{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013291634089132134, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.191011235955056, '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}}
Crisis-induced public demand for regulatory intervention in the social media era: Examining the moderating roles of perceived government controllability and consumer collective efficacy

Through an online survey of Beijing consumer publics, this study examines a moderated mediation model of public demand for regulatory intervention ensuing from a corporate crisis that entirely unfolded on social media platforms. The study finds that highly involved publics tend to attribute crisis responsibility more to the in-crisis company, and such attribution leads to stronger demand for regulatory intervention. However, the effects of issue involvement on public demands decrease when publics think they have collective efficacy to control crisis outcomes and that government has controllability over crisis outcomes. The study further finds that, in determining the degree of public demand, how publics attribute crisis responsibility is not as important as how they perceive government controllability. By delineating the relationships among issue involvement, responsibility attribution, perceived government controllability, and collective efficacy, this study outlines a comprehensive psychological mechanism of public demand for regulatory intervention during corporate crisis.