IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v11y2021i4p21582440211061525.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Effects of Instructional Message Strategies on Risk Perceptions and Behavioral Intentions: The Case of a Substandard Vaccine Incident

Author

Listed:
  • Xiao Wang
  • Yi-Hui Christine Huang
  • Qiudi Wu
  • Ivy Wai-Yin Fong

Abstract

Extending the recent theorizing of the message-centric approach to instructional risk and crisis communication, this study identifies two distinct instructional strategies used by regulatory authorities and adopts a goal-attainment approach to measuring the effectiveness of both strategies in instructing nonscientific publics about impending risks. Specifically, we conducted a quasi-experiment immediately after a substandard vaccine incident in China to examine the differential effects of regulators’ instructional press releases on stakeholders’ risk perceptions and behavioral intentions. We found that the explanation-focused buffering strategy is significantly more effective in both heightening individuals’ cognitive risk perception and reducing their affective risk perception, while the personalization-focused bridging strategy shows more effectiveness in sustaining individuals’ intention to consume and positively evaluate domestic vaccines. Additionally, the findings highlight the need to tailor instructional message strategies to regulatory organizations’ ultimate goals of communication activities. Practical implications for government regulators and risk communicators are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiao Wang & Yi-Hui Christine Huang & Qiudi Wu & Ivy Wai-Yin Fong, 2021. "Exploring the Effects of Instructional Message Strategies on Risk Perceptions and Behavioral Intentions: The Case of a Substandard Vaccine Incident," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:11:y:2021:i:4:p:21582440211061525
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440211061525
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440211061525
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440211061525?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jennifer E. C. Lee & Louise Lemyre, 2009. "A Social‐Cognitive Perspective of Terrorism Risk Perception and Individual Response in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1265-1280, September.
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    3. Howard Kunreuther & Douglas Easterling & William Desvousges & Paul Slovic, 1990. "Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High‐Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 469-484, December.
    4. Lennart Sjöberg, 2004. "Local Acceptance of a High‐Level Nuclear Waste Repository," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 737-749, June.
    5. Roh, Seungkook & Lee, Jin Won, 2018. "Differentiated effects of risk perception dimensions on nuclear power acceptance in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 727-735.
    6. Mattias J. Viklund, 2003. "Trust and Risk Perception in Western Europe: A Cross‐National Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 727-738, August.
    7. Paul Slovic & Baruch Fischhoff & Sarah Lichtenstein, 1982. "Why Study Risk Perception?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 83-93, June.
    8. Timothy L. Sellnow & Deanna D. Sellnow & Derek R. Lane & Robert S. Littlefield, 2012. "The Value of Instructional Communication in Crisis Situations: Restoring Order to Chaos," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 633-643, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ruoheng Liu & Yi-Hui Christine Huang & Jie Sun & Jennifer Lau & Qinxian Cai, 2022. "A Shot in the Arm for Vaccination Intention: The Media and the Health Belief Model in Three Chinese Societies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-17, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yi-Hui Christine Huang & Xiao Wang & Ivy Wai-Yin Fong & Qiudi Wu, 2021. "Examining the Role of Trust in Regulators in Food Safety Risk Assessment: A Cross-regional Analysis of Three Chinese Societies Using an Integrative Framework," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    2. Hoti, Ferdiana & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter & Renn, Ortwin, 2021. "Who is willing to participate? Examining public participation intention concerning decommissioning of nuclear power plants in Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    3. Meredith Frances Dobbie & Rebekah Ruth Brown, 2014. "A Framework for Understanding Risk Perception, Explored from the Perspective of the Water Practitioner," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 294-308, February.
    4. Byoung Joon Kim & Seoyong Kim & Youngcheoul Kang & Sohee Kim, 2022. "Searching for the New Behavioral Model in Energy Transition Age: Analyzing the Forward and Reverse Causal Relationships between Belief, Attitude, and Behavior in Nuclear Policy across Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-24, June.
    5. Moran Bodas & Morel Ragoler & Yossi Rabby & Esther Krasner, 2021. "The Effect of Risk Communication on Public Behavior to Non-Conventional Terrorism—Randomized Control Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-20, December.
    6. Daniela Knuth & Doris Kehl & Lynn Hulse & Silke Schmidt, 2014. "Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1286-1298, July.
    7. Timothy C. Earle, 2010. "Trust in Risk Management: A Model‐Based Review of Empirical Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 541-574, April.
    8. Manika, Danae & Dickert, Stephan & Golden, Linda L., 2021. "Check (it) yourself before you wreck yourself: The benefits of online health information exposure on risk perception and intentions to protect oneself," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Bo-Hyun Seong & Chang-Yu Hong, 2021. "Does Risk Awareness of COVID-19 Affect Visits to National Parks? Analyzing the Tourist Decision-Making Process Using the Theory of Planned Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-14, May.
    10. Ghidoni, Riccardo, 2017. "Mistrust and Opposition to Large-Scale Projects : An Experiment on the Role of Uncertainty," Discussion Paper 2017-053, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    11. Luigi Cembalo & Daniela Caso & Valentina Carfora & Francesco Caracciolo & Alessia Lombardi & Gianni Cicia, 2019. "The “Land of Fires” Toxic Waste Scandal and Its Effect on Consumer Food Choices," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, January.
    12. Tianjun Feng & L. Robin Keller & Ping Wu & Yifan Xu, 2014. "An Empirical Study of the Toxic Capsule Crisis in China: Risk Perceptions and Behavioral Responses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(4), pages 698-710, April.
    13. Bo-Hyun Seong & Youngseok Choi & Hyojin Kim, 2021. "Influential Factors for Sustainable Intention to Visit a National Park during COVID-19: The Extended Theory of Planned Behavior with Perception of Risk and Coping Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-17, December.
    14. Roh, Seungkook & Lee, Jin Won, 2018. "Differentiated effects of risk perception dimensions on nuclear power acceptance in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 727-735.
    15. John Downer & M. V. Ramana, 2021. "Empires built on sand: On the fundamental implausibility of reactor safety assessments and the implications for nuclear regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1304-1325, October.
    16. Taeuk Kim & Jungwoo Ha, 2023. "Applying a Goal-Directed Behavior Model to Determine Risk Perception of COVID-19 and War on Potential Travelers’ Behavioral Intentions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Yujeong Kim & Eunmi Lee, 2021. "Factors Influencing Preparedness for Bioterrorism among Koreans," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-10, May.
    18. Yanbo Zhang & Yibao Wang & Ahmad Bayiz Ahmad & Ashfaq Ahmad Shah & Wen Qing, 2021. "How Do Individual-Level Characteristics Influence Cross-Domain Risk Perceptions Among Chinese Urban Residents?," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    19. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    20. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:11:y:2021:i:4:p:21582440211061525. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.