The differential impact of crisis types in cybersecurity crises: The moderating role of ESG information

초록

This study examines the protective potential of crisis-relevant ESG messaging during cybersecurity crises. Based on the attribution framework, Kelley's covariation model, and Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT), this research explores how different crisis types (i.e., preventable vs. victim) affect punitive opinions via responsibility attributions and emotional responses (anger, sympathy). We also investigate how the relevance of ESG information (i.e., crisis relevant vs. irrelevant) moderates this process. Findings from an experimental study reveal that preventable crises evoke stronger attributions of responsibility and greater anger, which in turn lead to greater punitive opinions. In contrast, victim crises elicit weaker responsibility attributions, greater sympathy, and consequently, lower punitive opinions. Importantly, relevant distinctiveness information (crisis-relevant ESG messaging) plays a dual role: it mitigates negative perceptions in victim crises (halo effect) but exacerbates blame in preventable crises (backfire effect). These results highlight the strategic importance of aligning ESG communication with crisis controllability and crisis relevance, offering practical guidance for managing reputation in the face of cybersecurity threats.

키워드