Exploring dynamic public trust in mega infrastructure projects during online public opinion crises of extreme climate emergencies: Users' behaviors, trust dimensions, and effectiveness of strategies.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2024-09-07 DOI:10.1111/risa.17646
Yang Wang, Ruoyan Gong, Peizhi Xu, Chen Shen
{"title":"Exploring dynamic public trust in mega infrastructure projects during online public opinion crises of extreme climate emergencies: Users' behaviors, trust dimensions, and effectiveness of strategies.","authors":"Yang Wang, Ruoyan Gong, Peizhi Xu, Chen Shen","doi":"10.1111/risa.17646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The vulnerability of mega infrastructure projects (MIPs) has generated online public opinion crises, leading to public trust damage. However, few studies focused on the online dynamic trust of MIPs in such crises from the perspective of multiple users. Based on situational crisis communication theory, this study aims to explore the dynamic public trust in MIPs during online public opinion crises of extreme climate emergencies. The extreme heavy rainstorm event in Zhengzhou City, China, was selected as the case. Content analysis, the curve fitting method, and sentiment analysis were conducted to process the collected data from multiple users. The results indicated that the opinions of trust damage were set by \"media practitioners\" and led by \"elites,\" whereas the opinions of trust repair were directed by \"elites,\" led by \"media practitioners,\" and defended by \"individuals.\" Besides, trust dimensions would change over time; integrity-based and competence-based trust diffused alternatively. \"Diminish,\" \"deny,\" and \"rebuild\" strategies were proved to be the most effective strategies in integrity-based, competence-based, and competence and integrity-based trust repair, respectively. The findings can contribute to the authorities monitoring online public opinions in extreme climate emergencies and repairing trustworthy images.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.17646","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The vulnerability of mega infrastructure projects (MIPs) has generated online public opinion crises, leading to public trust damage. However, few studies focused on the online dynamic trust of MIPs in such crises from the perspective of multiple users. Based on situational crisis communication theory, this study aims to explore the dynamic public trust in MIPs during online public opinion crises of extreme climate emergencies. The extreme heavy rainstorm event in Zhengzhou City, China, was selected as the case. Content analysis, the curve fitting method, and sentiment analysis were conducted to process the collected data from multiple users. The results indicated that the opinions of trust damage were set by "media practitioners" and led by "elites," whereas the opinions of trust repair were directed by "elites," led by "media practitioners," and defended by "individuals." Besides, trust dimensions would change over time; integrity-based and competence-based trust diffused alternatively. "Diminish," "deny," and "rebuild" strategies were proved to be the most effective strategies in integrity-based, competence-based, and competence and integrity-based trust repair, respectively. The findings can contribute to the authorities monitoring online public opinions in extreme climate emergencies and repairing trustworthy images.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在极端气候突发事件的网络舆论危机中,探索超大型基础设施项目的动态公众信任:用户行为、信任维度和策略的有效性。
超大型基础设施项目(MIP)的脆弱性引发了网络舆论危机,导致公众信任受损。然而,很少有研究从多个用户的视角关注此类危机中超大型基础设施项目的网络动态信任。本研究以情景危机传播理论为基础,旨在探讨极端气候突发事件网络舆情危机中MIP的动态公信力。研究选取了中国郑州市的特大暴雨事件作为案例。对收集到的多用户数据进行了内容分析、曲线拟合法和情感分析。结果表明,信任受损的观点由 "媒体从业者 "设定、"精英 "主导,而信任修复的观点则由 "精英 "引导、"媒体从业者 "主导、"个人 "维护。此外,信任维度会随着时间的推移而变化,诚信型信任和能力型信任交替扩散。事实证明,"削弱"、"否认 "和 "重建 "策略分别是诚信型信任、能力型信任和能力与诚信型信任修复中最有效的策略。研究结果有助于有关部门监测极端气候突发事件中的网络舆情,修复可信形象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
期刊最新文献
A review of optimization and decision models of prescribed burning for wildfire management. An information-theoretic analysis of security behavior intentions amongst United States poll workers. JointLIME: An interpretation method for machine learning survival models with endogenous time-varying covariates in credit scoring. Portrayal of risk information and its impact on audiences' risk perception during the Covid-19 pandemic: A multi-method approach. A quantitative analysis of biosafety and biosecurity using attack trees in low-to-moderate risk scenarios: Evidence from iGEM.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1