (1992). Measuring causal attributions: The Revised Causal Dimension Scale (CDII). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 566-573.
29.
McDougallJ. (2007). Engaging the visual generation: Some Queensland teachers come to terms with changing literacies. Screen Education, 46, 130-137.
30.
MeyerJ. P.AllenN. (1984). Testing the side-best theory of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 372-378.
31.
MilesE. W.PatrickS. L.KingW. C. (1996). Job level as a systemic variable in predicting the relationship between supervisor communication and job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 277-292.
32.
MorganR.HuntS. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58, 20-38.
33.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
34.
ParkH.ReberB. (2011). The organization-public relationship and crisis communication: The effect of the organization-public relationship on publics’ perceptions of crisis and attitudes toward the organization. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 5,240-260.
35.
SeegerM. (2006). Best practices in crisis communication: An expert panel process. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34, 232-244.
36.
SelnesF. (1998). Antecedents and consequences of trust and satisfaction in buyer-seller relationships. European Journal of Marketing, 32, 305-322.
37.
SiscoF. H.CollinsE. L.ZochL. M. (2010). Through the looking glass: A decade of Red Cross crisis response and situational crisis communication theory. Public Relations Review, 36(1), 21-27.
38.
StaffordL.CanaryD. J. (1991). Maintenance strategies and romantic relationship type, gender, and relational characteristics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8,217-242.
39.
TaylorM. (2007). How the third party effect influences how organizations respond to product recalls. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago, IL.
40.
UlmerR. R. (2001). Effective crisis management through established stakeholder relationships: Malden Mills as a case study. Management Communication Quarterly, 14, 590-615.
41.
WeinerB. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychology Review, 92, 548-573.
