![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
Benoit's (1995a, 2000, 2004; Brinson & Benoit, Citation1999) image repair theory and Coombs' (1995, 1998, 2004a; Coombs & Holladay, Citation1996, 2001, 2002; Coombs & Schmidt, Citation2000) crisis response standards theory and research methods provided the theoretical and methodological framework for a 3 × 2 factorial experiment testing effects of crisis communication strategy (mortification, bolstering, and corrective action) and performance history (positive and negative) in conjunction with a politician's faux pas. In evaluations of a politician following racial remarks, strategy and performance history had main effects independent of one another for 6 dependent variables. Contrary to previous research, performance history was not always a factor in achieving favorable evaluations, and sometimes bolstering was as effective as mortification. Generally, corrective action was least effective.
Notes
Notes. *Subjects were instructed to “please circle only one number, from 1 to 5, which best describes your thoughts and feelings about Senator Henry Davis.” +Subjects were instructed to “please circle one answer which best describes your opinion of how Senator Davis responded to the remarks he made at the retirement celebration from the following choices: Strongly agree = SA, Agree = A, Neutral = N, Disagree = D, Strongly disagree = SD.” ^Subjects were instructed to “please circle one answer which best describes your reaction to Senator Davis's statement the day after his remarks at the retirement gala: Very likely = VL, Likely = L, Neutral = N, Unlikely = U, Very unlikely = VU.” All items were scored 1-to-5 (SA-to-SD or VL-to-VU) with 5 (SA and VL) most positive. Item numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, 16, 18, 21, and 23 were reverse-scored and were recoded for analysis.