PREPARING FOR THE MISINFORMATION ATTACK: THE STRATEGIC ROLE OF TIMING OF CORRECTION PLACEMENT AND MESSAGING ON COMBATING ORGANIZATIONAL CRISIS MISINFORMATION

This dissertation investigated the effect of various correction strategies, including the timing of the correction placement and the detail level of refutation on mitigating the effect of misinformation on the organization and individuals’ understanding of the crisis. The dissertation also examined the effectiveness of using narrative to elaborate factual information in the prebunking message in preparing for the misinformation attack, especially when the misinformation is written in the format of blame narrative, as well as its psychological mechanism behind the correction process. Two online experimental studies were conducted separately and sequentially to test the research question and hypotheses proposed. In the first study, an online experiment with 2 (placement of corrective information: prebunking vs. debunking) x 2 (detail level of refutation: simple rebuttal vs. factual elaboration) x 2 (Misinformation attack: victim narrative vs. blame narrative) between-subjects, full-factorial design was conducted with 490 U.S. adults to examine the interaction and main effect of the type of misinformation narrative, and correction elements (i.e., the timing of correction placement and correction strategy). Results implied that prebunking strategy, especially when combined with factual elaboration, is superior in correcting individuals miserection of crisis responsibility, repairing organizational reputation and limiting the misinformation discussion. Moreover, results also found the difficulty of using factual elaboration to combat organizational misinformation when it was written in the format of blame narrative.

Based on the findings from study 1, an online experiment with 1 (Misinformation: blame narrative) x 4 (Prebunking message: blame narrative vs. victim narrative vs. renewal narrative vs. non-narrative factual elaboration) between-subjects, full-factorial design was conducted with 352 U.S. adults was conducted in study 2. Results reinstated the potential for the narrative to correct misinformation and highlighted the role of individuals’ feelings toward the character (i.e., identification, character liking, character trust) in mediating the relationship between the exposure to prebunking narratives and the correction outcomes. Theoretical contributions and practical recommendations were also made based on the findings from study 1 and study 2.