Organizational License to Operate: Further Research Into the Roles of
Credibility and Multimodality of Online Corporate Communication
[An empirical analysis of the relationships between the credibility and multimodalityof online corporate communication and perceived organizational legitimacy] Willemijn Albers
11909625 29/06/2018
I. Lock
Master’s Thesis: Graduate School of Communication Master’s Programme Communication Science
Abstract
The aim of this research is to identify to what extent the perceived credibility of online corporate communication affects the public’s perception of an organization’s legitimacy, and if the manner in which the presentation of this online corporate communication can possibly moderate such an effect or even has a direct effect on the perceived legitimacy of an
organization. The presentation of the online corporate communication, also specified as multimodality, in this case refers to either presenting online corporate communication solely in the form of text or in the form of text accompanied by an image. In order to test for the proposed effects, an analysis of online communication on the corporate website of a Dutch gas and oil organization, the ‘Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij’ (NAM), was conducted via an experiment. The findings highlighted that a significant effect could be demonstrated for the credibility of online corporate communication on the public’s perception of the legitimacy of the NAM. However, neither a direct effect of multimodality on the perceived organizational legitimacy of the NAM, nor a moderation effect of multimodality on the significant
relationship between the credibility of online corporate communication and perceived
organizational legitimacy of the NAM could be indicated. However, this research contributed to knowledge on the topics of the credibility of online corporate communication, the public’s perception of organizational legitimacy and the multimodality of online corporate
communication for the gas and oil industry. Additionally, the findings of this study show various practical implications and possibilities for future research.
Introduction
ExxonMobil, one of the largest gas and oil organizations worldwide, was under attack in March 1989 by the media and the public due to one of the largest environmentally damaging oil spills in history, causing nearly eleven million gallons of oil to be discharged into the waters of Alaska (Patten, 1992). Next to the environmental and financial consequences of the oil spill, ExxonMobil also faced a large public relations challenge (Williams & Treadaway, 1992). Based on an evaluation of ExxonMobil’s crisis response, it was concluded that the response came too late, included improper burden sharing and made excessive use of denial strategies (Williams & Treadaway, 1992). In addition, the level of honesty of the crisis response was doubted (Benoit, 1997; Williams & Treadaway, 1992). As a result of the oil spill and the crisis response, the ExxonMobil incident may have caused the public more and more to start to question the credibility of corporate communication in general. After all, such crisis communication is an essential subpart of a corporate’s communication (Argenti, 1996). Credibility in this matter is defined as the believability of information and/or the source of the information (Metzger, 2007).
The concept of credibility of corporate communication is often linked to an
organization’s license to operate, or in other words ‘legitimacy’. According to the theory of moral legitimacy, legitimacy as an organization can be acquired by maintaining a credible communication process (Lock & Seele, 2017; Suchman, 1995). This reflects back on the resource-dependence theory, suggesting that strategic communication tactics may be utilized to acquire legitimacy (Suchman, 1995; Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975). Prior research therefore proposes that once organizations communicate in a credible manner via online or offline communication channels, and stakeholders perceive this communication as credible,
done in which specifically the public’s perception of organizational legitimacy is tested for (Chung, 2010). According to the public, does an organization still have a right to exist and operate once its corporate communication is not perceived as credible?
In the current study, the proposed effect of credible corporate communication on organizational legitimacy is looked into for a large Dutch gas and oil organization, the ‘Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij’ (NAM), loosely translated as the Dutch Petroleum Company. Prior research states that the discussed effect may in particular be true for
organizations from challenging and generally more frowned upon industries such as tobacco, alcohol, or gas and oil industries (Du & Vieira, 2012). This experimental research will therefore investigate the possible effects of credible and not credible corporate
communication on the perceived organizational legitimacy of the NAM. In the current digital ‘zeitgeist’, the main ways for the public to come across such corporate communication involves looking onto corporate websites. Corporate websites are in general a starting point for the public to get in contact with an organization (Cornelissen, 2017). Therefore, online corporate communication presented on the corporate website from the NAM is used in this study.
Little experimental research has been done in the past concerning a possible link between the concepts of credibility of online corporate communication and organizational legitimacy. As a new addition, the concept of multimodality of communication is also included in this research. Multimodality refers to the manner in which communication statements are presented via multiple modalities at once, such as news on the television for which audio is combined with visuals (Powell, Boomgaarden, De Swert, & De Vreese, 2015). Prior research proposes that adding visuals to textual communication statements may
influence people’s attention to and their perception of the communication statements (Holsanova, 2014). The concept of multimodality has been tested for within other
communication contexts, but has not been used to test for interfering with a possible relationship of the concepts of credibility of online corporate communication and
organizational legitimacy. Due to the fact that this has not been thoroughly investigated, the current research attempts to identify any differences.
In short, a causal link between the credibility of online corporate communication and legitimacy, with a possible moderation of multimodality, is tested for in an experiment and the research question therefore is:
What is the effect of credible online corporate communication on the perceived legitimacy of organizations, and is this possible relationship moderated by the concept of multimodality?
Theoretical Framework
Building trust in organizations
Edelman’s recent annual Trust Barometer report, the result of more than 30,000 respondents being surveyed, and its Global Trust Index remain at an overall low level with only 48% of the general population worldwide portraying trust in institutions (Edelman, 2018). Often, such trust in an organization has proven to be shaped via interactions with the organization
(Adams, Highhouse, & Zickar, 2010). Rotter (1967) defined the concept of trust as “an expectancy held by an individual or a group that the word, promise, verbal or written statement of another individual or group could be relied upon” (p. 1). Within the context of communication, the numerous definitions of trust all similarly emphasize the idea that the sender of information provides the recipient with complete, accurate and credible information (Renn & Levine, 1991). The credibility of corporate communication may therefore play a crucial role for an organization to be ‘trusted’ by others (Adams et al., 2010; Bentele &
Seidenglanz, 2008). The current study takes this assumption a bit further and looks into the relationship of credibility of corporate communication and organizational legitimacy (Lock & Seele, 2017; Suchman, 1995). After all, the concepts of organizational trust and
organizational legitimacy are closely interrelated and are suggested to occasionally overlap (Jackson & Gau, 2016). For example, it is proposed that the level of trust portrayed in an organization is also able to shape the public’s overall perception of an organization (Adams et al., 2010). It is important to remark that an absence of trust does not automatically signify a presence of distrust, because the two concepts are to be treated as two separate concepts (Yang, Kang, & Cha, 2015).
As stated above, it is said that credible corporate communication often is a tool for establishing trust or legitimacy (Lock & Seele, 2017; Bentele & Seidenglanz, 2008).
However, the following question arises: what can make online corporate communication to be perceived as credible or not credible?
Establishing credible corporate communication
In order to be able to establish credible corporate communication, prior research proposes an explanation via the so-called ‘Theory of Communicative Action’ (Habermas, 1984). This theory focusses on interactions between individuals, in which action is based upon the manner in which the interacting individuals agreed on interpretations of the situation. Habermas (1984) presents four validity claims for constructing credible communication statements in this process, namely truth, sincerity, understandability, and appropriateness. According to Habermas’ theory, in order to establish credible communication as an individual or as an organization, it is proposed that all four validity claims must be met in the concerning communication statement (Lock & Seele, 2017).
Once organizations establish credible communication, it is still uncertain how the public eventually perceives this. Research in the field of persuasive communication has shown people tend to be guided by the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) and the Heuristic Systematic Model (HSM). The dual process models claim that the perceived correctness of a communication statement can be the result of two different processes, a systematic or a heuristic process (Hoeken, Hornikx, & Hustinx, 2009). Systematic processing means that all relevant arguments in the communication statement are critically and carefully weighed in order to come to a correct evaluation, whereas heuristic processing focuses on a more superficial level of information processing. Instead of carefully weighing all arguments in a communication statement, one then usually uses so-called ‘heuristics’, or rules of thumb (Hoeken et al., 2009). Therefore, the manner in which a person processes a piece of
communication can influence his or her opinion of the credibility of the piece of communication.
Since the rise of the Web 2.0, traditional ways of assessing corporate communication on its credibility for example, such as taking into account the information’s source and author expertise, appear to have become quite troubled in the cyberspace settings, such as corporate websites (Metzger, Flanagin, & Medders, 2010).
The role of corporate websites
The Internet has become an essential tool for people to obtain large amounts of information at a fast pace, including information from and about organizations (Flanagin & Metzger, 2000). Flanagin, Medders and Metzger (2010) provide evidence that people mainly use five
heuristics to assess online information on its credibility. In specific, these heuristics are reputation, endorsement, consistency, expectancy violation, and persuasive intent. The
reputation heuristic, referring to the reputation of the source or website, turned out to be the most influential.
Corporate websites are in this day and age the main online source for the public and stakeholders to come across an organization’s corporate communication (Cornelissen, 2017). Specific research into the credibility of corporate websites brings up a number of interesting points of attention. First of all, trustworthiness and expertise are named as most heavy
weighing factors for the credibility of websites (Fogg et al., 2001). Additionally, it was found that the overall design of the website also is an important factor for establishing website credibility (Fogg et al., 2003). In specific, it is suggested a corporate website attempts to evoke a so-called ‘real-feel’ of the organization. In other words, this means the website needs to give a clear picture of the organization by showing photographs of the building and
employees, and states the address of the organization (Fogg et al., 2001). Fogg et al. (2011) also argue that the corporate website should be easy in use and should include elements of expertise, such as recommendations or citations.
It can therefore be said that an organization can establish credible online corporate communication based on the four discussed validity claims, but that the design of the corporate website also influences the public’s assessment of credibility. Moreover, research also proposes positive consequences of corporate communication, which is perceived as credible, on the trustworthiness and reputation of an organization (Cornelissen, 2017; Adams et al., 2010). Additional theories and research suggest that such a similar effect may also apply to an organization’s legitimacy (Lock & Seele, 2017).
Building organizational legitimacy
It is vital for organizations to be perceived as legitimate, because in the end it is essential for the survival of the organization (Du & Vieira, 2012). An organization’s legitimacy is based on the fact whether the public and stakeholders generally view an organization’s actions as desirable and appropriate within a socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs and definitions (Crane & Glozer, 2016). It is also defined as an organization’s license to operate, due to the idea that an organization may be viewed as a social institution which, in order to survive, needs to be accepted by society (Sethi, 1977).
Types of organizational legitimacy
The concept of organizational legitimacy is broad and a distinction can be made between several forms of organizational legitimacy. Preceding research discerns between three main types, namely regulative organizational legitimacy, cognitive organizational legitimacy, and moral organizational legitimacy (Chung, 2010; Suchman, 1995). Whereas regulative
organizational legitimacy is focused on attaining legitimacy via following rules and
regulations, is cognitive organizational legitimacy concentrated on whether an organization may be viewed as desirable and necessary, and moral organizational legitimacy falls back on the idea of whether an organization’s actions – according to society – “are the right thing to do” (Chung, 2010). As an organization, next to being assessed as desirable and legitimate by following regulations, it is nearly of more importance to be morally viewed as legitimate by society in order to be able to survive (Ruef & Scott, 1998). The current study therefore focuses in specific on this moral legitimacy of organization, especially since it largely
legitimacy lies within the fact that it is not based upon manipulations, but only makes use of credible communication via reasonable arguments (Palazzo & Scherer, 2006).
Establishing legitimacy through credible communication
Maintaining good and credible communication as an organization is essential in order to eventually obtain moral legitimacy, since it helps establish a consistent, uniform and credible corporate identity. Otherwise we may speak of an ‘organizational legitimacy gap’ (Crane & Glozer, 2016; Chung, 2010). Dowling and Pfeffer (1975) state that in order for such a ‘gap’ to prevail, this means that there is a discrepancy between the organization’s behavior and
actions, and how society expects the organization to behave. The legitimacy of an
organization is generally evaluated based on norms and values that are prevalent in the social system the organization exists within. These norms and values often become visible in the communications of a social system (Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975).
Thus, gaining and maintaining such organizational moral legitimacy depends for a large part on the communication between an organization and its environment (Lee, Kim, & Chan-Olmsted, 2011; Suchman, 1995).A theory capturing the process of establishing organizational legitimacy via ‘good’ corporate communication is the ‘resource-dependency theory’. The resource-dependency theory believes that organizations are interdependent due to a need of each other’s resources. In order for organizations to obtain those needed
resources, the social system in which an organization participates must view them as
legitimate (Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975). Therefore, once organizations lose their organizational legitimacy, it becomes challenging for them to still enter social interactions and obtain resources, because their environment thinks of the organization as not compliant with the social norms and values that are prevalent in its social system (Palazzo & Scherer, 2006). In the end, this brings the survival of the organization as a whole at risk, because the
organization cannot obtain the essential resources (Suchman, 1995).
Findings from these prior studies thus suggest that once online communication on a corporate website is perceived as credible, this eventually ought to improve the public’s perception of the legitimacy of an organization (Suchman, 1995). Therefore, Hypothesis 1a is proposed:
H1a: Credible online corporate communication will lead to higher perceived organizational legitimacy than not credible online corporate communication.
Moreover, preceding research has shown that the proposed effect is presumably larger once the communication concerns that of an organization coming from a controversial industry (Du & Vieira, 2012). This may be explained via the concept of self-regulation, suggesting that once organizations strategically adapt themselves to their environment, this will improve their relationship with their environment (Chung, 2010). In specific, self-regulation concerns the evaluation and adaptation of the behavior of an industry and its underlying organizations (Heath & Palenchar, 2008).
As stated before, the current research makes use of the online corporate
communication of one of the largest Dutch gas and oil organizations, the NAM. According to Du and Vieira (2012), the gas and oil industry is looked upon as controversial, mainly due to the fact that the production of gas and oil knows several environmentally harmful
consequences. In order to survive as a controversial organization, the gas and oil organizations become largely dependent on the perceived credibility of their corporate
communication in order to still be able to participate in their social system, be looked upon as morally legitimate, obtain the resources the organization needs, and thus survive. Therefore, the findings in literature propose that by establishing credible corporate communication via
self-regulation, this may positively influence the survival of a controversial organization (Lock & Seele, 2017; Suchman, 1995).
Multimodal framing effects
The manner in which organizations present their corporate communication, may also
influence the manner in which the public interprets this corporate communication (Lee et al., 2011). Therefore, in this study, there will be tested for an influence of this so-called concept of multimodality.
The power of text and images
The concept of multimodality can best be described as the manner in which communication statements, such as images and text, differ in presentation and salience (Powell et al., 2015). In this study, text-alone and text accompanied by images are used and tested for. Researches have established several theories, as to why images may be processed differently than text. As discussed before, the ELM and HSM information processing models state that the correctness of a communication statement can be the result of two different acceptance processes, a systematic and a heuristic process. Based on the two dual processing models it is suggested, that adding an image to a communication statement may stimulate people to thoroughly and critically assess the communication statement in terms of argument quality and honesty (Hoeken et al., 2009; Paivio & Csapo, 1973). According to the ‘pictorial superiority theory’, adding a picture to an advertisement or text has also proven to be able to stimulate a more systematic way of information processing (Meyers-Levy & Malaviya, 1999; Paivio & Csapo, 1973). It is proposed that this results in more and thorough chances of changes in attitude (Hoeken et al., 2009). This means that the evaluation of a piece of corporate communication
in general is expected to be better when more superficial processing of the text takes place and thus no image is included. In the current study, the public is expected to portray an
overall better perception of the legitimacy of an organization, once less critical examination of the organization via the piece of corporate communication takes place. Therefore, Hypothesis 1b can be proposed:
H1b: Online corporate communication in the form of text will lead to higher perceived organizational legitimacy than online corporate communication in the form of text combined with an image.
Based on the findings within literature and in regards to Hypothesis 1a and 1b, Hypothesis 2 can be proposed as followed:
H2a: Credible online corporate communication will lead to higher perceived organizational legitimacy than not credible online corporate communication, and this effect will be stronger when it concerns online corporate communication in the form of text than when it concerns online corporate communication in the form of text combined with an image.
With regard to testing the research question and proposed hypotheses, respondents are recruited and asked to participate in an experimental study. The study consists of a 2 between-subjects (Credibility of online corporate communication: credible vs. not credible) x 2 between-subjects (Multimodality of online corporate communication: text vs. image-text) experimental design. The conceptual model for this study is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Methods
In order to examine the relationships between variables, a quantitative, self-reporting, cross-sectional online questionnaire was set out. Before carrying out the actual experiment, a pre-test was conducted. In both the pre-pre-test, as well as in the actual experiment, a questionnaire was set out by the use of the online program Qualtrics. The complete questionnaires can respectively be found in Appendix 2 and Appendix 3. Both questionnaires were accessible via laptops and desktops, as well as via mobile telephones or tablets.
All data for the pre-test was collected in April 2018 and all data for the actual experiment was collected in May and June 2018. Respondents for both questionnaires were mainly recruited by means of the websites SurveyStudent.nl and SurveySwap.io. Respondents obtained compensation in the form of receiving responses on the questionnaires the
respondents themselves had set out. In this section, the pre-test and experiment are discussed in terms of sample, procedure, variables and measurements.
Credibility of online corporate communication Perceived organizational legitimacy Multimodality
Pre-test
A pre-test on a small sample was conducted via an online questionnaire in order to check for any problems, such as unclear wording or an incorrect manipulation. The manipulation consisted of exposure of the respondents to either credible online corporate communication or not credible online corporate communication. The aim of the pre-test was to check whether the credible corporate communication was perceived as more credible than the not credible corporate communication.
The questionnaire started with a short welcome in which respondents were told that participation was anonymous and voluntary. Next, the respondents had to give official consent to participate in the study and they were provided with a short piece of information about the “Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij” (NAM). This due to the fact that two website articles about and from NAM were used in the experiment as stimuli, which can be found in Appendix 1. The experiment was setup in Dutch, since it was probable that the respondents and the online corporate communication from the NAM were going to be Dutch.
Next, respondents were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions. Four conditions based on credibility and multimodality were classified. The respondents were either assigned to the condition that was shown credible online corporate communication in the form of text (n=20), to the condition that was shown credible online corporate
communication in the form of an image-text combination (n=18), to the condition that was shown not credible online corporate communication in the form of text (n=13), or to the condition that was shown not credible online corporate communication in the form of an image-text combination (n=23). A total of 74 respondents participated in the pre-test. Within the pre-test, 14 respondents were male and 60 respondents female (SD = 0.39). The
After assigning respondents to the conditions, the website article from the NAM for the concerning condition was shown and a corresponding scale to measure the credibility of the website article. The used scale, as was the case with all scales in the study, was translated from English to Dutch by the use of back and forward translations. Moreover, two items to measure the respondents’ age and gender were shown. Finally, respondents were thanked for their participation via an afterword. The online questionnaire consisted of a total of 24 items.
A One-Way ANOVA was conducted in order to check for a manipulation of credibility of the used website articles, and had Credibility Condition (credible corporate communication vs. not credible corporate communication) as the independent variable and Credibility Score as the dependent variable. The One-Way ANOVA showed that the scores of the respondents in the condition with the poster in the credible corporate communication (M = 4.62, SD = 0.82) differed significantly from the scores of the respondents in the condition with the not credible corporate communication (M = 4.12, SD = 0.96), F(1, 72) = 5.73, p = .019. The analysis therefore showed that the manipulation of credibility of the website articles was successful and that the actual experiment could be conducted.
Experiment
Procedure
The questionnaire for the actual experiment started with a short introduction and respondents had to give official consent in order to participate in the study. Respondents were also
provided with a short piece of information about the NAM, since two website articles from the pre-test were also used as stimuli for the experiment. Next, the respondents were
randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions, which were classified based on credibility and multimodality. Respondents were then shown the experimental stimulus for at
least 45 seconds with a timer before they could continue to the scales. Finally, a series of control items and items to measure demographic data were asked. The experiment was concluded with a debriefing and respondents were thanked for their participation. In total, the questionnaire consisted of 60 items.
Experimental sample
A total of 215 respondents participated in the experiment. Of these respondents, 75 were male and 140 were female (SD = 0.48), with an average age of 23.65 years old (SD = 2.42). Of the respondents, 94.8% had enjoyed a higher education (‘wo’ or ‘hbo’). See Table 1 for an
overview of the distribution of the respondents and demographic characteristics per condition. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondents split out per condition.
Descriptives Condition
Credible text Credible text-image Not credible text Not credible text-image
N=215 n=56 n=52 n=51 n=56 Age 23.59 (2.30) 24.08 (2.71) 23.39 (2.84) 23.55 (1.76) Gender Male Female 32.14% 67.86% 34.62% 65.38% 41.18% 58.82% 32.14% 67.86% Education wo hbo Other 83.93% 7.14% 8.93% 80.77% 17.31% 1.92% 70.59% 25.49% 3.92% 76.79% 17.85% 5.36%
Variables and measurements
Three variables can be distinguished in this study, in specific two independent variables and one dependent variable. Also, three control variables were included.
Credibility of online corporate communication
The first independent variable is Credibility Condition (credible vs. not credible). For this variable, a manipulation in the content of the presented online corporate communication took place. Two articles from the website of NAM were used as a template for this. By means of adjustments with the text program Word, the content in one of the website articles was manipulated on credibility. To manipulate the content on credibility, the consistency of the information in the text was adjusted according to the Theory of Communicative Action and the four validity claims it proposes (Habermas, 1984). As far as the manipulation of
credibility of visual corporate communication was concerned in the condition with an image, an existing but illogical image was used and presented alongside the text. Inconsistencies between the given text and the presented image were expected to make the text less credible.
Lock and Seele (2017) designed a 16-item scale to measure communication
credibility, which was adapted to fit the experiment in terms of wording. Also, an intention check item was added to the credibility scale. Respondents valued the items on a 7-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha for the 16-item Credibility showed that the scale was reliable (α = .93). The Cronbach’s alpha would increase slightly if item 9 were to be deleted (α = .94). However, due to the overall high reliability of the scale, this item was not deleted.
Perceived organizational legitimacy
Legitimacy, which, as described before, refers to the manner in which respondents viewed the NAM’s actions in the presented communication messages, as desirable and appropriate within society. A 5-item scale was used to measure the perceived organizational legitimacy on a 7-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) (Chung, 2010). Wording in the scale was slightly adapted to fit the study. The Cronbach’s alpha for the 5-item scale showed that it was reliable (α = .88). The Cronbach’s alpha would improve if item 5 were to be deleted (α = .90), but since the scale was already high in reliability, this item was not deleted.
Multimodality of the online corporate communication message
The second independent variable and moderator is, Multimodality Condition (text vs. image-text). Hereby, a distinction is made between online corporate communication in the form of text, and in the form of images and text combined. The respondents were exposed to one of these two levels in the experiment.
Control variables
In the current study, dispositional scepticism towards communication statements from organizations, attitude towards NAM, and whether respondents consider themselves a green person were taken into account as control variables.
Dispositional scepticism refers to the natural tendency people may experience to doubt the credibility of organizations (Obermiller & Spangenberg, 1998). In specific, in the field of corporate communication, this proposes that people with a higher level of dispositional
scepticism towards organizations, will tend to doubt the corporate communication. Obermiller and Spangenberg (1998) developed a 9-item scale to measure dispositional scepticism for corporate advertising. The items were modified to fit the current study and were valued by
respondents on a 7-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha showed that the scale was reliable (α = .93).
In addition, due to the fact that gas and oil organizations, such as the NAM, are generally categorized as a controversial industry, the experiment controls for the publics’ prior attitude towards the NAM. Singh and Spears (2004) designed a 5-item scale to measure brand atittude, which could be used. The items measuring NAM Attitude were: ‘unappealing-appealing’, ‘bad-good’, ‘unpleasant-pleasant’, ‘unfavorable-favorable’, and ‘unlikeable-likeable’. The lower the score was, the more negative a person’s attitude towards the NAM was and vice versa. The Cronbach’s alpha showed that the scale was reliable (α = .91).
Finally, whether respondents view themselves as a ‘green person’ is also controlled for in the current study. Since the experiment involves communication statements from a gas and oil organization, there may be an influence for the manner in which respondents dislike the NAM due to the harmful environmental consequences of its production of gas and oil. Maloney, Ward and Braucht (1975) designed a scale to measure a person’s so-called Ecological Attitude’, differentiating between four components of an ecological attitude: ‘Verbal commitment’, ‘Actual commitment’, ‘Affect’, and ‘Knowledge’. The current study solely used the items from the ‘Actual commitment’ and ‘Affect’ categories’, which added up to a total of 20 items. The Cronbach’s alpha for the items showed that the scale was reliable (α = .81). The Cronbach’s alpha would increase slightly if item 20 (α = .84) would be deleted. Though, due to already an overall high reliability of the scale, this item was not deleted.
Results
Randomization checks
To check whether respondents were evenly distributed over the conditions based on their gender and age, two randomization tests were conducted. First off, concerning the gender of the respondents, a Chi Square analysis with the experimental conditions as the independent variable and gender as the dependent variable was conducted. The analysis showed that gender and condition of the respondents were not dependent, X2 (3) = 1.26, p = .738.
Respondents were thus evenly distributed throughout the experiment based on their gender. Second, in order to check for the correct distribution of respondents over the conditions based on age, a One-Way ANOVA was conducted. The One-Way ANOVA had the experimental conditions as the independent variable and age as the dependent variable. The analysis showed that the age of the respondents and the condition of the respondents are not dependent, so the respondents were equally divided over the experimental conditions based on their age, F(3, 211) = 0.77, p = .510.
Control variables
As discussed before, several control variables were included in the experiment in order to control for side effects on credibility. Spearman’s rho indicated that the control variable Ecological Attitude significantly correlated with credibility, rs = -.15, p < 0.05, two-tailed, N
= 215. This concerned a relatively weak and negative correlation. The correlation suggests that a person values the corporate communication as less credible once they perceive
themselves to be more of a ‘sustainable person’. Moreover, the control variable Dispositional Skepticism significantly showed a moderately strong and positive correlation, rs = .46, p <
two-tailed, N = 215. Though, the latter correlation was less strong. The last two correlations suggest that the more skeptical the person is or the better attitude he or she has towards the NAM, the higher he or she values the credibility of the corporate communication. All control variables were taken into account as covariates in further statistical tests. Table 2 provides means and standard deviations for the control variables per credibility condition.
Table 2. Means and standdarddeviations for the control variables per credibility condition. Control variable Credibility Condition
Credible Not credible Dispositional Scepticism 4.02 (1.02) 4.02 (0.99)
NAM Attitude 3.64 (1.04) 3.57 (1.17)
Ecological Attitude 3.99 (0.78) 3.82 (0.79)
Hypotheses testing
Credibility and organizational legitimacy
Hypothesis 1a proposed a positive relationship between corporate communication credibility and organizational legitimacy. This was tested for by means of a One-Way ANCOVA, with the discussed control variables as covariates. Credibility Condition (credible corporate communication vs. not credible corporate communication) was the independent variable and Perceived Organizational Legitimacy was the dependent variable. The assumption of
normality was supported after looking into the Shapiro-Wilk statistics and histograms. Moreover, the assumption of linearity was also met after examination of the scatterplots for the dependent variable and the covariates. Finally, the assumptions of homogeneity of regression slopes and homogeneity of variances were also supported. For covariate NAM
Attitude no significant IV-by-covariate interaction was found, F(1, 207) = 0.03, p = .856. The same was concluded for the covariate Dispositional Skepticism with no significant IV-by-covariate interaction, F(1, 207) = 0.08, p = .369, and respectively neither for IV-by-covariate Ecological Attitude, F(1, 207) = 0.09, p = .763. In addition, a non-significant Levene’s test was reported, F(1, 213) = 3.49, p = .063.
The One-Way ANCOVA showed that the covariate NAM Attitude was significantly related to Perceived Organizational Legitimacy, F(1, 210) = 87.17, p < .001, partial η2 = 0.293. In addition, the covariate Dispositional Skepticism also signified a significant relation with the dependent variable, F(1, 210) = 32.59, p < .001, partial η2 = 0.134, as well as the covariate Ecological Attitude, F(1, 210) = 11.47, p = .001, partial η2 = 0.052. Finally, the analysis showed that the perceived organizational legitimacy scores of the respondents in the condition with the credible corporate communication (M = 4.18, SD = 1.07) did differ significantly from the perceived organizational legitimacy scores of the respondents in the condition with the not credible corporate communication (M = 3.74, SD = 1.10), F(1, 210) = 17.29, p < .001, partial η2 = .076. The analysis showed that Hypothesis 1a could be
confirmed.
Multimodality and organizational legitimacy
Second, Hypothesis 1b was tested for. This hypothesis proposed a relationship between multimodality of corporate communication and organizational legitimacy. A One-Way ANOVA was conducted with Multimodality Condition (text vs. image-text) as the
independent variable and Perceived Organizational Legitimacy as the dependent variable. Based on Shapiro-Wilk statistics and a non-significant Levene’s test, F(1, 213) = .86, p = .355, assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances were not violated.
Outcomes of the analysis showed that the perceived organizational legitimacy scores of the respondents in the text-only condition (M = 4.01, SD = 1.06) did not differ significantly from the perceived organizational legitimacy scores of the respondents in the image-text condition (M = 3.92, SD = 1.15), F(1, 213) = 0.39, p = .53. The analysis therefore showed that Hypothesis 1b could not be confirmed, since there was no relationship between the
multimodality of the corporate communication and the perceived organizational legitimacy.
Moderation analysis
Finally, Hypothesis 1a was tested once again, but this time with a possible moderating effect of the variable Multimodality Condition (text vs. image-text) via a Factorial ANCOVA. Therefore this resulted in Hypothesis 2, with Credibility Condition (credible corporate communication vs. not credible corporate communication) as the independent variable, Perceived Organizational Legitimacy as the dependent variable, and Multimodality Condition (text vs. image-text) as the moderating variable. Again, the control variables were included as covariates. Assumptions for normality and linearity were not violated based on Shapiro-Wilk statistics and scatter plots for the dependent variable and the covariates. Also, the assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes was also supported since no significant IV-by-covariate interactions were found. Finally, the assumption for homogeneity of variances supported met through a non-significant Levene’s test, F(3, 211) = 2.31, p = .077.
The analysis showed that, first off, Hypothesis 1a could again be confirmed, because a significant effect of Credibility Condition on Perceived Organizational Legitimacy could be appointed, F(1, 208) = 16.98, p < .001, partial η2 = .075. Also, significant relations between the covariates and the dependent variable were found. The covariates NAM Attitude, F(1, 210) = 85.70, p < .001, Dispositional Skepticism, F(1, 210) = 32.43, p < .001, as well as the
covariate Ecological Attitude, F(1, 210) = 11.34, p = .001 all found significant relations on Perceived Organizational Legitimacy.
Subsequently, a moderating effect of multimodality was examined. However, no interaction effect could be indicated to confirm Hypothesis 2, F(1, 208) = 0.02, p = .900, partial η2 = .000. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 was rejected, because there was no moderation for multimodality on the credibility of corporate communication and organizational legitimacy. See Table 3 for an overview of the mean scores and standard deviations for perceived organizational legitimacy split out per condition.
Table 3. Means and standdarddeviations for organizational legitimacy. Multimodality Condition Credibility Condition
Credible Not credible
Text-only 4.18 (1.05) 3.83 (1.06)
Text-image 4.19 (1.11) 3.67 (1.14)
Discussion
In the current experimental study, it was investigated whether an effect of credible online corporate communication on the perceived legitimacy of organizations could be found and if this possible relationship could be moderated by the concept of multimodality.
Findings were able to confirm that credible online corporate communication leads to an increased evaluation of an organizations’ legitimacy than not credible online corporate communication. This was in line with preceding literature (Lock & Seele, 2017; Palazzo & Scherer, 2006; Suchman, 1995). Credible communication can thus also ensure better chances
of survival and growth for an organization (Du & Vieira, 2012; Suchman, 1995). Moreover, these findings allowed the current research to make new contributions to prior findings, namely confirming that the proposed effect could be found for an organization from a controversial industry (Du & Vieira, 2012). Preceding research focused on establishing legitimacy for an oil organization via corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication, whilst the current study made use of general corporate communication (Du & Vieira, 2012). Still, a similar result was found. In addition, the findings were also able to newly contribute an influence of the credibility of corporate communication on organizational legitimacy from the perspective of the public (Chung, 2010).
It is important to remark that a moderate influence of the public’s prior attitude towards the NAM was found. The more positive the public evaluated the NAM as an organization prior to reading the communication statement, the higher the public rated the credibility of the communication statement. This could be used to signal the importance of the attitude people have towards an organization, because this may moderately affect the manner in which the public rates the credibility of the organization’s communication and possible even its legitimacy. Based on the discussed ELM and HSM models, the effect of prior attitude could suggest that people’s attitudes towards NAM seemed to prohibit a critical and
systematic way of processing of the presented information (Hoeken et al., 2009).
Next to looking for an influence of communication credibility, the current study also investigated whether an influence could be found for the presentation of the corporate
communication on the public’s opinion of the NAM’s legitimacy. It was assumed that online corporate communication in the form of a text would lead to a better assessment of an organizations’ legitimacy than online corporate communication in the form of a text combined with an image. Even though the perceived organizational legitimacy means per condition showed slight support for this assumption, the expected significant effect was not
found. Moreover, it was also expected that credible online corporate communication would lead to higher perceived organizational legitimacy than not credible online corporate communication, and that this effect would be stronger when it concerned online corporate communication in the form of text than when it concerned online corporate communication in the form of text combined with an image. However, this assumption could not be confirmed either and was therefore not in line with literature on, for example, the so-called ‘pictorial superiority’ theory and the often discussed dual information processing models. These theories suggest that text and images are often processed in different manners, but no such effect was found in the current study (Hoeken et al. 2009; Paivio, 1986; Paivio & Csapo, 1973).
In addition to the dual processing models, Meyers-Levy and Malaviya (1999)
introduced a third form of information processing, namely experiential processing. Therefore, it is proposed that experiences may also influence a person’s evaluation of a communication statement. Experiential processing is based on the assumption that the emotion a person feels when processing a message can influence or even determine his or her attitude towards that message, brand or even an organization. Barry (1997) confirms that experiences may influence the way in which we shape our visual world and perceptions, and even proposes similar influences for a person’s emotional state and mindset. Similarly, Petty, Cacioppo, and Goldman (1981) found that the personal relevance of an issue might also affect the manner in which an individual eventually processes a communication statement. In short, respondents’ experiences and priorities may have overruled an effect of multimodality.
Moreover, missing effects for multimodality could also be contributed to an
underlying methodological cause, because the manipulation of multimodality may not have worked or may not have been strong enough. Prior research has shown that images alongside text can be appreciated and bring about a change, but only once the images play a useful role
within the text, such as providing additional information or clarification (De Haan,
Kruikemeier, Lecheler, Smit, & Van der Nat, 2017; Holsanova, 2014). Otherwise, Sung and Mayer (2012) referred to such ineffective and uninformative images as ‘decorative images’.
Practical implications
Based on the study that was carried out, it can be concluded that for an organization’s chances of survival, it is essential for the organization to maintain credible online communication on the corporate website. The Theory of Communicative Action and its four validity claims have proven to be useful in establishing credible online corporate communication (Habermas, 1984). Though, the type of modality of the online corporate communication, whether it concerned a text or a text in combination with an image, has shown to not influence the public’s evaluation of the organization’s legitimacy. However, as stated before, this could be explained due to possibly the accidental use of decorative and uninformative images (De Haan et al., 2017; Holsanova, 2014; Sung & Mayer, 2012). Therefore, organizations still have to take possible effects of different types of modality for their corporate communication into consideration. Organizations should carefully make decisions on whether to include or not include images alongside the corporate communication on the corporate website.
Collaborations with professional design agencies may be needed in order to allocate the appropriate images.
Future research
Based on the findings of this study, a few suggestions for future research can be made. First off, it is recommended that the current study be replicated, but this time with a larger and more diverse amount of online corporate communication. In the current study, one of the website articles used was one concerning gas and oil production numbers of the NAM, whilst
the other website article was more on the topic of corporate social responsibility. Therefore, the number and diversity of the used website articles was limited.
A second and last suggestion for future research could be to replicate the experiment, but make use of different types of modalities of the online corporate communication, such as videos versus audio, to see whether an interesting effect could be found if the modalities are less alike. Moreover, the concept of website credibility could be added. Prior research has already shown that the overall design of a corporate website plays an interesting role for the manner in which the public perceives a corporate website to be credible or not. Therefore, a website design may also exert an influence on the perceived credibility of information presented on the website (Fogg et al., 2003; Fogg et al., 2001).
Limitations
On a more critical note, the current research and its findings bring along a few limitations. First off, only one organization and one industry were tested for in the experiment, namely the NAM and the gas and oil industry. Therefore, the results cannot easily be used to generalize for more organizations, especially those involved in other industries.
A second and large limitation of the research is that the respondents almost solely consisted of current students with a higher education. After all, the student population is a homogeneous group of respondents, but is not genuinely a representative reflection of the general population. Also, the number of respondents per condition turned out to be on the low side. A higher number of respondents would have been desirable to make sure of a solid reflection of the population.
Finally, the current study solely made use of online corporate communication that was presented on the corporate website. This while, in the current digital age, organizations also
often communicate online via social media platforms, such as Twitter, Youtube, Instagram and more.
Conclusion
Overall, the study makes useful contributions to prior research by concluding that the credibility of an organization’s corporate communication on its website is of importance for the public’s perception of an organization’s legitimacy. However, no effects for the
presentation of the corporate communication, whether it concerned a text or a text with an image, could be appointed. These results were found for the NAM, a large Dutch gas and oil organization coming from an industry that is often frowned upon. The findings propose that once an organization like the NAM does not communicate online in a credible manner, the public may perceive the legitimacy of the organization as less. In a worst-case scenario, this could endanger the organization’s chances of survival and growth, and possibly even the public’s general trust in the organization.
Literature
Adams, J. E., Highhouse, S., & Zickar, M. J. (2010). Understanding General Distrust of Corporations. Corporate Reputation Review, 13(1), 38-51. doi:10.1057/crr.2010.6 Argenti, P. A. (2016). Corporate Communication as a Discipline: Toward a Definition.
Management Communication Quarterly, 10(1), 73-97. doi:10.1177/0893318996010001005
Barry, A. M. (1997). Visual intelligence: Perception, image, and manipulation in visual communication. Albany, GA: State University of NewYork Press.
Benoit, W. L. (1997). Image repair discourse and crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 23(2), 177-186. doi:10.1016/S0363-8111(97)90023-0
Bentele, G., & Seidenglanz, R. (2008). Trust and Credibility – Prerequisites for Communication Management. In: Public Relations Research (pp. 49-62). doi: 10.1007/978-3-531-90918-9_4
Chung, J. Y. (2010). Examining organizational legitimacy: An empirical analysis of
organizational legitimacy, issue legitimacy, legitimacy gaps, and factors affecting the legitimacy regarding the issue of direct-to-consumer advertising in the
pharmaceutical industry (Doctoral Dissertation). The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama.
Cornelissen, J. P. (2017). Corporate Communication: A Guide to Theory and Practice (5th ed.). London, UK: Sage.
Crane, A., & Glozer, S. (2016). Researching Corporate Social Responsibility
Communication: Themes, Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of Management Studies, 53(7), 1223‐1252. doi:10.1111/joms.1219
De Haan, Y., Kruikemeier, S., Lecheler, S., Smit, G., & Van der Nat, R. (2017). When Does an Infographic Say More Than a Thousand Words? Journalism Studies, 19(9), 1293-1312. doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2016.1267592
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122-136. doi:10.2307/1388226
Du, S., & Vieira, E. T. (2012). Striving for Legitimacy Through Corporate Social
Responsibility: Insights from Oil Companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 413-427. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1490-4
Edelman (2018). 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer Global Report. Retrieved from https://www.edelman.com/trust-barometer
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2000). Perceptions of Internet Information Credibility. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(3), 515-540. doi:
10.1177/107769900007700304
Fogg, B. J., Marshall, J., Laraki, O., Osipovich, A., Varma, C., Fang, N., ... Treinen, M. (2001). What Makes Web Sites Credible? A Report on a Large Quantitative Study. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 61-68. doi: 10.1145/365024.365037
Fogg, B. J., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D. R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., & Tauber, E. R. (2003). How Do Users Evaluate the Credibility of Web Sites? A Study with Over 2,500 Participants. Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for user experiences, 1-15. doi: 10.1145/997078.997097
Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Heath, R. L., & Palenchar, M. J. (2008). Strategic Issues Management: Organizations and
Public Policy Challenges (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
Hoeken, H., Hornikx, J., & Hustinx, L. (2009). Overtuigende teksten: Onderzoek en ontwerp (2nd ed.). Bussum: Coutinho.
Holsanova, J. (2014). Reception of multimodality: Applying eye-tracking methodology in multimodal research. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis, 2nd Edition (pp. 287–302). London: Routledge.
Jackson, J., & Gau, J. M. (2016). Carving Up Concepts? Differentiating Between Trust and Legitimacy in Public Attitudes Towards Legal Authority. In: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Trust (pp. 49-69). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-22261-5_3
Web: the role of brand trust and credibility of online information sources. Journal of Marketing Communications, 17(5), 355–374. doi:10.1080/13527266.2010.484128 Lock, I., & Seele, P. (2017). Measuring Credibility Perceptions in CSR Communication: A
Scale Development to Test Readers’ Perceived Credibility of CSR Reports. Management Communication Quarterly, 31(4), 584-613.
doi:10.1177/0893318917707592
Maloney, M. P., Ward, M. P., & Braucht, G. N., (1975). A Revised Scale for the
Measurement of Ecological Attitudes and Knowledge. American Psychologist, 30(7), 787-790. doi:10.1037/h0084394
Metzger, M. J. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2078–2091. doi:10.1002/asi.20672 Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010). Social and Heuristic Approaches to
Credibility Evaluation Online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413-439. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01488.x
Meyers-Levy, J., & Malaviya, P. (1999). Consumers’ Processing of Persuasive
Advertisements: An Integrative Framework of Persuasion Theories. Journal of Marketing, 63, 45-60. doi:10.2307/1252100
Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. R. (1998). Development of a Scale to Measure Consumer Skepticism Toward Advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 159-186. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp0702_03
Palazzo G., & Scherer, A. G. (2006). Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 71-88. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9044-2
Oxford University Press.
Paivio, A., & Csapo, K. (1973). Picture Superiority in Free Recall: Imagery or Dual Coding?. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 176-206. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90032-7
Patten, D. M. (1992). Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: A note on legitimacy theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 471-475. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(92)90042-Q
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J.T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847-855. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.5.847
Powell, T. E., Boomgaarden, H. G., De Swert, K., & De Vreese, C. H. (2015). A Clearer Picture: The Contribution of Visuals and Text to Framing Effects. Journal of Communication, 65(6), 997-1017. doi:10.1111/jcom.12184
Renn, O., & Levine, D. (1991). Credibility and trust in risk communication. In:
Communicating Risks to the Public (pp. 175-217). doi: 10.1007/978-94-009-1952-5_10
Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35(4), 651-665. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01454.x
Ruef, M., & Scott, M. (1998). A Multidimensional Model of Organizational Legitimacy: Hospital Survival in Changing Institutional Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(4), 877-904. doi:10.2307/2393619
Sethi, S. P. (1977). Advocacy advertising and large corporations: Social conflict, big business image, the news media, and public policy. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring Attitude toward the Brand and Purchase Intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53-66. doi:10.1080/10641734.2004.10505164
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.
doi:10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080331
Sung, E., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). When graphics improve liking but not learning from online lessons. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1618-1625. doi:
10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.026
Williams, D. E., & Treadaway, G. (1992). Exxon and the Valdez accident: A failure in crisis communication. Communication Studies, 43(1), 56-64.
doi:10.1080/10510979209368359
Yang, S., Kang, M., & Cha, H. (2015). A Study on Dialogic Communication, Trust, and Distrust: Testing a Scale for Measuring Organization-Public Dialogic Communication (OPDC). Journal of Public Relations Research, 27(2), 175-192. doi:
Appendix 1. Experimental stimulus
Condition 1: Credible corporate communication, text only
Condition 3: Not credible corporate communication, text only
Appendix 2. Pre-test questionnaire
Welkom bij deze enquête! Deze enquête maakt deel uit van een afstudeeronderzoek binnen de master "Corporate Communication" aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam en wordt uitgevoerd door Willemijn Albers, een student binnen de bovengenoemde masteropleiding. Enkele vragen met betrekking tot 1 bericht van de website van en over de 'Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij' (NAM) zullen worden gesteld. Er zijn geen goede of foute antwoorden. Het invullen van de enquête duurt ongeveer 5 minuten.
De antwoorden en rapportage ervan worden altijd anoniem verwerkt, zodat de antwoorden niet zijn terug te leiden naar individuen. U kunt weigeren deel te nemen aan het onderzoek of uw deelname stoppen zonder daarvoor een reden te hoeven opgeven. U heeft ook tot 24 uur na deelname om uw toestemming in te trekken om te voorkomen dat antwoorden in het onderzoek worden gebruikt. Als u vragen heeft over dit proces, aarzel dan niet om contact met mij op te nemen via alberswillemijnj@gmail.com.
Bedankt voor uw bijdrage aan dit onderzoek. Het wordt zeer gewaardeerd! Met vriendelijke groet,
Willemijn Albers
Student Corporate Communication- Universiteit van Amsterdam ---
Ik ga ermee akkoord vrijwillig deel te nemen aan deze studie. Ik ben vrij om me op elk moment terug te trekken, zonder hiervoor een reden op te geven. Als mijn resultaten worden gebruikt in wetenschappelijke publicaties of op een andere manier worden gepubliceerd, dan zijn mijn persoonlijke gegevens volledig anoniem. Mijn persoonlijke gegevens worden niet door derden gelezen zonder mijn uitdrukkelijke toestemming. Als ik meer informatie wil, weet ik dat ik contact kan opnemen met Willemijn Albers (alberswillemijnj@gmail.com). Voor eventuele klachten over dit onderzoek kan ik me wenden tot het lid van de Commissie Ethiek namens ASCoR, per adres:
ASCoR secretariaat: Commissie Ethiek
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Nieuwe Achtergracht 1661018 WV Amsterdam
Of door te bellen naar 020-525 3680 of per mail: ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl
o
Ik begrijp het bovenstaande en ik ga ermee akkoord deel te nemen aan het onderzoek ---Over de Nederlandse Aardoliemaatschappij (NAM)
De Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij (NAM) is een bedrijf dat zich bezighoudt met het opsporen, ontwikkelen en produceren van aardgas en aardolie in Nederland. De NAM levert deze energie aan de samenleving en de industrie.
---
Hieronder wordt een bericht op de website van en over de Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij (NAM) weergeven. Lees dit bericht goed door. Na 45 seconden kunt u doorgaan naar de vragenlijst [Timer].
[Stimulus]
---
[Stimulus]
Beoordeel de volgende stellingen na het lezen van het bericht op de website van en over de NAM: 1. Zeer mee oneens 2 3 4 5 6 7. Zeer mee eens 1. Ik denk dat de uitspraken in het bericht juist zijn.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
2. Ik denk dat de beweringen in het bericht correct zijn.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
3. Ik heb er vertrouwen in dat de uitspraken waar zijn.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1. Zeer mee oneens
2 3 4 5 6 7. Zeer
mee eens
4. Ik denk dat het bericht het beste
bewijs gebruikt.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
5. De argumenten worden gerechtvaardigd door de feiten in het bericht.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
6. Het bericht weerspiegelt de oprechte bedoelingen van de NAM.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
7. Ik denk dat de bedoelingen van de NAM overeenkomen met het bericht.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
8. Het bericht is niet misleidend.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
9. Het bericht past in de context van de gas- en olie-industrie en haar sociale en milieu-uitdagingen.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
10. Als lezer van dit bericht, ben ik van mening dat het bericht sociale
kwesties goed adresseert.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
11. Ik denk dat het bericht de NAM rechtmatig vertegenwoordigt.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
12. Ik begrijp het bericht.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
13. Het bericht is duidelijk geschreven.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
14. Ik begrijp de betekenis van het
bericht.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
15. Het bericht is gemakkelijk te lezen.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
16. Het bericht is op een begrijpelijke manier geschreven.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
---Beoordeel de volgende stellingen na het lezen van het bericht op de website van en over de NAM: 1. Zeer mee oneens 2 3 4 5 6 7. Zeer mee eens 1. Ik heb een positief oordeel over de NAM.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
2. Ik geloof dat de NAM overheidsvoo rschriften volgt.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
3. De NAM verricht goed werk.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4. Ik denk dat de NAM eerlijk is.o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1. Zeer mee oneens 2 3 4 5 6 7. Zeer mee eens
5. Ik denk dat de NAM een noodzakelijk onderdeel van onze
maatschappij is.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
--- Tot slot nog 2 vragen.
1. Wat is uw geslacht?
o
Mano
Vrouw 2. Wat is uw leeftijd? ______________ --- Bedankt voor je deelname!---
[Not credible conditions only]
Let op: klik hieronder om uw gegevens definitief te verzenden!
Het getoonde website artikel van de NAM is gemanipuleerd voor dit onderzoek. Deze is slechts gedeeltelijk gebaseerd op een oorspronkelijk website artikel van de NAM. Mocht u vragen hebben, dan kunt u contact met mij opnemen via: alberswillemijnj@gmail.com.
Appendix 3. Final questionnaire
Welkom bij deze enquête! Deze enquête maakt deel uit van een afstudeeronderzoek binnen de master "Corporate Communication" aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam en wordt uitgevoerd door Willemijn Albers, een student binnen de bovengenoemde masteropleiding. Enkele vragen met betrekking tot 1 bericht van de website van en over de 'Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij' (NAM) zullen worden gesteld. Er zijn geen goede of foute antwoorden. Het invullen van de enquête duurt ongeveer 5 minuten.
De antwoorden en rapportage ervan worden altijd anoniem verwerkt, zodat de antwoorden niet zijn terug te leiden naar individuen. U kunt weigeren deel te nemen aan het onderzoek of uw deelname stoppen zonder daarvoor een reden te hoeven opgeven. U heeft ook tot 24 uur na deelname om uw toestemming in te trekken om te voorkomen dat antwoorden in het onderzoek worden gebruikt. Als u vragen heeft over dit proces, aarzel dan niet om contact met mij op te nemen via alberswillemijnj@gmail.com.
Bedankt voor uw bijdrage aan dit onderzoek. Het wordt zeer gewaardeerd! Met vriendelijke groet,
Willemijn Albers
Student Corporate Communication- Universiteit van Amsterdam ---
Ik ga ermee akkoord vrijwillig deel te nemen aan deze studie. Ik ben vrij om me op elk moment terug te trekken, zonder hiervoor een reden op te geven. Als mijn resultaten worden gebruikt in wetenschappelijke publicaties of op een andere manier worden gepubliceerd, dan zijn mijn persoonlijke gegevens volledig anoniem. Mijn persoonlijke gegevens worden niet door derden gelezen zonder mijn uitdrukkelijke toestemming. Als ik meer informatie wil, weet ik dat ik contact kan opnemen met Willemijn Albers (alberswillemijnj@gmail.com). Voor eventuele klachten over dit onderzoek kan ik me wenden tot het lid van de Commissie Ethiek namens ASCoR, per adres:
ASCoR secretariaat: Commissie Ethiek
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Nieuwe Achtergracht 1661018 WV Amsterdam
Of door te bellen naar 020-525 3680 of per mail: ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl
o
Ik begrijp het bovenstaande en ik ga ermee akkoord deel te nemen aan het onderzoek ---Over de Nederlandse Aardoliemaatschappij (NAM)
De Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij (NAM) is een bedrijf dat zich bezighoudt met het opsporen, ontwikkelen en produceren van aardgas en aardolie in Nederland. De NAM levert deze energie aan de samenleving en de industrie.
---
Beantwoord de volgende vragen waarbij u aangeeft hoe u tegen de NAM aankijkt:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Onaantrekkelijk
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
AantrekkelijkSlecht
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
GoedOnaangenaam
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
AangenaamOngunstig
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
GunstigNiet sympathiek
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Sympathiek---
Hieronder wordt een bericht op de website van en over de Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij (NAM) weergeven. Lees dit bericht goed door. Na 45 seconden kunt u doorgaan naar de vragenlijst [Timer].
[Stimulus]
---
[Stimulus]
Beoordeel de volgende stellingen na het lezen van het bericht op de website van en over de NAM:
