Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore crisis history further. The paper also examines the possible impact of information source on publics’ perceptions. The study seeks to expound on the tenets of the situational crisis communication theory (SCCT), particularly the underutilized crisis history component. Design/methodology/approach The study used a 3 × 3 between-subjects experiment design to examine the effects of crisis history and information source on publics’ crisis emotions, perception of crisis responsibility, control, and organizational reputation. Participants were 174 undergraduate students from a large Southeastern university. Findings The study’s findings suggest that an organization’s crisis history by the media can increase publics’ perceived organizational control (referred to as personal control) in a crisis situation. However, negative crisis history told by the media can evoke more severe public anger in a crisis. A positive crisis history still could lead to negative perceptions. Research limitations/implications The study uses a fictional crisis scenario that may not evoke the same emotions or perceptions as an actual crisis. Practical implications Crisis communicators concerned with angry publics should focus less on traditional media relations and more on new media to reach other gatekeepers; or focus more heavily on media strategy since the media is more likely to elicit more anger among publics. Furthermore, a positive crisis history does not give organizations a pass in current crises. Originality/value Although the SCCT identifies crisis history as an intensifier of attribution of responsibility, few studies have examined crisis history.

No abstract

Coombs’s Situational Crisis Communication Theory suggests performance history, composed of relationship history and crisis history, intensify crisis responsibility attribution. Relationship history is organizations’ actual and perceived rapport with publics, while crisis history is an organization’s previous crises. Extant literature has only examined crisis history one-dimensionally. This study proposes the Crisis History Framework that provides insight into influential factors that can make crises more or less salient to individuals. Furthermore, the study introduces the Crisis History Salience Scale that can help crisis communications scholars conduct empirical research examining crisis history’s multiple facets. Moreover, the study offers suggestions for how crisis history considerations can inform proactive crisis management, key messaging, and strategy development during crises.

PurposeThe purpose of the study is to provide insights on the COVID-19 pandemic communication from the lessons learned by health communication executives—how they perceived the COVID-19 pandemic and recommend preparing for communication management of future public health crises.Design/methodology/approachA number of top health communication executives in the United States, who worked in the healthcare industry for at least 25 years and held titles like director, president and chief strategist, were interviewed for their unique perspectives on the COVID-19 pandemic. This study used the contingency theory of strategic conflict management for qualitative deductive analysis of the following segmentations of key factors that drove organizational communication management decision making during the pandemic: organization characteristics, relationship characteristics, general external climate, external publics and the issue under question.FindingsHealth communication executives heavily relied on their past health communication experiences, which led to nuanced understandings of the COVID-19 pandemic. Practically, the health communication executives urged future practitioners to constantly assess risks, hire and use diverse and representative decision-makers; set a communication protocol; and keep the communication in perspective. Theoretically, the contingency theory is furthered—there appears to be a theoretical linkage between the construct of general external climate and the construct of the external public.Originality/valueThe unique perspectives of top health communication executives, based in the United States, provided in-depth insights on the COVID-19 pandemic—its nuances, challenges and main influences (e.g. political, racial, etc.). These takeaways and recommendations can be adapted by other organizations and future health communicators in other parts of the world.