Should Organisations Remain Silent Before the Storm: Testing the Effects of Perceived Source of Disclosure and Moral Recognition in a Crisis Response Following a Scansis

Abstract

Research in crisis communication has emphasised the complexity of emotions that crises breed. Recently, exploitation crises have received significant scholarly attention. Scansis has been termed as a type of exploitation crisis, which is characterised by strong perceptions of injustice and greed. This study corroborates previous findings pertaining to the effects of scansis on key crisis outcome variables such as purchase intentions and negative word-of-mouth. Additionally, we extend on existing research by testing the effectiveness of stealing thunder and explicit recognition of moral outrage following a scansis. Specifically, the study employs a 2 (perceived source of transgression disclosure: organisation vs. media) by 2 (corrective action coupled with moral recognition response: yes vs. no) between-subjects factorial design. The results indicate that scansis leads to desire for third-party punishment (i.e., retaliation), which has not been tested in the context of scansis before. Additionally, there is empirical evidence for the robustness of stealing thunder and its effects on purchase intentions, as well as support for the value of moral recognition statements following a scansis, a proposition made by previous research.