This experimental study explores how governments should respond to rumors about nationallevel risk issues. Informed by research in rumor psychology and risk/crisis communication, it investigates whether type of rumor and rumor response strategy have main and interaction effects on reducing rumor beliefs and intention to disseminate rumor. The two featured rumor types are the bogie rumor, which highlights feared outcomes, and the wedge rumor, which aims to reinforce differences between rival groups. Derived from Situational Crisis Communication Theory, the three response strategies examined are refuting the rumor, denying it, and attacking its source. Data were drawn from part of a large-scale online experiment, and the sample of the analysis was 942 South Korean adults. The experiment had a between-subjects design of 2 rumor type (wedge vs. bogie) x 3 government response strategies (refutation, denial, attack the attacker). Results show that all three rumor response strategies significantly reduced rumor beliefs, but only the refutation strategy significantly reduced intention to disseminate the rumor. Rumor type (bogie) and response strategies (refutation) had main, but not interaction, effects on reduction of intention to disseminate the rumor.

Introduction

Contemporary risk situations have an inherent uncertainty (Paek & Hove, 2017). In response to this uncertainty, people often produce and spread rumors (DiFonzo & Bordia, 2000, 2007). Rumors can be defined as messages that convey information which could be important or relevant but has not yet been verified (Allport & Postman, 1946). During government efforts to protect the public from risks, the spread of unreliable information can create serious problems. Now that so many people get their information from social media, risk experts and government officials worry that the increased dissemination of rumors could worsen public trust in government risk management efforts. Although most rumors that spread during outbreaks of national-level risks are inaccurate, people tend to believe them. To prevent the public panic that sometimes results, governments try to publicly refute or deny the rumors, or even threaten legal punishments for people who create and spread them. Several government rumor response strategies have been proposed by institutions such as the World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. However, we still do not know which of these strategies are most effective and why. In the related field of crisis communication, studies tend to focus on how, when crises occur, organizations that are perceived to be responsible for risks might protect their reputations (Coombs & Holladay, 2004; Coombs, 2000). But in research on situations of national-level risks, few studies have investigated which rumor response strategies are effective and what makes them effective.