The Paradox of Safety Communication: The Effect of Communication Framing on Psychological Safety and Reporting Intention in Organizations

초록

Safety reporting is essential in safety-critical organizations, yet fear of blame may discourage employees from reporting safety concerns. This study examines how managerial communication framing shapes employees' postexposure psychological responses and reporting intention. A scenario-based experiment was conducted with 180 frontline employees from the power industry in China. Participants were randomly assigned to read an empathy-based, neutral, or blame-based managerial incident memo. They then reported their emotional reactions, trust in management, perceived psychological safety, and reporting intention. Sequential mediation analyses tested a dual-pathway model. Empathy-based framing generated more positive emotional reactions, higher trust in management, greater perceived psychological safety, and stronger reporting intention than neutral or blame-based framing. Mediation analyses supported two complementary sequential pathways: an affective pathway from communication framing to positive emotions, psychological safety, and reporting intention, and a cognitive-relational pathway from communication framing to trust in management, psychological safety, and reporting intention. The findings provide initial scenario-based evidence that managerial communication framing can influence employees' emotional reactions, trust-related inferences, perceived psychological safety, and self-reported willingness to report safety concerns in a Chinese power-industry context. Incident-reporting protocols and supervisory training may benefit from empathy-oriented, learning-focused communication. Supportive managerial framing may reduce fear of blame, support trust-related inferences, and enhance employees' perceived safety in reporting.

키워드