Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Public Relations and Crisis CommunicationNews Media Framing and Political CommunicationDisaster Management and Resilience

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Social media dialogues in a crisis: A mixed-methods approach to identifying publics on social media

Smith, Brian G., Smith, Staci B., Knighton, Devin·2018·Public Relations Review
DOI 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Despite the promise of social media to engender dialogue, the common approach to studying social media may prioritize monologue, whereby research considers the strategies organizations use in targeting publics, particularly in a crisis. This study uses a mixed-method approach to analyze dialogue in a crisis—semantic network analysis and content analysis. Specifically, this study examines the emotional expression and crisis coping behaviors on social media during two separate terror attacks: the Paris terror attacks in 2015 and the Barcelona terror attacks in 2017. Results demonstrate how publics may be identified and understood through semantic network analysis and content analysis. This study also shows the connection between emotions and coping, expanding the crisis communication literature in public relations, and suggests the need to consider agenda-setting and resilience in crisis communication research. Finally, we discuss this study’s implications for assuming a dialogic orientation in public relations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.005

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 39 references

Cited by

See all 87

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Smith, B. G., Smith, S. B., & Knighton, D.
Affiliations
Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Smith, Brian G.
ORCID
Venue
Public Relations Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
44
Issue
4
Pages
562-573
ISSN
0363-8111 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.005
OpenAlex
W2884339766
Cited by
78
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 2
FWCI
20.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
Public Relations Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
  • Social Sciences › Communication › News Media Framing and Political Communication
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
Keywords
crisis communication, publics, emotional expression, crisis coping, semantic network analysis, agenda setting, resilience, public relations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social media dialogues in a crisis: A mixed-methods approach to identifying publics on social media. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.005
The paper
Smith, B. G., Smith, S. B., & Knighton, D. (2018). Social media dialogues in a crisis: A mixed-methods approach to identifying publics on social media. Public Relations Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.005

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.