Purpose This study examines how and when corporate news valence (positive vs. negative) influences individuals' intentions to share it. Drawing on expectancy violations theory and the cue-diagnosticity framework, it explores how corporate perceptions and news topics—specifically, morality and competence—moderate the effects of news valence on sharing intentions. Design/methodology/approach Two studies were conducted. Study 1 used a survey (N = 501) to test how pre-existing perceptions of a company's morality and competence moderate the relationship between news valence and sharing intentions. Study 2 employed a 2 (news valence) × 2 (news topic: morality vs. competence) between-subjects experiment (N = 180) to examine how news topics moderate valence effects. Findings Study 1 found that morality perceptions moderated the effects of news valence: both positive and negative news were more likely to be shared when a company was perceived as moral, while negative news was shared more than positive for companies perceived as immoral. Competence perceptions did not show a moderating effect. Study 2 revealed that negative news was more likely to be shared when related to corporate morality, evoking anger, whereas positive news was more likely to be shared when related to competence, triggering admiration. Originality/value This research advances corporate news sharing research by identifying distinct moderating roles of morality and competence. It demonstrates that morality perceptions influence expectation-based responses, while news topics act as diagnostic cues that trigger emotion-driven sharing.
Choi et al. (Fri,) studied this question.