Apolitical Values &amp;amp; Compliance with Government-Recommended Prosocial Health Behavior

Motta, Matthew; Goren, Paul

doi:10.31235/osf.io/hxjk5

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A previous study encouraging influenza vaccination found that individuals exposed to pro-social messages-in the form of describing potential flu victims who could have serious adverse effects if others do not vaccinate-were more likely to intend to vaccinate; , including those who had previously refused to vaccinate (Li et al, 2016). Similarly, those who are more self-transcendent (more likely to put others' needs before their own) are more likely to engage in social distancing measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 (Motta and Goren, 2020; see also; Van der Linden et al, 2020).…”

Section: Overcoming Vaccine Hesitancy Through Effective Health Communication How Personal Economic and Collective Health Risk Frames Coulmentioning

confidence: 99%

Encouraging COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Through Effective Health Communication

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic will require most Americans to vaccinate against the virus. Unfortunately, previous research suggests that many Americans plan to refuse a vaccine; thereby jeopardizing collective immunity. We investigate the effectiveness of three different health communication frames hypothesized to increase vaccine intention; emphasizing either 1) personal health risks, 2) economic costs, or 3) collective public health consequences of not vaccinating.Methods: In a large (N = 7,064) and demographically representative survey experiment, we randomly assigned respondents to read pro-vaccine communication materials featuring one of the frames listed above. We also randomly varied the message source (ordinary people vs. medical experts) and availability of information designed the “pre-bunk” potential misinformation about expedited clinical trial safety.Findings: We find that messages emphasizing the personal health risks and collective health consequences of not vaccinating significantly increase Americans’ intentions to vaccinate. These effects are similar in magnitude irrespective of message source, and the inclusion of pre-bunking information. Surprisingly, economic cost frames have no discernible effect on vaccine intention. Additionally, despite sharp partisan polarization in public vaccination intentions, we find that these effects are no different for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike.Conclusion: Health communicators hoping to encourage vaccination may be effective by appealing to the use personal and collective health risks of not vaccinating.

show abstract

Section: Overcoming Vaccine Hesitancy Through Effective Health Communication How Personal Economic and Collective Health Risk Frames Coulmentioning

confidence: 99%

Encouraging COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Through Effective Health Communication

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A previous study encouraging influenza vaccination found that individuals exposed to pro-social messages-in the form of describing potential flu victims who could have serious adverse effects if others do not vaccinate-were more likely to intend to vaccinate; , including those w h oh a dp r e v i o u s l yr e f u s e dt ov a c c i n a t e ( Li et al, 2016). Similarly, t h o s ew h oa r em o r es e l f -t r a n s c e n d e n t( m o r el i k e l yt op u to t h e r s ' needs before their own) are more likely to engage in social distancing measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 (Motta and Goren, 2020;s e ea l s o ;Van der Linden et al, 2020).…”

Section: Overcoming Vaccine Hesitancy Through Effective Health Commun...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Political Misinformation in the Digital Age During a Pandemic: Partisanship, Propaganda, and Democratic Decision-Making

2022

Frontiers Research Topics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frontiers is more than just an open-access publisher of scholarly articles: it is a pioneering approach to the world of academia, radically improving the way scholarly research is managed. The grand vision of Frontiers is a world where all people have an equal opportunity to seek, share and generate knowledge. Frontiers provides immediate and permanent online open access to all its publications, but this alone is not enough to realize our grand goals. Frontiers Journal SeriesThe Frontiers Journal Series is a multi-tier and interdisciplinary set of open-access, online journals, promising a paradigm shift from the current review, selection and dissemination processes in academic publishing. All Frontiers journals are driven by researchers for researchers; therefore, they constitute a service to the scholarly community. At the same time, the Frontiers Journal Series operates on a revolutionary invention, the tiered publishing system, initially addressing specific communities of scholars, and gradually climbing up to broader public understanding, thus serving the interests of the lay society, too. Dedication to QualityEach Frontiers article is a landmark of the highest quality, thanks to genuinely collaborative interactions between authors and review editors, who include some of the world's best academicians. Research must be certified by peers before entering a stream of knowledge that may eventually reach the public -and shape society; therefore, Frontiers only applies the most rigorous and unbiased reviews. Frontiers revolutionizes research publishing by freely delivering the most outstanding research, evaluated with no bias from both the academic and social point of view. By applying the most advanced information technologies, Frontiers is catapulting scholarly publishing into a new generation.

show abstract

Happily Distant or Bitter Medicine? The Impact of Social Distancing Preferences, Behavior, and Emotional Costs on Subjective Wellbeing During the Epidemic

Kelley

Evans

Kelley³

2023

Applied Research Quality Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To inhibit the spread of COVID-19 Public health officials stress, and governments often require, restrictions on social interaction ("social distancing"). While the medical benefits are clear, important questions remain about these measures' downsides: How bitter is this medicine? Ten large non-probability internet-based surveys between April and November 2020, weighted statistically to reflect the US population in age, education, and religious background and excluding respondents who even occasionally role-played rather than giving their own true views; N = 6,223. Pre-epidemic data from 2017–2019, N = 4,032. Reliable multiple-item scales including subjective wellbeing (2 European Quality of Life Survey items, Cronbach's alpha = .85); distancing attitudes (5 items, alpha = .87); distancing behavior e.g., standing 6' apart in public (5 items, alpha = .80); emotional cost of distancing and restrictions on social interaction (8–12 items, alpha = .94); and an extensive suite of controls (19 variables). Descriptive statistics, OLS regression, structural equation models. Subjective wellbeing is greater for those who approve of distancing, for those who practice distancing, and particularly for those whose distancing attitudes and behavior are congruent, either both in favor or both opposed (multiplicative interaction). The emotional cost of distancing is strongly tied to wellbeing and is heterogeneous, with some disliking distancing much more than others. An SEM model suggests causality: that emotional costs strongly reduce wellbeing but not vice-versa. During the epidemic, COVID issues constitute two of the top 5 influences on wellbeing, behind only subjective health and religious belief and tied with income. All this is net of family background, religious origins, age, ethnicity, race, gender, rural residence, education, occupational status, marriage, unemployment, income, health, religion, and political party. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11482-023-10149-0.

show abstract

Apolitical Values & Compliance with Government-Recommended Prosocial Health Behavior

Cited by 3 publications

References 10 publications

Encouraging COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Through Effective Health Communication

Encouraging COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Through Effective Health Communication

Political Misinformation in the Digital Age During a Pandemic: Partisanship, Propaganda, and Democratic Decision-Making

Happily Distant or Bitter Medicine? The Impact of Social Distancing Preferences, Behavior, and Emotional Costs on Subjective Wellbeing During the Epidemic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About