earticle

영어

Government crisis has occurred more frequently, and its occurrence pattern is ever evolving. It’s about time that a research showing what kind of communication the government should implement by empirically verifying people’s acceptance attitude for the government’s crisis response communication strategies is urgently needed. This study has tried to clarify the question “How do people evaluate the government’s crisis response communication message?” based on the SCCT(Situational Crisis Communication Theory, Coombs & Holladay). The study was carried on by the method of on-line experimental design using structured experimental questions by commissioning to an on-line research company from April 23 till May 2. The responses from the total 565 general public between their twenties to fifties living in the capital area selected by the method of percentage quota probability sampling bases on the census of population have been used in the final statistical analysis. The design of experiment was composed of between-subject design of 3 (3 types of crisis communication strategy) x 2 (existence/nonexistence of emotional appeal) x 2 (high/low government responsibility). The total two crisis situation scenarios for power and waterworks were used to improve the possibility of generalizing experiment result. Firstly, the effect of persuasion of the public of the ‘rebuilding’ message referencing correction of behavior and compensation together under the crisis where the government responsibility was high was proved. Secondly, ‘apology’ did not show any significant persuasion effect compared to other strategies in both cases of high or low government responsibility. Thirdly, under the crisis where government responsibility is low, the acceptance of message without including emotional appeal was higher contrary to the forecasted direction of the hypothesis. Fourthly, the research result showed that there was a significant two-dimensional interaction effect between crisis communication strategy and emotional appeal and also a significant three-dimensional interaction effect between crisis communication strategy, emotional appeal and issue involvement under the scenario where the government responsibility was low. Fifthly, the research result showed that the people accepted the crisis message published by the government better when the crisis responsibility of government is low and positively evaluate the government credibility.

한국어

정부에 위기가 발생했을 때 “어떠한 전략적 관점에서 어떠한 메시지로 국민 과 소통해야 하는가?”에 대해서는 실증적인 연구결과를 반영한 가이드라인이 없어 마련이 시급하다. 본 연구에서는 쿰즈와 할러데이의 ‘상황적 위기 커뮤니 케이션 이론(SCCT)’을 토대로 국민이 정부의 위기 대응 메시지를 어떻게 평가 하는지 검증하기 위해 일반국민 20∼50대 총 565명을 대상으로 온라인 실험을 실시하였다. 3(전략 3유형)×2(감성적 소구 유/무)×2(정부 책임성 저/고)의 개 체 간 실험이 설계되었으며, 전기와 상수도 2개의 위기 시나리오가 사용되었다. 연구결과, 첫째, 정부 책임성이 높은 위기에서 행동시정과 보상을 함께 언급한 ‘개선’ 메시지의 공중 설득 효과가 입증되었다. 둘째, 예상과 달리 정부의 책임 성이 높고 낮은 경우 모두에서 ‘사과 전략’은 타 전략들과 비교해 유의미한 설득 효과를 보이지 않았다. 셋째, 정부책임성이 낮은 위기에서 가설의 예측 방향과 반대로 감성적 소구가 없는 메시지에 대한 공중 수용도가 더욱 높게 나타났다. 넷째, 정부 책임성이 낮은 위기에서 위기 커뮤니케이션 전략과 감성적 소구, 쟁점 관여도 간에 삼원 상호작용효과가 유의미하게 나타났다. 다섯째, 국민들은 정부의 위기 책임성이 낮을 때 정부가 발표한 위기 메시지를 더욱 잘 수용하고 정부신뢰도 더 긍정적으로 평가하는 것으로 나타났다.