Analyzing the Perceived Utility of Covid-19 Countermeasures: The Role of Pronominalization, Moral Foundations, Moral Disengagement, Fake News Embracing, and Health Anxiety

Abstract

An online survey (N = 210) is presented on how the perceived utility of correct and exaggerated countermeasures against Covid-19 is affected by different pronominalization strategies (impersonal form, you, we). In evaluating the pronominalization effect, we have statistically controlled for the roles of several personal characteristics: Moral Disengagement, Moral Foundations, Health Anxiety, and Embracing of Fake News. Results indicate that, net of personal proclivities, the you form decreases the perceived utility of exaggerated countermeasures, possibly due to simulation processes. As a second point, through a Structural Equation Model, we show that binding moral values (Authority, Ingroup, and Purity) positively predict both fake news embracing and perceived utility of exaggerated countermeasures, while individualizing moral values (Harm and Fairness) negatively predict fake news embracing and positively predict the perceived utility of correct countermeasures. Lastly, fake news embracing showed a doubly bad effect: not only does it lead people to judge exaggerated countermeasures as more useful; but, more dangerously, it brings them to consider correct countermeasures as less useful in the struggle against the pandemic.

Exploring the Relationship between COVID-19 Vaccine Refusal and Belief in Fake News and Conspiracy Theories: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study in Italy

“…Specifically, the infodemic can worsen the impact of the pandemic by hindering the search for reliable sources, making people feel overwhelmed and influencing the decision-making process [ 12 , 13 ]. Although this field of research is continuously evolving [ 13 ], some studies started to deepen this topic, suggesting that infodemic, disinformation and conspiracy theories may impact individuals’ health, not only fueling fears [ 14 ] among a mentally worn out population [ 15 , 16 ], but also making people believe that preventive measures are not useful [ 17 ] and leading to low adherence to measures implemented to limit COVID-19 transmission [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Concurrently, some authors have proposed theoretical frameworks to explain the impact of fake news and conspiracy theories on vaccine hesitancy [ 22 , 23 ].…”

What is important for you makes you think about the pandemic differently: moral foundations, pandemic-related fears and convictions ( Lo que cada uno consideramos importante nos hace reflexionar sobre la pandemia de forma distinta: fundamentos morales, temores y convicciones sobre la pandemia )

“…Moreover, with disgust and fear as the Binding values-related emotions (Graham et al, 2009) and a genuine pathogen being the source of the threat, the pandemic could have been a severe trigger of discomfort in people endorsing Binding (compared to Individualizing). This notion is supported by a study regarding the endorsement of exaggerated COVID-19 countermeasures by people of Binding morality compared to Individualizing (Ansani et al, 2021).…”

“…Relying on concerns about the ingroup and its purity, they may endorse conspiracy theories more than people of Individualizing values to have a sense of affiliation to the 'right', elitist group (Calvillo et al, 2021). This idea was supported by the available COVID-19-related studies, which suggest that people of Binding morality embrace fake news (Ansani et al, 2021) and conspiracy theories (Leone et al, 2018) more than people of Individualizing morality. The same was found for people of conservative political orientation (Pivetti et al, 2021), which is related to the Binding morality (Graham et al, 2009).…”

Is Health Misinformation Harmful? A Systematic Review of the Psychological and Behavioral Impact of Beliefs in and Exposure to Health Misinformation

“…Six studies used peer-reviewed scientific research to verify misinformation (Carrico et al, 2013;Hornik et al, 2021;Loomba et al, 2021, study 1 and 2; Neely et al, 2021;Tan et al, 2015). Other sources for verifying misinformation included governments (e.g., Italian Health Ministry, see Ansani et al, 2021), research centers (e.g., Annenberg Public Policy Center, see Lyons et al, 2019), mainstream and alternative websites , and databases (e.g., Poynter's International Fact-Checking Network, see Hornik et al, 2021). Five studies cited multiple sources (Hornik et al, 2021;Loomba et al, 2021, study 1 and 2; Neely et al, 2021;Tan et al, 2015).…”

“…Attitudes toward Health Behaviors. Three studies assessed attitudes toward health behaviors as the outcome, suggesting that beliefs in health misinformation were associated with less favorable attitudes toward healthy behaviors (e.g., recommended countermeasures against COVID-19, Ansani et al, 2021;HIV medication, Gillman et al, 2013) and more positive attitudes toward unhealthy behaviors (e.g., non-recommended countermeasures against COVID-19, Ansani et al, 2021).…”