Social media influentials play key roles in information creation and impact people’s crisis interpretations and behavioral intentions. Applying a multilevel perspective, this study examined how various social media influentials’ frame building was affected by crisis clusters and message characteristics. Social media influentials’ tweets were extracted from over a million tweets from eight crises. A random sample of 2,000 tweets was analyzed by content analysis. The results showed that social media influentials’ use of responsibility and topic frames was affected by both crisis-level factors (i.e., crisis origin and organization type) and message-level factors (i.e., communicative functions and types of influentials). These findings support the importance to understand the contextual factors that condition influentials' frame building on social media.
AnS. K.GowerK. K. (2009). How do the news media frame crises? A content analysis of crisis news coverage. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.01.010
2.
AustinL.JinY. (2018). Social media and crisis communication. Taylor & Francis.
3.
AustinL.LiuB. F.JinY. (2012). How audiences seek out crisis information: Exploring the social-mediated crisis communication model. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 40(2), 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2012.654498
BrüggemannM.D’AngeloP. (2018). Defragmenting news framing research: Reconciling generic and issue-specific frames. In D’AngeloP. (Ed.), Doing news framing analysis II (pp. 130–151). Routledge.
6.
CanelM. J.SandersK. (2010). Crisis communication and terrorist attacks: Framing a response to the 2004 Madrid bombings and 2005 London bombings. In CoombsW.T.HolladayS. J. (Eds.), The handbook of crisis communication (pp. 449-466). Wiley-Blackwell.
7.
ChengY.CameronG. (2018). The status of social-mediated crisis communication (SMCC) research: An analysis of published articles 2002-2014. In AustinL.JinY. (Eds.), Social media and crisis communication (pp. 9–20). Routledge.
8.
ClaeysA. S.CaubergheV. (2014). What makes crisis response strategies work? The impact of crisis involvement and message framing. Journal of Business Research, 67(2), 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.10.005
9.
CoombsW. T. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049
10.
CoombsW. T. (2018). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
11.
CurranP. J. (2003). Have multilevel models been structural equation models all along?Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38(4), 529–569. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3804_5
de VreeseC. H.LechelerS. (2012). News framing research: An overview and new developments. In SemetkoH. A.ScammellM. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of political communication (pp. 282–307). Sage.
14.
DelbaereM.MichaelB.PhillipsB. J. (2021). Social media influencers: A route to brand engagement for their followers. Psychology & Marketing, 38(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21419
15.
DjafarovaE.RushworthC. (2017). Exploring the credibility of online celebrities’ Instagram profiles in influencing the purchase decisions of young female users. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.009
FraustinoJ. D.LiuB. F. (2017). Toward more audience-oriented approaches to crisis communication and social media research. In AustinL.JinY. (Eds.), Social media and crisis communication (pp. 129–140). Routledge.
18.
FrebergK.GrahamK.McGaugheyK.FrebergL. A. (2011). Who are the social media influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 90–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.11.001
19.
GerkenF.van der MeerT. G. (2019). Crises frame dynamics: Frame diversity in news media and the role of governmental actors. Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research, 2(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.30658/jicrcr.2.2.1
20.
GrahamT.WrightS. (2014). Discursive equality and everyday talk online: The impact of “superparticipants”. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 625–642. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12016
21.
HallahanK. (1999). Seven models of framing: Implications for public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11(3), 205–242. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1103_02
22.
HeckR. H.ThomasS. L. (2015). An introduction to multilevel modeling techniques: MLM and SEM approaches using Mplus. Routledge.
23.
HoxJ. J.MoerbeekM.Van de SchootR. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Routledge.
24.
IyengarS. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues.University of Chicago Press.
25.
JinX. (2020). Exploring crisis communication and information dissemination on social media: Social network analysis of hurricane Irma tweets. Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research, 3(2), 179–210. https://doi.org/10.30658/jicrcr.3.2.3
26.
JinY.LiuB. F. (2010). The blog-mediated crisis communication model: Recommendations for responding to inuential external blogs. Journal of Public Relations Research, 22(4), 429–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627261003801420.
27.
JinY.LiuB. F.AustinL. (2014). Examining the role of social media in effective crisis management: The effects of crisis origin, information form, and source on publics’ crisis responses. Communication Research, 41(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211423918
28.
KatzE.LazarsfeldP. (1955). Personal influence.Free Press.
29.
KimH. J.CameronG. T. (2011). Emotions matter in crisis: The role of anger and sadness in the publics’ response to crisis news framing and corporate crisis response. Communication Research, 38(6), 826–855. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210385813
30.
KimS. H.CarvalhoJ. P.DavisA. C. (2010). Talking about poverty: News framing of who is responsible for causing and fixing the problem. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(3–4), 563–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769901008700308
31.
KrippendorffK. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Sage.
32.
LachlanK. A.SpenceP. R.LinX.NajarianK.Del GrecoM. (2016). Social media and crisis management: CERC, search strategies, and Twitter content. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 647–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.027
LazarsfeldP.BerelsonB.GaudetH. (1948). The people’s choice. Columbia University Press.
35.
LiuB. F.FraustinoJ. D.JinY. (2015). How disaster information form, source, type, and prior disaster exposure affect public outcomes: Jumping on the social media bandwagon?Journal of Applied Communication Research, 43(1), 44–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2014.982685
36.
LiuB. F.FraustinoJ. D.JinY. (2016). Social media use during disasters how information form and source influence intended behavioral responses. Communication Research, 43(5), 626–646. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650214565917
37.
MakA. K.SongA. O. (2019). Revisiting social-mediated crisis communication model: The Lancôme regenerative crisis after the Hong Kong Umbrella Movement. Public Relations Review, 45(4), 101812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101812
38.
MartensenA.Brockenhuus-SchackS.ZahidA. L. (2018). How citizen influencers persuade their followers. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-09-2017-0095
39.
McGuireW. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In LindzeyG.AronsonE. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 233–346). Random House.
40.
MillerM. D.BrunnerC. C. (2008). Social impact in technologically-mediated communication: An examination of online influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2972–2991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.05.004
41.
MirbabaieM.BunkerD.StieglitzS.MarxJ.EhnisC. (2020). Social media in times of crisis: Learning from Hurricane Harvey for the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic response. Journal of Information Technology, 35(3), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268396220929258
42.
MuralidharanS.RasmussenL.PattersonD.ShinJ. H. (2011). Hope for Haiti: An analysis of Facebook and Twitter usage during the earthquake relief efforts. Public Relations Review, 37(2), 175–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.010
43.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2017). Mplus user’s guide. Muthén & Muthén.
44.
Perez-VegaR.WaiteK.O’GormanK. (2016). Social impact theory: An examination of how immediacy operates as an influence upon social media interaction in Facebook fan pages. The Marketing Review, 16(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1362/146934716X14636478977791
SemetkoH. A.ValkenburgP. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50(3), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/50.2.93
47.
SinghJ.CrisafulliB.XueM. T. (2020). “To trust or not to trust”: The impact of social media influencers on the reputation of corporate brands in crisis. Journal of Business Research, 119, 464–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.039
48.
StieglitzS.BunkerD.MirbabaieM.EhnisC. (2018). Sense‐making in social media during extreme events. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12193
UtzS.SchultzF.GlockaS. (2013). Crisis communication online: How medium, crisis type and emotions affected public reactions in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. Public Relations Review, 39(1), 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.09.010
51.
ValenzuelaS.PiñaM.RamírezJ. (2017). Behavioral effects of framing on social media users: How conflict, economic, human interest, and morality frames drive news sharing. Journal of Communication, 67(5), 803–826. https://doi-org/10.1111/jcom.12325
52.
van der MeerT. G. (2018). Public frame building: The role of source usage in times of crisis. Communication Research, 45(6), 956–981. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216644027
53.
van der MeerT. G.VerhoevenP.BeentjesH.VliegenthartR. (2014). When frames align: The interplay between PR, news media, and the public in times of crisis. Public Relations Review, 40(6), 751–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.07.008
54.
VrontisD.MakridesA.ChristofiM.ThrassouA. (2021). Social media influencer marketing: A systematic review, integrative framework and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12647
55.
WeeksB. E.Ardèvol-AbreuA.Gil de ZúñigaH. (2017). Online influence? Social media use, opinion leadership, and political persuasion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29(2), 214–239. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edv050
56.
WeimannG. (2017). Multistep flow of communication: Evolution of the paradigm. The International encyclopedia of media effects. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0055
57.
WeismuellerJ.HarriganP.WangS.SoutarG. N. (2020). Influencer endorsements: How advertising disclosure and source credibility affect consumer purchase intention on social media. Australasian Marketing Journal, 28(4), 160–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.03.002
58.
WinterS.NeubaumG. (2016). Examining characteristics of opinion leaders in social media: A motivational approach. Social Media+ Society, 2(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116665858
59.
ZhangY.JinY.TangY. (2015). Framing depression: Cultural and organizational influences on coverage of a public health threat and attribution of responsibilities in Chinese news media, 2000-2012. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699014558553
60.
ZhaoX.OhH. J. (2021). What fosters interorganizational frame convergence: Examining a semantic network during the opioid crisis. Public Relations Review, 47(3), 102055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102042
61.
ZhaoX.ZhanM.LiuB. F. (2018a). Disentangling social media influence in crises: Testing a four-factor model of social media influence with large data. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 549–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.08.002
62.
ZhaoX.ZhanM.WongC.-W. (2018b). Segmenting and understanding publics in a social media information sharing network: An interactional and dynamic approach. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(1), 25–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2017.1379013
63.
ZhaoX.ZhanM. M.LiuB. F. (2019). Understanding motivated publics during disasters: Examining message functions, frames, and styles of social media influentials and followers. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 27(4), 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12279
