2010 - Public Relations Society of America
2010 - Public Relations Society of America
2010 - Public Relations Society of America
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Understanding and respecting the ways people make risk judgments<br />
as well as appreciating their fear and anxiety can help governments<br />
assist their populace frame risk perceptions (and ultimately<br />
behaviours and attitudes). Such perceptions, behaviours, and<br />
attitudes are critical for effective communication and engagement<br />
with the public following a major attack.” (Sheppard, et. al., 2006, p. 241).<br />
Rogers et. al. (2007) also note the increased possibility <strong>of</strong> panic in the aftermath <strong>of</strong> terrorist<br />
attack or an epidemic. Moreover they also claim that ineffective governmental or organizational<br />
response may add to that panic and increase morbidity and mortality. In sum, there is a sense <strong>of</strong><br />
urgency for more research in the arena <strong>of</strong> fear; fear control, and panic, and public relations<br />
scholars have the ability to greatly contribute.<br />
Recent Trends in <strong>Public</strong> <strong>Relations</strong> Crisis Oriented Research<br />
The roots <strong>of</strong> crisis oriented research in the field <strong>of</strong> public relations are founded on<br />
rhetorical theory and models <strong>of</strong> organizational apologia such as those first organized by Benoit<br />
(1995, 1997) and later modified and synthesized by others such as Coombs (Situational Crisis<br />
Communication Theory- SCCT: Coombs 1999; 2007; 2009). The goal <strong>of</strong> these lines <strong>of</strong> research<br />
was to categorize organizational communicative response in the face <strong>of</strong> crisis with the hope <strong>of</strong><br />
better identifying and/or differentiating effective communication techniques to protect and<br />
rebuild organizational image in the face <strong>of</strong> an emerging, active, or receding crisis.<br />
For example an examination <strong>of</strong> recent research in the area <strong>of</strong> crisis communication and<br />
management has focused on topics such as an analysis <strong>of</strong> red cross crisis strategies based on<br />
situational crisis communication theory (Zoch, Collins, Sisco, <strong>2010</strong>), image repair in politics<br />
(Sheldon & Salllot, 2009), in the Chinese Governments efforts in the aftermath <strong>of</strong> the “Made in<br />
China crisis” (Cai, Lee, & Pang, 2009), in the Chinese governments efforts in the aftermath<br />
earthquake (Chen 2009), in the Chinese governments handling <strong>of</strong> SARS (Zhang & Benoit,<br />
2009) and in fraud crises ( Caldiero, Taylor, & Ungureanu, 2009), as well as many others.<br />
In the past 20 years, crisis oriented public relations research has heavily focused on these<br />
two theoretical and conceptual models that focus on protecting and repairing organizational<br />
image. Avery, Lariscy, Kim, & Hocke (<strong>2010</strong>) report the results <strong>of</strong> a quantitative content analysis<br />
and review <strong>of</strong> public relations crisis communication literature from 1991 to 2009. The authors<br />
note that an analysis <strong>of</strong> the existing research in the field finds that the majority <strong>of</strong> research in the<br />
public relations crisis literature focused on or was performed using either Benoit’s Image<br />
Restoration typology or Coombs Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT). This metaanalysis<br />
examined 66 published articles across the 18 year time period and found that most <strong>of</strong> the<br />
most <strong>of</strong> the research (86%) focused on organizations/individual response and image restoration<br />
or repair. Avery, Lariscy, Kim, & Hocke, conclude by calling for more diversity in public<br />
relations research into the areas <strong>of</strong> crisis communication and management and note that more <strong>of</strong><br />
it should be prescriptive as opposed to descriptive. Coombs (2009) makes a similar call for more<br />
research, but also notes that such research should <strong>of</strong>fer empirical research oriented support for<br />
response recommendations.<br />
While recent public relations research that examines multiple factors that would reduce<br />
fear or panic in the event <strong>of</strong> a disaster such as a terrorist CBRN (Chemical, Biological,<br />
Radiological, Nuclear) attack is not common, some research has been undertaken in this<br />
direction. For example, Avery and Kim (2009) examined the practices and media releases <strong>of</strong><br />
health organizations such as the CDC (Centers for Disease Control), DHHS (Department <strong>of</strong><br />
Health and Human Services) and the WHO (World Health Organization) in response to the threat<br />
100