This study seeks to advance the literature in emotional crisis communication by comparing the effects of single emotional message framing to mixed emotional message framing in organizational crisis on organizational reputation and forgiveness. Through an online four (emotional message framing: control vs. negative emotion [sadness] vs. positive emotion [sympathy] vs. mixed-valence emotions [both sadness + sympathy]) by two (crisis type: preventable vs. victim crisis) between-groups experiment, this study investigated the effects of mixed-valence emotions, where the CEO expressed both positive and negative discrete emotions (N = 424). Additionally, the current study sought to test the mediating effects of perceived sincerity and empathy toward the CEO on the relationship between the crisis type and message framing on both organizational reputation and forgiveness. The findings show that, during a preventable crisis, expressing mixed emotions results in a more positive organizational reputation and organizational forgiveness than expressing single emotions (sadness or sympathy). Also, both empathy toward the CEO and perceived sincerity mediated the relationship between a preventable crisis and organizational reputation as well as forgiveness. Both practical and theoretical implications of this study are discussed.
Baron-CohenS.WheelwrightS. (2004). The Empathy quotient: An investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(2), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jadd.0000022607.19833.00
3.
BennettR. (2015). Individual characteristics and the arousal of mixed emotions: Consequences for the effectiveness of charity fundraising advertisements. Journal of Philanthropy and Marketing, 20(2), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.1500
4.
BerinskyA. J.HuberG. A.LenzG. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20(3), 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr057
5.
BlaneyJ. R.BenoitW. L.BrazealL. A. M. (2002). Blowout! Firestone’s image restoration campaign. Public Relations Review, 28(4), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0363-8111(02)00163-7
BuhrmesterM.KwangT.GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393980
ChoiJ.ChungW. (2012). Analysis of the interactive relationship between apology and product involvement in crisis communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 27(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651912458923
10.
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
11.
ClaeysA.-S.CaubergheV.LeysenJ. (2013). Implications of stealing thunder for the impact of expressing emotions in organizational crisis communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41(3), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2013.806991
CoombsW. T. (2015). The value of communication during a crisis: Insights from strategic communication research. Business Horizons, 58(2), 141–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2014.10.003
14.
CoombsW. T. (2019). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing and responding. SAGE.
15.
CoombsW. T.HolladayS. J. (2002). Helping crisis managers protect reputational assets. Management Communication Quarterly, 16(2), 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/089331802237233
16.
CrijnsH.ClaeysA.-S.CaubergheV.HuddersL. (2017). Who says what during crises? A study about the interplay between gender similarity with the spokesperson and crisis response strategy. Journal of Business Research, 79, 143–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.06.010
17.
DavisJ. R.GoldG. J. (2011). An examination of emotional empathy, attributions of stability, and the link between perceived remorse and forgiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(3), 392–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.031
18.
DecetyJ.JacksonP. L. (2004). The functional architecture of human empathy. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 3(2), 71–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534582304267187
19.
De WaeleA.SchoofsL.ClaeysA.-S. (2020). The power of empathy: The dual impacts of an emotional voice in organizational crisis communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 48(3), 350–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2020.1750669
20.
DuhachekA. (2005). Coping: A multidimensional, hierarchical framework of responses to stressful consumption episodes. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 41–53. https://doi.org/10.1086/426612
21.
EdwardsA.EisenbergN.SpinradT. L.ReiserM.Eggum-WilkensN. D.LiewJ. (2014). Predicting sympathy and prosocial behavior from young children’s dispositional sadness. Social Development, 24(1), 76–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12084
22.
FehrR.GelfandM. J.NagM. (2010). The road to forgiveness: A meta-analytic synthesis of its situational and dispositional correlates. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 894–914. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019993
23.
FinchamF. D.PaleariG. F.RegaliaC. (2002). Forgiveness in marriage: The role of relationship quality, attributions, and empathy. Personal Relationships, 9(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6811.00002
24.
FollmerD. J.SperlingR. A.SuenH. K. (2017). The role of MTurk in education research: Advantages, issues, and future directions. Educational Researcher, 46(6), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17725519
25.
FredricksonB. L.TugadeM. M.WaughC. E.LarkinG. R. (2003). What good are positive emotions in crises? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.84.2.365
26.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford.
27.
Hung-BaeseckeC.-J. F.BowenS. A. (2017). Ethical engagement at a time of crisis in the social era. In AustinL.JinY. (Eds.), Social media and crisis communication (pp. 68–80). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315749068-6
28.
IyerA.OldmeadowJ. (2006). Picture this: Emotional and political responses to photographs of the Kenneth Bigley kidnapping. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(5), 635–647. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.316
29.
JinY. (2014). Examining publics’ crisis responses according to different shades of anger and sympathy. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(1), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726x.2013.848143
30.
JinY.PangA.CameronG. T. (2012). Toward a publics-driven, emotion-based conceptualization in crisis communication: Unearthing dominant emotions in multi-staged testing of the integrated crisis mapping (ICM) model. Journal of Public Relations Research, 24(3), 266–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726x.2012.676747
31.
KauffmanJ. (2008). When sorry is not enough: Archbishop cardinal Bernard Law’s image restoration strategies in the statement on sexual abuse of minors by clergy. Public Relations Review, 34(3), 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.03.001
32.
KimH. -S. (2011). A reputational approach examining publics’ attributions on corporate social responsibility motives. Asian Journal of Communication, 21(1), 84–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2010.524230
33.
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
34.
KimY.KangM.LeeE.YangS. (2019). Exploring crisis communication in the internal context of an organization: Examining moderated and mediated effects of employee-organization relationships on crisis outcomes. Public Relations Review, 45(3), 101777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.04.010
35.
LazarusR. S. (1991). Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. American Psychologist, 46(8), 819–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.46.8.819
36.
LeeS. Y. (2016). Weathering the crisis: Effects of stealing thunder in crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 42(2), 336–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.02.005
37.
LeggK. L. (2009). Religious celebrity: An analysis of image repair discourse. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21(2), 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627260802557621
38.
LichtenfeldS.MaierM. A.BuechnerV. L.CapoM. F. (2019). The influence of decisional and emotional forgiveness on attributions. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1425. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01425
39.
LiuB. F.BartzL.DukeN. (2016). Communicating crisis uncertainty: A review of the knowledge gaps. Public Relations Review, 42(3), 479–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.03.003
40.
LiuS. S.StoutP. A. (1987). Effects of message modality and appeal on advertising acceptance. Psychology and Marketing, 4(3), 167–187. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220040303
41.
LuY.HuangY.-H. C. (2018). Getting emotional: An emotion-cognition dual-factor model of crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 44(1), 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.09.007
42.
LuceroM.Tan Teng KwangA.PangA. (2009). Crisis leadership: When should the CEO step up?Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 14(3), 234–248. https://doi.org/10.1108/13563280910980032
43.
McCulloughM. E. (2001). Forgiveness: Who does it and how do they do it?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00147
44.
McCulloughM. E.RachalK. C.SandageS. J.WorthingtonE. L.BrownS. W.HightT. L. (1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(6), 1586–1603. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.6.1586
45.
McCulloughM. E.WorthingtonE. L.Jr.RachalK. C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(2), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.73.2.321
46.
MenL. R. (2012). CEO credibility, perceived organizational reputation, and employee engagement. Public Relations Review, 38(1), 171–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.12.011
47.
MerchantA.FordJ. B.SargeantA. (2010). Charitable organizations’ storytelling influence on donors’ emotions and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), 754–762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.05.013
48.
MoonB. B.RheeY. (2012). Message strategies and forgiveness during crises: Effects of causal attributions and apology appeal types on forgiveness. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(4), 677–694. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699012455388
49.
NabiR. (2002). Anger, fear, uncertainty, and attitudes: A test of the cognitive-functional model. Communication Monographs, 69(3), 204–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750216541
50.
NabiR. L. (2003). Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference?Communication Research, 30(2), 224–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650202250881
51.
NabiR. L. (2010). The case for emphasizing discrete emotions in communication research. Communication Monographs, 77(2), 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751003790444
52.
NdoneJ.ParkJ. (2022). Crisis communication: The mediating role of cognitive and affective empathy in the relationship between crisis type and crisis response strategy on post-crisis reputation and forgiveness. Public Relations Review, 48(1), 102136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102136
53.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.40.3.879
54.
RiekB. M.ManiaE. W. (2012). The antecedents and consequences of interpersonal forgiveness: A meta-analytic review. Personal Relationships, 19(2), 304–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2011.01363.x
55.
RisenJ. L.GilovichT. (2007). Target and observer differences in the acceptance of questionable apologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 418–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.418
56.
RyeM. S.LoiaconoD. M.FolckC. D.OlszewskiB. T.HeimT. A.MadiaB. P. (2001). Evaluation of the psychometric properties of two forgiveness scales. Current Psychology, 20(3), 260–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-001-1011-6
57.
SaloveyP.RosenhanD. L. (1989). Mood states and prosocial behavior. In WagnerH.MansteadA. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychophysiology (pp. 371–391). Wiley.
58.
SchererK. R.SchorrA.JohnstoneT. (Eds.). (2001). Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research. Oxford University Press.
59.
SchoofsL.ClaeysA.-S. (2021). Communicating sadness: The impact of emotional crisis communication on the organizational post-crisis reputation. Journal of Business Research, 130, 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.020
60.
SchoofsL.ClaeysA.-S.WaeleA. D.CaubergheV. (2019). The role of empathy in crisis communication: Providing a deeper understanding of how organizational crises and crisis communication affect reputation. Public Relations Review, 45(5), 101851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101851
61.
SchumannK. (2012). Does love mean never having to say you’re sorry? Associations between relationship satisfaction, perceived apology sincerity, and forgiveness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(7), 997–1010. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512448277
StewartN.UngemachC.HarrisA. J. L.BartelsD. M.NewellB. R.PaolacciG.ChandlerJ. (2015). The average laboratory samples a population of 7,300 Amazon Mechanical Turk workers. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(5), 479–491. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-45545-008
65.
TsangJ.-A. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: An experimental test of gratitude. Cognition and Emotion, 20(1), 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930500172341
66.
ValeriL.VanderWeeleT. J. (2013). Mediation analysis allowing for exposure–mediator interactions and causal interpretation: Theoretical assumptions and implementation with SAS and SPSS macros: Correction to Valeri and VanderWeele (2013). Psychological Methods, 18(4), 474. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035596
WilesM. A.JainS. P.MishraS.LindseyC. (2010). Stock market response to regulatory reports of deceptive advertising: The moderating effect of omission bias and firm reputation. Marketing Science, 29(5), 828–845. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1100.0562
70.
WispéL. (1986). The distinction between sympathy and empathy: To call forth a concept, a word is needed. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.2.314
71.
XiaoW.LinX.LiX.XuX.GuoH.SunB.JiangH. (2021). The influence of emotion and empathy on decisions to help others. SAGE Open, 11(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211014513
72.
XiaoY.CaubergheV.HuddersL. (2017). Humor as a double-edged sword in response to crises versus rumors: The effectiveness of humorously framed crisis response messages on social media. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(2), 247–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12188
73.
XiaoY.HuddersL.ClaeysA.CaubergheV. (2018). The impact of expressing mixed-valence emotions in organizational crisis communication on consumer’s negative word-of-mouth intention. Public Relations Review, 44(5), 794–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.007
74.
ZhouZ.KiE.-J. (2018). Does severity matter? An investigation of crisis severity from defensive attribution theory perspective. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 610–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.08.008
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
