Effective strategies for responding to rumors about risks: The case of radiation-contaminated food in South Korea

Abstract

This experimental study explores how governments should respond to rumors about national-level risk issues. Informed by research in rumor psychology and risk/crisis communication, it investigates whether type of rumor and rumor response strategy have main and interaction effects on reducing rumor beliefs and intention to disseminate rumor. The two featured rumor types are the bogie rumor, which highlights feared outcomes, and the wedge rumor, which aims to reinforce differences between rival groups. Derived from Situational Crisis Communication Theory, the three response strategies examined are refuting the rumor, denying it, and attacking its source. Data were drawn from part of a large-scale online experiment, and the sample of the analysis was 942 South Korean adults. The experiment had a between-subjects design of 2 rumor type (wedge vs. bogie) x 3 government response strategies (refutation, denial, attack the attacker). Results show that all three rumor response strategies significantly reduced rumor beliefs, but only the refutation strategy significantly reduced intention to disseminate the rumor. Rumor type (bogie) and response strategies (refutation) had main, but not interaction, effects on reduction of intention to disseminate the rumor.