Scholarlink

<p>Brand crises pose significant risks to brand equity and consumer trust, making effective crisis response a critical part of brand management strategy. This study integrates Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) with Construal Level Theory (CLT) to explain when private (proximal) versus public (distal) apologies best repair consumer evaluations. We argue that individual‑threatening crises are construed at a low psychological distance and therefore a private apology is more effective, whereas society‑threatening crises are construed at a higher psychological distance and thus a public apology is preferable. A 2 × 2 experimental design with 240 participants tests this framework in an emerging market context. Results confirm an interaction, demonstrating that private apologies increase brand trust and reconciliation, while decreasing avoidance, in individual-threatening conditions. In contrast, public apologies produce the converse pattern in society-threatening conditions. Moreover, anger mediates these effects, indicating an affective pathway through which construal‑congruent apologies operate. The paper extends SCCT by supplying a psychological mechanism (CLT) for the crisis–response fit and offers practical guidance for designing apology modes that align with how consumers mentally construe crises.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Matching crisis response strategies to crisis types: insights from construal level theory and situational crisis communication theory for understanding consumer responses

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月15日

查看全文
  • Naghmeh Sheibani Moghadam,
  • Masoud Keimasi,
  • Rosa Hendijani

摘要

Brand crises pose significant risks to brand equity and consumer trust, making effective crisis response a critical part of brand management strategy. This study integrates Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) with Construal Level Theory (CLT) to explain when private (proximal) versus public (distal) apologies best repair consumer evaluations. We argue that individual‑threatening crises are construed at a low psychological distance and therefore a private apology is more effective, whereas society‑threatening crises are construed at a higher psychological distance and thus a public apology is preferable. A 2 × 2 experimental design with 240 participants tests this framework in an emerging market context. Results confirm an interaction, demonstrating that private apologies increase brand trust and reconciliation, while decreasing avoidance, in individual-threatening conditions. In contrast, public apologies produce the converse pattern in society-threatening conditions. Moreover, anger mediates these effects, indicating an affective pathway through which construal‑congruent apologies operate. The paper extends SCCT by supplying a psychological mechanism (CLT) for the crisis–response fit and offers practical guidance for designing apology modes that align with how consumers mentally construe crises.