Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2023-3
The Process of Online Keyword Activism in Political Figure’s Crisis: Moderating Roles of Like-Minded Public Opinion and Government Controllability of Crisis Outcomes
Using a national online survey in South Korea, this study examines the underlying psychological mechanisms of online keyword activism in supporting a politician. Findings show that when perceived like-minded opinion is extremely negative toward the politician, the like-minded opinion perception mitigates the effects of perceived majority opinion on crisis blame attribution and pro-politician activism. Government controllability intensifies the effects crisis blame has on pro-politician activism when it is extremely low. What drives more pro-politician activism is their perception of like-minded opinion through blaming external parties; what makes people refrain from pro-politician activism is their perception of low government controllability through blaming the politician.
AdamsJ. S. (1961). Reduction of cognitive dissonance by seeking consonant information. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 74–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047029
BakshyE.MessingS.AdamicL. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348, 1130–1132. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160
5.
BanduraA. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs.
6.
BarakatA.MoussaF. (2017). Using the expectancy theory framework to explain the motivation to participate in a consumer boycott. Journal of Marketing Development and Competitiveness, 11, 32–46.
7.
BuntingA. M.StamatelJ. (2019). Exploring geospatial characteristics of hashtag activism in Ferguson, Missouri: An application of social disorganization theory. Geoforum, 104, 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.06.008
8.
CampbellJ. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946–967. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.25275684
9.
ChoiS. Y. (2019, September11). The amount of news coverage after appointing Cho widely varied at NAVER. Journalists Association of Korea. https://news.v.daum.net/v/20190911123330136
10.
ChoiJ.YangM.ChangJ. J. (2009). Elaboration of the hostile media phenomenon: The roles of involvement, media skepticism, congruency of perceived media influence, and perceived opinion climate. Communication Research, 36, 54–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208326462
11.
ChoiS.ParkH. W. (2014). An exploratory approach to a Twitter-based community centered on a political goal in South Korea: Who organized it, what they shared, and how they acted. New Media & Society, 16, 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487956
12.
ChungY. (2019, September3). Search keywords appeared after Cho’s press conference: “Condolences on the death of Korean journalism,” quality of questions by Korean Journalists. YTN. https://www.ytn.co.kr/_ln/0101_201909031040071411
13.
CialdiniR. B.WosinskaW.BarrettD. W.ButnerJ.Gornik-DuroseM. (1999). Compliance with a request in two cultures: The differential influence of social proof and commitment/consistency on collectivists and individualists. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1242–1253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167299258006
CoombsT. W.HalladayS. J. (1996). Communication and attributions in a crisis: An experimental study in crisis communication. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8, 279–295. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr0804_04
16.
Dvir-GvirsmanS.GarrettR. K.TsfatiY. (2018). Why do partisan audiences participate? Perceived public opinion as the mediating mechanism. Communication Research, 45, 112–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215593145
17.
FeldmanL.HartP. S.LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC. (2017). Do hostile media perceptions lead to action? The role of hostile media perceptions, political efficacy, and ideology in predicting climate change activism. Communication Research, 44, 1099–1124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650214565914
18.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
19.
Gil de ZúñigaH.WeeksB.Ardèvol-AbreuA. (2017). Effects of the news-finds-me perception in communication: Social media use implications for news seeking and learning about politics. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 22, 105–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12185
20.
GuntherA. C. (1998). The persuasive press inference: Effects of mass media on perceived public opinion. Communication Research, 25, 486–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365098025005002
21.
HairJ. F.BlackW. C.BabinB. J.AndersonR. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
22.
HayesA. F. (2018a). Introduction of mediation moderation conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
23.
HayesA. F. (2018b). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
24.
HeathR. L.PalencharM. J. (2009). Issue management and crisis communication. In HeathR. L.PalencharM. J. (Eds.), Strategic issues management: Organizations and public policy challenges (2nd ed., pp. 125–156). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452274829.n8
HuangY. H. (2006). Crisis situations, communication strategies, and media coverage: A multicase study revisiting the communicative response model. Communication Research, 33(3), 180–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650206287077
27.
JiY.KimS. (2019). Communication-mediated psychological mechanisms of Chinese publics’ post-crisis corporate associations and government associations. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 27(2), 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12255
28.
JiY.KimS. (2020). Crisis-induced public demand for regulatory intervention in the social media era. New Media & Society, 22(6), 959–983. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819874473
29.
KarpfD. (2010). Online political mobilization from the advocacy group’s perspective: Looking beyond clicktivism. Policy & Internet, 2, 7–41. https://doi.org/10.2202/1944-2866.1098
KimS. (2014). What’s worse in times of crisis? Negative corporate ability or negative CSR reputation?Journal of Business Ethics, 123(1), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1808-x
33.
KimS.SungK. H.JiY.XingC.QuJ. G. (2021). Online firestorms in social media: Comparative research between China Weibo and USA Twitter. Public Relations Review, 47(1), Article 102010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102010
34.
KoS. K. (2019, September6). Lee Chul Hee, “Cho’s news coverage exceeded 1.18 million, more than Sewol ferry disaster and Choi Soon-sil scandal” Asia News Agency. http://www.anewsa.com/detail.php?number=1957862
35.
KrosnickJ.PettyR. (1995). Attitude strength: An overview. In PettyR.KrosnickJ. (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 1–24). Routledge.
36.
LiJ.SuM.-H. (2020). Real talk about fake news: Identity language and disconnected networks of the U.S. public’s “fake news” discourse on Twitter. Social Media + Society, 6(2), Article 916841. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120916841
37.
LöblichM.WendelinM. (2012). ICT policy activism on a national level: Ideas, resources and strategies of German civil society in governance processes. New Media & Society, 14, 899–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811432427
MunyonT. P.JenkinsM. T.CrookT. R.EdwardsJ.HarveyN. P. (2019). Consequential cognition: Exploring how attribution theory sheds new light on the firm-level consequences of product recalls. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40, 587–602. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2350
NekmatE.IsmailI. (2019). Issue-based micromobilization on social media: Mediated pathways linking issue involvement and self-network opinion congruity to expressive support. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.008
42.
NeubaumG.KrämerN. C. (2017). Monitoring the opinion of the crowd: Psychological mechanisms underlying public opinion perceptions on social media. Media Psychology, 20, 502–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2016.1211539
RojasH. (2010). Corrective’ actions in the public sphere: How perceptions of media and media effects shape political behaviors. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22, 343–363. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq018
50.
RosenstoneS. J.HansenJ. M. (2003). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America (1st ed.). Pearson.
51.
RudolphT. J.EvansJ. (2005). Political trust, ideology, and public support for government spending. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 660–671. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00148.x
52.
ScheufeleD. A. (2002). Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior. Communication Research, 29, 46–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365020202900103
53.
ScheufeleD. A.HardyB.BrossardD.Waismel-ManorI. S.NisbetE. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56, 728–753. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.x
54.
SudeD. J.Knobloch-WesterwickS.RobinsonM. J.WesterwickA. (2019). “Pick and choose” opinion climate: How browsing of political messages shapes public opinion perceptions and attitudes. Communication Monographs, 86, 457–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2019.1612528
55.
TaoW. (2018). How consumers’ pre-crisis associations and attitude certainty impact their responses to different crises. Communication Research, 45(6), 815–839. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650217733361
56.
ThiemeL. (2003). Method for monitoring a web site’s keyword visibility in search engines and directories and resulting traffic from such keyword visibility (U.S. patent application no. 10/235, 247).
57.
TsfatiY.StroudN. J.ChotinerA. (2014). Exposure to ideological news and perceived opinion climate: Testing the media effects component of spiral-of-silence in a fragmented media landscape. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19, 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161213508206
58.
VaccariC.ValerianiA.BarberáP.BonneauR.JostJ. T.NaglerJ.TuckerJ. A. (2015). Political expression and action on social media: Exploring the relationship between lower-and higher-threshold political activities among Twitter users in Italy. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 20, 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12108
59.
ValenzuelaS.KimY.GildeZúñigaH. (2012). Social networks that matter: Exploring the role of political discussion for online political participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24, 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edr037
60.
VelasquezA.LaRoseR. (2015). Youth collective activism through social media: The role of collective efficacy. New Media & Society, 17, 899–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813518391
WasonP. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470216008416717
WeinerB. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. Guilford Press.
65.
WeinerB. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: An attributional approach. Taylor & Francis.
66.
XiongY.ChoM.BoatwrightB. (2019). Hashtag activism and message frames among social movement organizations: Semantic network analysis and thematic analysis of Twitter during the #MeToo movement. Public Relations Review, 45, 10–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.014
67.
YangG. (2016). Narrative agency in hashtag activism: The case of # BlackLivesMatter. Media and Communication, 4, 13–17. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v4i4.692
ZhangA. X.BordenJ.KimS. (2018). Understanding publics’ post-crisis social media engagement behaviors: An examination of antecedents and mediators. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2133–2146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.07.014
70.
ZerbackT.KochT.KrämerB. (2015). Thinking of others: Effects of implicit and explicit media cues on climate of opinion perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92, 421–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015574481
