This study examined how the medium, type of crisis, and emotions affect public perceptions and reactions to organizational crises. The researchers hypothesized that social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook would elicit more secondary crisis communication but less negative reactions than newspapers. They also expected intentional crises to elicit more negative responses than unintentional "victim" crises. A between-subjects experiment tested these hypotheses using a fictional crisis scenario. The results showed the medium mattered, with newspapers seen as more credible than social media, but the type of crisis did not directly impact responses. However, intentional crises did increase feelings of anger, which influenced perceptions and reactions. The study provided further evidence that the medium and emotions are important contextual factors in crisis communication.

1. ‘Crisis Communication Online’
How medium, crisis type and emotions affect public
perceptions, reactions and communications
Friederike Schultz, Sonja Utz & Sandra Glocka, VU University Amsterdam

2. Conceptual model & hypotheses
Emotions
Crisis Type: Reputation
- intentional
- victim
Secondary crisis
communication:
Media type: - Willingness to show / forward
- Facebook message
- Twitter - tell friends about incident
- Newspaper
Secondary crisis reactions:
(boycott, negative word of
mouth)
Media Credibility
Conceptual model
H1: Twitter, Facebook > newspaper: higher reputation; more secondary communication, less secondary crisis reactions
H2: Newspaper are more credible than Facebook and Twitter
H3: Media credibility is positively related to secondary crisis communication
H4: Intentional crises > victim crises: lower reputation, more secondary communication, more secondary crisis reactions
H5: Effects of crisis type are mediated by emotion anger
2

3. Method
Design
• 2 (crisis type: intentional vs. Victim crisies) x 3 (medium: facbook, twitter, newspaper)
between-participants design
Participants
• 182 participants (50% male, 50% female)
• Mean age: 29 (SD = 8.38)
Stimuli-Material
• Crisis scenario: Japanese crisis in Fukushima
• E.„Nuclear plant damaged through inadequate maintenance management. 50 TEPCO
employees sent to prevent from damage.“
3

4. Medium matters, but crisis type doesn‘t
Reputation, Secondary Crisis Reaction and Communication
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
Facebook
Twitter
2
Newspaper
1.5
1
0.5
0
reputation secondary crisis sharing message
reaction
No direct effects of crisis type; only: people talk more negatively about
company in case of intentional crisis
4

5. Media credibility and anger matters; crisis type affects anger
Media Credibility and Anger
6
5
4
3
2 media credibility
1
0
Facebook Twitter Newspaper
• Medium credibility is related to secondary crisis communication
(r(182)=.27, p<.05)
• Emotion anger is positively related to secondary crisis
communication (F (6, 175)=2.73, p<.05), to secondary crisis reaction (F (18, 163) =
3.93, p<.001) and reputation (F(6,175)=5.91, p<.001)
• Crisis type affects anger
5

6. Conclusion and Discussion
Conclusion
• Replicates findings (Schultz et al., 2011), that medium matters
• Clarifies, that willingness to share message from traditional newspaper is higher is due to
higher media credibility of newspapers
• Indicates indirect effects of crisis type via anger
• Limitations and future research
• Use of real crisis is limitation
• Need for extension of classic crisis communication theories (SCCT)
• Need for analyses of likelihood and valence of crisis communication
6