{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03421309872922776, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005865102639296188, 'mean_word_length': 5.564102564102564, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Should the Shady Steal Thunder? The Effects of Crisis Communication Timing, Pre‐Crisis Reputation Valence, and Crisis Type on Post‐Crisis Organizational Trust and Purchase Intention

A scenario-based 2 (communication timing: stealing thunder vs. thunder) × 2 (pre-crisis reputation valence: positive vs. negative) × 2 (crisis type: product-harm vs. moral-harm) between-subjects experiment was implemented with 273 Dutch participants to address the question of whether or not the positive effects of stealing thunder depend on pre-crisis reputation valence and crisis type. Statistical analyses reveal that stealing thunder by an organization with a positive pre-crisis reputation results in higher post-crisis trust and purchase intention levels than stealing thunder by an organization with a negative pre-crisis reputation. Moreover, crisis type interacts with crisis communication timing in influencing post-crisis trust and purchase intention, as stealing thunder works better than thunder during a product-harm crisis.