CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 52Public Relations and Crisis CommunicationDisaster Management and ResilienceCorporate Identity and Reputation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How publics react to situational and renewing organizational responses across crises: Examining SCCT and DOR in social-mediated crises

Zhao, Xinyan, Zhan, Mengqi, Ma, Liang·2020·Public Relations Review
DOI 10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101944
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101944

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Baym, 2012, Socially mediated publicness: An introduction, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 320, 10.1080/08838151.2012.705200 · DOI
  2. Bentley, 2018, We’re sorry but it’s not our fault: Organizational apologies in ambiguous crisis situations, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26, 138, 10.1111/1468-5973.12169 · DOI
  3. Carlson, 2018, Vigilant resilience: The possibilities for renewal through preparedness, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23, 212, 10.1108/CCIJ-04-2017-0030 · DOI
  4. Cheng, 2019, Corporate dialogue in crises of China: Examining dialogic strategies and communicative outcomes in a child abuse scandal, Public Relations Review, 46, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101816 · DOI
  5. Coombs, 2007, Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory, Corporate Reputation Review, 10, 163, 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049 · DOI
  6. Coombs, 2008, Comparing apology to equivalent crisis response strategies: Clarifying apology’s role and value in crisis communication, Public Relations Review, 34, 252, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.04.001 · DOI
  7. Coombs, 2012, Amazon.com’s orwellian nightmare: Exploring apology in an online environment, Journal of Communication Management, 16, 280, 10.1108/13632541211245758 · DOI
  8. Dang-Xuan, 2013, An investigation of influentials and the role of sentiment in political communication on Twitter during election periods, Information, Communication and Society, 16, 795, 10.1080/1369118X.2013.783608 · DOI
  9. DiStaso, 2015, Managing a health crisis on Facebook: How the response strategies of apology, sympathy, and information influence public relations, Public Relations Review, 41, 222, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.014 · DOI
  10. du Plessis, 2018, Social media crisis communication: Enhancing a discourse of renewal through dialogic content, Public Relations Review, 44, 829, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.003 · DOI
  11. Fuller, 2019, Extending discourse of renewal to preparedness: Construct and scale development of readiness for renewal, Management Communication Quarterly, 33, 272, 10.1177/0893318919834333 · DOI
  12. Guo, 2017, The 2013 Boston marathon bombing: Publics’ emotions, coping, and organizational engagement, Public Relations Review, 43, 755, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.07.003 · DOI
  13. Guo, 2016, Big social data analytics in journalism and mass communication comparing dictionary-based text analysis and unsupervised topic modeling, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93, 332, 10.1177/1077699016639231 · DOI
  14. Herovic, 2016, Some lines bring us together: Sport as crisis renewal in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Communication Culture & Critique, 9, 517, 10.1111/cccr.12138 · DOI
  15. Ji, 2019, Functional and emotional traits of corporate social media message strategies: Behavioral insights from S&P 500 Facebook data, Public Relations Review, 45, 88, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.12.001 · DOI
  16. Kim, 2016, Understanding publics’ perception and behaviors in crisis communication: Effects of crisis news framing and publics’ acquisition, selection, and transmission of information in crisis situations, Journal of Public Relations Research, 28, 35, 10.1080/1062726X.2015.1131697 · DOI
  17. Liu, 2014, Beyond image repair: Suggestions for crisis communication theory development, Public Relations Review, 40, 543, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.04.004 · DOI
  18. Liu, 2011, How organizations framed the 2009 H1N1 pandemic via social and traditional media: Implications for US health communicators, Public Relations Review, 37, 233, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.03.005 · DOI
  19. Liu, 2016, Social media use during disasters: How information form and source influence intended behavioral responses, Communication Research, 43, 626, 10.1177/0093650214565917 · DOI
  20. Liu, 2017, Like it or not: The Fortune 500’s Facebook strategies to generate users’ electronic word-of-mouth, Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 605, 10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.068 · DOI
  21. Ma, 2016, Effects of attributed responsibility and response strategies on organizational reputation: A meta-analysis of situational crisis communication theory research, Journal of Public Relations Research, 28, 10.1080/1062726X.2016.1166367 · DOI
  22. Moody, 2011, Jon and Kate Plus 8: A case study of social media and image repair tactics, Public Relations Review, 37, 405, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.06.004 · DOI
  23. Peugh, 2010, A practical guide to multilevel modeling, Journal of School Psychology, 48, 85, 10.1016/j.jsp.2009.09.002 · DOI
  24. Schwarz, 2012, How publics use social media to respond to blame games in crisis communication: The love parade tragedy in Duisburg 2010, Public Relations Review, 38, 430, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.01.009 · DOI
  25. Seeger, 2010, From image restoration to renewal: Approaches to understanding postcrisis communication, The Review of Communication, 10, 127, 10.1080/15358590903545263 · DOI
  26. Simon, 2000, Developing the three levels of learning in crisis management: A case study of the Hagersville tire fire, Review of Business, 21, 6
  27. Su, 2017, Analyzing public sentiments online: Combining human- and computer-based content analysis, Information, Communication and Society, 20, 406, 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1182197 · DOI
  28. Ulmer, 2007, Post-crisis communication and renewal: Expanding the parameters of post-crisis discourse, Public Relations Review, 33, 130, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.11.015 · DOI
  29. Utz, 2013, Crisis communication online: How medium, crisis type and emotions affected public reactions in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, Public Relations Review, 39, 40, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.09.010 · DOI
  30. Wombacher, 2018, The complexities of place in crisis renewal discourse: A case study of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26, 164, 10.1111/1468-5973.12186 · DOI
  31. Zhao, 2019, Understanding motivated publics during disasters: Examining message functions, frames, and styles of social media influentials and followers, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 27, 387, 10.1111/1468-5973.12279 · DOI
  32. Zhao, 2019, Appealing to the heart: How social media communication characteristics affect users’ liking behavior during the Manchester terrorist attack, International Journal of Communication, 13, 3826
  33. Zhao, 2018, Examining multiplicity and dynamics of publics’ crisis narratives with large-scale Twitter data, Public Relations Review, 44, 619, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.004 · DOI
  34. Zhao, 2018, Disentangling social media influence in crises: Testing a four-factor model of social media influence with large data, Public Relations Review, 44, 549, 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.08.002 · DOI
  35. Zhao, 2018, Segmenting and understanding publics in a social media information sharing network: An interactional and dynamic approach, International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12, 25, 10.1080/1553118X.2017.1379013 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Zhao, X., Zhan, M., & Ma, L.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong Baptist University (HK)
  • The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
  • Texas Christian University (US)
Corresponding author
Zhao, Xinyan
ORCID
Venue
Public Relations Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
46
Issue
4
Pages
101944
ISSN
0363-8111 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101944
OpenAlex
W3037978348
Cited by
52
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1
FWCI
5.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Public Relations Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Identity and Reputation
Keywords
crisis communication, social media, Situational Crisis Communication Theory, public sentiment, Twitter, attribution of responsibility, organizational learning, organizational rhetoric, sympathy

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