Why scapegoating can ruin an apology: The mediated-moderation model of appropriate crisis response messages in the context of South Korea.
South Korea
apology
communicative responsibility
crisis communication
process analysis
scapegoating
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
27
10
2022
accepted:
30
12
2022
entrez:
2
2
2023
pubmed:
3
2
2023
medline:
3
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
As South Korean companies frequently use apologies for various crisis situations and pair them with other types of crisis response strategies (i.e., scapegoating), theory-driven recommendations for crisis response messages may fall short in practice. This study empirically examines the effectiveness of two crisis response messages (i.e., apology + compensation vs. apology + scapegoating) by integrating the theory of communicative responsibility and situational crisis communication theory. South Korean participants ( The findings indicate that an apology that is provided with compensation is more appropriate than those with scapegoating. The appropriateness is moderated by the perceived symmetry in communicative responsibility, and fully mediates the relationship between apology type and reputation. This study integrates two theoretical models to examine the mechanism behind the crisis response strategies from the perspective of the message receivers, while considering the cultural and normative context of South Korea.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36726498
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1082152
pmc: PMC9885208
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1082152Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Youk and Park.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
J Appl Psychol. 2004 Feb;89(1):104-18
pubmed: 14769123
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Dec;89(6):852-63
pubmed: 16393020
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986 Dec;51(6):1173-82
pubmed: 3806354