The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Role of Dialogic Crisis Communication Strategy in Repairing Organizational Reputation: A Moderated Mediation Model
Abstract
This study empirically examines the differences in the impact of dialogic and monologic communication strategies on organizational reputation during a crisis, challenging the conventional belief that dialogic strategies are always superior. Through two online experiments, this study explored the effects of dialogic communication strategies on organizational reputation and the mechanisms and boundary conditions that influence these outcomes. The findings revealed that dialogic communication strategies were generally more effective than monologic ones in enhancing organizational reputation in times of crisis. However, the effectiveness of these strategies is contingent upon the type of crisis. Furthermore, stakeholder empathy toward the organization plays a mediating role in how dialogic communication influences reputation. The main contribution of this study is to provide a deeper understanding of how an organization’s use of social media to convey “dialogic messages” during a crisis can affect stakeholders' perceptions of the organization. The results will help crisis managers to choose crisis response strategies more effectively.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Recent research further demonstrates that dialogic crisis communication on social media, such as stakeholdercentered accommodating strategies, elicit greater reputation repair than monologic ones, particularly in preventable crises where responsibility is high (Fu and Yang 2025).”
From Artificial Intelligence in Crisis Communication: Investigating Source Effects and Matched Crisis Responses on Stakeholder Perceptions (2026) · cites this paper as Fu and Yang 2025
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
Chen, Q., Min, C., Zhang, W., Wang, G., Ma, X., & Evans, R. (2020) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106380 · Cited by 652
Social media dialogues in a crisis: A mixed-methods approach to identifying publics on social media
Smith, B. G., Smith, S. B., & Knighton, D. (2018) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.005 · Cited by 78
Im, W. J., Youk, S., & Park, H. S. (2021) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.102002 · Cited by 21
Research works printed but not linked: 72
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.10.009 · DOI
- 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540236 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/jcr/ucac034 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101816 · DOI
- 10.1080/10410236.2020.1864098 · DOI
- Cohen J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
- 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0893318995008004003 · DOI · Paper page
- Coombs W. T. (1999). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing and responding. Sage.
- 10.1002/9781118335529.ch23 · DOI
- 10.1177/089331802237233 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S1746-9791(05)01111-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.06.010 · DOI
- 10.1108/APJML-08-2021-0583 · DOI
- 10.1177/0021943603261748 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/00909882.2020.1750669 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102206 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.003 · DOI
- 10.1108/CCIJ-04-2017-0039 · DOI
- Fombrun C. J. (2004). Fame and fortune: How successful companies build winning reputations. Corporate Reputation Review, 6(01), 390–395. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540007 · doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540007
- 10.1057/bm.2000.10 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.4135/9781848608122.n2 · DOI
- 10.1080/10496491.2017.1297983 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2008.00543.x · DOI
- 10.1111/1468-5973.12552 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114330 · DOI
- Ihlen Ø., May S., Bartlett J. (2014). Four aces: Bringing communication perspectives to. Corporate social responsibility. In Tench R., Sun W., Jones B. (Eds.), Critical studies on corporate responsibility, governance and sustainability (6, pp. 25–39). Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2014)0000006023 · doi:10.1108/s2043-9059(2014)0000006023
- Jin Y., Pang A., Cameron G. T. (2007). Integrated crisis mapping: Towards a publics-based, emotion-driven conceptualization in crisis communication. Sphera Pública, 7(3), 81–96. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=29720421006.
- 10.1080/1062726X.2012.676747 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.002325 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0363-8111(99)80143-X · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/1062726X.2013.795867 · DOI
- 10.1177/0093650204267936 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1096348012451455 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2023.108013 · DOI
- 10.1080/1062726X.2013.739103 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.05.008 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.09.005 · DOI
- 10.1080/03637751.2022.2032230 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.032 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.04.004 · DOI
- 10.1177/2046147X21999972 · doi:10.1177/2046147x21999972
- 10.1080/1553118X.2011.634869 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.73.2.321 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.2.321 · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102136 · DOI
- 10.3390/su141610244 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.10.015 · DOI
- 10.1080/13527266.2016.1269019 · DOI
- Rafaeli S. (1988). Interactivity: From new media to communication. Sage Annual Review of Communication Research: Advancing Communication Science, 16(1), 110–134. https://sid.ir/paper/560297/en
- 10.1080/15213269.2015.1030083 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1108/CCIJ-05-2012-0041 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.016 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101851 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102150 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.02.010 · DOI
- 10.1080/1062726X.2012.690255 · DOI
- 10.1080/10570314.2010.512278 · DOI
- 10.1080/10627260802557605 · DOI
- 10.1080/10696679.2019.1644958 · DOI
- 10.1080/1062726X.2014.956106 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0363-8111(01)00086-8 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.09.006 · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.09.006
- 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00515 · DOI
- 10.1108/CCIJ-06-2020-0096 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548 · DOI · Paper page
- Wirtz J. G., Ngondo P. (2013). An analysis of the website strategies of top fee-generating US-based public relations agencies. Public Relations Journal, 7(1), 1–32. https://www.academia.edu/26378050/AnAnalysisoftheWebsiteStrategiesofTopFeegeneratingUSbasedPublicRelationsAgencies?sm=b
- 10.1177/2329488420929748 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.09.005 · DOI
- 10.1177/0093650210362682 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101979 · DOI
- 10.1111/1468-5973.12147 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.08.008 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Schneider, E., Kyriakopoulos, V., Seo, Y., Hong, N., Lee, M., & Lim, J. S. (2026) · Corporate Reputation Review · doi:10.1057/s41299-026-00254-9 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Fu, J., & Yang, Y.
- Venue
- Management Communication Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2025-03-17
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 655-680
- ISSN
- 0893-3189
- 1552-6798
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
- Funders
- National Social Science Fund of China (20BXW104)
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
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.
