방어적 귀인이론(DAT) 관점에서의 위기커뮤니케이션 수용과 피해자비난 연구

Abstract

현재 우리 사회는 서양의 개방적인 성 문화가 상상할 수 없을 정도로 무차별적으로 수용되어 그에 따른 많은 문제가 발생하고 있다. 그릇된 성 문화는 잘못된 성적 행동을 유발하기도 하고, 온라인 등에서 쉽게 접근할 수 있는 정보의 홍수는 문란한 성 풍조와 잘못된 성 문화를 양산하고 있는 실정이다. 그러나 성(sex)이란 주제의 특성상 아직까지 금기시하는 정서가 일반적이기 때문에 은밀하게 학습되어진 왜곡된 인식은 개인에게도 악영향을 미치고, 나아가 사회범죄로까지 이어질 수 있다. 특히 우리 사회는 남성 중심의 전통 문화로 인해 성범죄나 성폭력 등에 대한 여러 사안들이 잘못 알려져 있는데, 가령 예를 들면 범죄의 가해자보다도 오히려 피해자가 성범죄를 유발했다는 비난을 하는 경우이다(Mateescu & Crow, 2008). 성을 매개로 한 위기 사건들은 모두 성폭력-성 위기 이슈에 포함될 수 있는데, 보통 성폭력에 대한 피해를 심층적으로 이해하기 위해서 1차 피해와 2차 피해로 나누어 설명한다. 1차 피해는 성적 위기가 발생해서 받은 직접적인 피해를 의미하며, 2차 피해는 성폭력 사건이 일어난 이후에 사법기관이나, 가족, 친구, 언론, 여론 등의 소문이나 피해자에 대한 부정적인 반응에 의해 받게 되는 정신적, 사회적 피해를 말한다(박명진ㆍ양난미ㆍ이명신, 2014). 캠벨과 라자(Campbell & Raja, 2005)는 피해자에게 부차적인 손상을 초래하는 비난적 태도와 행동, 지역사회 서비스 실행을 2차 피해로 정의했고, 장미정(2005)은 직접적인 피해 이외에 성폭력에 대한 잘못된 통념으로 사회적인 불이익을 당하거나 심리적인 고통을 당하게 되는 간접적인 피해로 정의하였다. 1950년에 울프강(Wolfgang)이 사용한 범죄 상황에서의 피해자 촉발(victim precipitation)이라는 용어는 다양한 피해자학 관점의 범죄연구에 적용되어 왔다. 이 개념은 피해자가 성관계를 동의했는지에 대해 애매모호한 행동이나 말을 했다는 근거로 성폭력 범죄에서 피해자를 비난하는 계기가 되고 있다(Curtis, 1974). 1970년대 초반 펜실베니아에서 진행된 성범죄 연구는 전체 강간사건 중의 19%가 피해자가 유발한 것이라는 결과를 발표하여 피해자 촉발(유발) 이론(victim precipitation)을 지지했고, 페미니스트의 맹렬한 비난을 받게 된다(유재두ㆍ송병호, 2009). 이에 대해 리그랜드(LeGrand, 1973)는 피해자 비난적 시각이 성폭력 범죄에 대한 기술이라기 보단 여성에 대한 잘못된 성역할의 고정관념과 문화적 전통에 기초한 남성들의 편협한 시각이라고 주장했다. 과거에는 힘에 의해 성범죄가 발생하는 것으로 단순하게 접근하는 경우가 많았지만 오늘날 문화적 다양성을 고려한다면 권력형 성범죄 등의 다양한 접근을 고려해야 한다(유재두ㆍ송병호, 2009). 국내에서 성폭력 2차 피해 문항간의 관계를 확인한 박명진, 양난미, 이명신(2014)은 성폭력 범죄에서 2차 피해로 가장 관련이 높은 요인이 피해자비난 요인이라는 것을 확인하고, 그것이 잘못된 강간통념과 높은 상관관계를 나타냄을 발표했다. 김정아(2013)의 연구에서도 높은 전통적 성역할 기대와 잘못된 강간통념은 가해자에게 범죄를 정당화하는 구실을 제공하고 피해자를 비난하며 책임을 전가하는 역할을 한다. 또한 잘못된 강간통념은 성인의 음란물 추구 성향이나 성적인 공격성과도 유의미한 결과를 나타내었으며(고재홍ㆍ지영단, 2002; 이건호ㆍ강혜자, 2005; 이인숙, 2013; 박경, 2008), 강간통념이 높은 남성의 경우 데이트 상대를 더 많이 통제하려 하였고, 데이트 성폭력 가해 경험도 더 많았다(이지연ㆍ이은설, 2005). 이와 관련하여 최근 화제가 되고 있는 미투(me too)등의 성적 위기 이슈에서 방어적 귀인이론<Defensive attribution theory: 이하 DAT>를 도입하는 것은 국내의 공중인식과 행동에 따른 대응 전략을 수립하는데 많은 이점을 준다. DAT이론은 부정적인 위기상황에서 책임귀인을 설명하기 위해 처음 제안되었다(Walster, 1966). 위기 사안이 심각할수록 공중은 사고의 책임을 지우기 위한 대상을 찾는 경향을 보이는데, 그 과정에서 사고발생 원인의 책임자와 공중과의 유사성이 발견된다면 방어적 귀인 메커니즘이 촉발되어 그들은 가해자를 옹호하고 피해자에게 더 많은 책임을 부여할 가능성이 있다. 이런 측면에서 DAT이론은 피해자비난 현상을 설명할 때, 그에 대한 이해를 넓히면서 대중이 기업의 커뮤니케이션전략 메시지를 얼마나 잘 수용하는지, 위기책임성과 위기커뮤니케이션 전략 유형만이 메시지의 수용을 좌우하는지, 또는 개인적, 상황적 유사성과 같은 다른 요인이 있는지에 대한 논의를 가능하게 한다. 위기상황에서의 기업커뮤니케이션전략 메시지 수용도란 대중이 기업의 문제 해결 능력을 얼마나 잘 받아들이고 어떻게 평가하는지를 의미한다. 이것은 여러 사회적 이슈를 중심으로 검증되어 왔고, 커뮤니케이션 영역에서도 메시지의 수용도가 높은 조직에서 올바른 위기커뮤니케이션을 구사한다고 보고 있다. DAT이론과 피해자비난 현상의 연관성이 검증된다면, 현 사회에서 공중에 대한 조직의 사회적 책임과 요구가 심화되는 만큼 더욱 체계적이고 적극적인 위기커뮤니케이션을 전략을 구축하여 다양한 공중관계를 개선할 수 있는 방향성이 제시될 것이다. 성적 이슈를 판단할 때 공중의 자유의지는 판단력에 막대한 영향을 미치므로 많은 이해관계자들은 자신이 가지고 있는 인식이 옳은 것인지, 그른 것인지 잘못 인식하기도 한다. 때문에 성폭력 피해자에 대한 관찰자의 지각, 사회적 반응 및 태도는 매우 중요하다. 지금까지 2차 피해에 대한 국내의 연구는 주로 법제도나 형사사법체계, 의료기관 등 전문가들을 대상으로 이루어져 왔다. 그러나 국외에서는 아렌스(Ahrens, 2006)의 연구와 같이, 친구나 가족들이 성폭력 피해자에게 부정적으로 반응하는 사례를 지적하며 성폭력 피해자에 대한 2차 피해가 형사적 사법체계에서만 유발되는 것이 아니라는 전제 하에 시도된 연구가 다수 존재하고 있다. 현실적으로 피해자들은 실생활의 주변 환경에서 2차 피해를 경험하게 되지만 아직 일반 공중의 인식 연구는 미미한 실정이기에 국내에서도 일반 성인을 응답자로 하는 연구가 필요하다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 SCCT이론에 대한 국내기업의 성 이슈 위기상황 실정을 살펴보고, DAT이론과 관련된 연구들을 탐독하여 국내의 성 이슈 위기상황을 중심으로 책임귀인에 따른 메시지 수용도와 피해자비난 현상에 대한 영향력을 알아보고자 한다. 기존 연구에 의하면 국내의 대중들은 위기가 발생했을 때, 수용적인 위기커뮤니케이션 전략을 선호하지만, 실제로 국내에서 행해지는 많은 위기커뮤니케이션 전략은 반대의 경향을 나타낸다. 그것은 민감한 사안인 성적 위기 이슈에서 더욱 현저하게 드러나는데, 이를 DAT이론에 접목시킨다면 가해자와 유사성을 느끼는 이해관계자들이 피해자비난에 더욱 동조하는 결과를 도출할 가능성이 있다. 성폭력 위기상황에서 주목받는 개념인 강간통념 역시 책임귀인과 위기커뮤니케이션 전략에 따른 피해자비난 현상에 주요한 역할을 할 것으로 예상된다. 이를 토대로 본 연구에서는 성 이슈 위기상황에서 위기 책임성과 위기커뮤니케이션 전략이 사회적인 피해자비난 현상과 공중의 메시지 수용에 미치는 영향을 살펴보고자 한다. 또한 DAT이론에 근거한 유사성이 위기책임성과 위기커뮤니케이션 전략에 따른 피해자비난과 메시지 수용의 관계를 좌우하는지 확인할 것이다. 마지막으로 이해관계자들의 강간통념이 부정적인 영향을 줄 수 있다는 사실에 착안하여, 위기책임성과 위기커뮤니케이션 전략에 따른 사회현상과 수용성을 조절하는 변인 요소들을 확인하고자 한다.;The purpose of this study is to explain the phenomenon of victim blaming through the DAT theory. According to the DAT(Defensive attribution theory) theory, the more serious the crisis, the more the public tends to seek out who to blame for the accident. In the process, if similarities between the person responsible for the cause of the accident and the public are found, a defensive attribution mechanism is triggered, and the public is more likely to advocate for the perpetrator and place more responsibility on the victim. In crisis situations related to sexual issues, victims experience secondary damage such as victim blaming in real life. However, domestic research on secondary damage so far has mainly focused on experts in the legal system, criminal justice system, and medical institutions. Therefore, under the assumption that research with general adults as respondents is necessary in Korea, this study looked at the crisis situation of sexual issues in domestic companies based on the SCCT theory. In addition, by reading the studies related to DAT theory, the influence of the message acceptance and victim blaming according to the attribution of responsibility was investigated, focusing on the crisis situation of domestic sexual issues. This study designed 2 (Corporate Responsibility: high/low) * 2 (Crisis Communication Strategy: Justification/Apology) experiment using corporate responsibility and crisis communication strategy type as independent variables. The experimental respondents were 321 adults between the ages of 20 and under 60 who were recruited through a research institute. They read the company's crisis scenario and the company's response message and responded to the survey questions. The gender and age of each group divided into 4 groups from type A to type D were composed of similar ratios, and random sampling was performed. Since the sexual crisis issue is a very socially sensitive issue, it was designed as an experiment by entering it anonymously. Based on this, as the first research question, this study tried to investigate whether crisis responsibility and crisis communication strategy in crisis situations of corporate sexual issues affect victim blaming and message acceptance. First, it was confirmed that the corporate crisis responsibility affects the victim blaming, but does not affect the acceptance of crisis communication messages. The public showed a tendency to blame the victims more when the corporate crisis responsibility was low than when it was high. This can be interpreted as increasing the possibility of victim blaming because the attribution of responsibility is ambiguous in the issue of sexual violence crisis between co-workers, unlike power-type sexual harassment with clear responsibility. Next, it was found that a company's crisis communication strategy affects both message acceptance and victim blaming. First of all, in terms of message acceptance, it was found that the public acceptance was greater when the company used the apology strategy than when the justification strategy was used, and this result was relatively the same in all experimental treatments. As discussed in the previous study, this is consistent with the result that the Korean public prefers the apology strategy to the justification strategy used by companies. In addition, in the results related to victim blaming, the public was more likely to blame the victim when companies used the justification strategy than when the company used the apology strategy. This is because, in the apology strategy, the victim is regarded as a complete victim, but in the justification strategy, the victim is not yet a complete victim, but just a party to the incident. As a second research question, this study tried to confirm whether the similarity based on the DAT theory influences the relationship between victim blaming and message acceptance according to crisis responsibility and crisis communication strategy. Unfortunately, similarity did not affect both message acceptance and victim blaming. However, when the similarity was not as a single variable, but interacted with the other moderating variables, such as the rape conventional myth and the independent variable, such as crisis responsibility, there was a partially significant difference. Through additional verification of each variable, it was confirmed that similarity had an effect on both message acceptance and victim blaming when it interacted with crisis responsibility and rape conventional myths. As a third research question, focusing on the fact that stakeholders' rape conventional myths can have a negative effect on victim blaming. Sexual Issues In crisis situations, it was investigated whether crisis responsibility & crisis communication strategies and message acceptance & victim blaming differed by the rape conventional myth. As a result of the study, the rape conventional myth had an effect on both message acceptance and victim blaming, which are dependent variables. First, in terms of message acceptance, the public with high rape conventional myths accepted the corporate crisis communication message better than the public with low rape conventional myths. In detail, the group with low rape conventional myths accepted the apology strategy better than the justification strategy, such as the general domestic public, but there was no difference in acceptance by corporate crisis communication strategies in the group with high rape conventional myths. The public with high rape conventional myths feels less sympathy for victims, so companies' acceptance of crisis communication messages is high, but the public with low rape conventional myths feels victims as complete victims, so it can be interpreted as low message acceptance. Next, as a result of victim blaming, it was found that the public with high rape conventional myths blamed the victim more than the low group, therefore the rape myth was found to influence victim blaming. As an interaction moderating effect of rape conventional myths, rape conventional myths interacted with crisis communication strategies to influence message acceptance and victim blaming. First, in terms of message acceptance, in the group with low rape conventional myths had higher acceptance of the apology strategy than the justification strategy, as is generally known. However, in the group with high rape conventional myths, overall message acceptance was high, and the justification strategy was found to be slightly more acceptable than the apology strategy. Next, in the results related to victim blaming, the difference between the group with a high level of rape conventional myth and the group with a low level of rape conventional myth was revealed in both the justification strategy and the apology strategy. In particular, the public with a high level of rape conventional myths tended to blame the victim more severely when the company used justification strategies. This result is consistent with previous research findings that false rape conventional myths play a role in blaming victims and shifting responsibility. Although similarity did not affect the dependent variable as a single variable, it partially affected victim blaming by interacting with another moderating variable, the rape conventional myth. Regardless of the degree of similarity, the group with high rape conventional myths blamed the victim significantly more than the group with low rape conventional myths. In addition, in the group with low rape conventional myths, the group with high similarity tended to slightly blame the victim more than the group with low similarity. As a result related to the interaction moderating effect of similarity, similarity interacted with the other moderating variable, the rape conventional myth, and the independent variable, crisis responsibility, to influence the acceptance of crisis communication messages. First, when the rape conventional myth was low in the group with high corporate crisis responsibility, the apology strategy was more acceptable than the justification strategy in both the low and high similarity groups. This means that the similarity effect of the DAT theory did not work properly. The result of accepting the apology strategy even in the group with a high degree of similarity to the perpetrator can be interpreted as that the rape conventional myth has a greater effect on the acceptance of crisis communication messages than the similarity in a crisis situation with high corporate responsibility. In other words, the notion of the public in general has a more important influence than the situation or personal similarity. In addition, both groups with high and low similarity showed relatively high message acceptance in justification and apology strategies. This result can be interpreted that the added similarity variable increases the acceptance of the justification strategy in addition to the apology strategy, unlike it is expected that the group with low rape conventional myths will naturally accept the apology strategy better when they are exposed to the high corporate responsibility scenario. Next, it was found that the similarity difference was meaningful when the rape conventional myth was high in the group with high responsibility. The group with high similarity had lower overall message acceptance than the group with low similarity, regardless of the company's strategy. In the sexual crisis, this can be explained by the phenomenon that when a group with high rape conventional myths, which is usually expected to have low message acceptance, and a group with high similarity who feel similarity with the perpetrator are combined, message acceptance is significantly lowered. Combining the experimental results, it was found that the Korean public generally accepted the apology strategy better than the justification strategy. The public with low rape conventional myths preferred corporate apology strategies, which is consistent with the characteristics of the general Korean public as discussed in the literature study. However, in the case of the public with high rape conventional myths, the message acceptance was high regardless of the crisis communication strategy because they felt less sympathy with the victim. Lastly, if the public felt a sense of similarity with the perpetrator in a state of high rape conventional myths, the message was not received overall, regardless of the crisis communication strategy, even if the corporate crisis responsibility was high. These results are consistent with the meaning of the DAT theory. This study is meaningful in that it applied a new concept called Defensive Attribution Theory:DAT, which was not well known in Korea, to the field of crisis communication. Existing studies mainly focused on the types of crisis communication and their effects, so it was difficult to derive the main causes of the Korean crisis communication phenomenon. From this point of view, this study expands a new field of behavior research on the public message acceptance process and victim blaming by relating the DAT theory to the issue of corporate sexual crisis, which has recently been highlighted in Korea. In particular, despite the fact that the domestic public generally prefers the apology strategy, in reality, it provided a basis for analyzing the social phenomenon in which the opposite strategy is being implemented in companies. When the public has no similarity to the perpetrator in a sexual crisis issue with high corporate responsibility, that is, when the victim and the perpetrator are clear, the public accepts more apology strategies and reduces victim blame. In the case of a sexual crisis in which corporate responsibility is low, there is a possibility that the public will blame victims more and the acceptance of justification strategies will increase. This can be explained as the cause of the phenomenon that the apology strategy is rarely used in Korea. Although the justification strategy is not a universally correct corporate crisis communication strategy for the public, it is a good strategy for avoiding the crisis from the corporate standpoint. Therefore, proper communication should be conducted with this fact in mind and caution. Likewise, since the concept of similarity also stimulates public anxiety, if the media releases articles or broadcasts that can stimulate public's situation or personal similarity, the victim's blaming can be further exacerbated. Keeping this in mind, public relations must be maintained. This study has practical implications in that it deals with the effect of DAT(Defensive attribution theory), which was not well dealt with in the existing crisis communication research area in Korea, by verifying the moderating effect on similarity and rape conventional myth. In addition, it is very meaningful that a direction to improve various public relations has been suggested by preparing a more systematic and active crisis communication strategy in Korea. However, this study has a limitation in that it compared an inconsistent number of cases when confirming the influence of similarity, the rape conventional myth, and victim blaming. Also, since the issue of sexual crisis is a sensitive issue, there were not many samples of the group with high similarity to the perpetrator or high rape conventional myths. Therefore, there may have been situations such as some respondents who responded to the survey differently from reality or those who did not take the survey seriously. In future studies, it is necessary to look for ways to expand the range of respondents with high similarity to the rape conventional myth and examine the effects more carefully. Lastly, since demographic personal similarity was excluded in this study, only the degree of situational similarity was extracted with relatively few items. However, since the influence of similarity may be different depending on demographic variables, more diverse similarity measurement items should be developed to expand the discussion.