Debunking Misinformation and Communicating Critical Events in Vaccine Trials

Paula Memenga, S. Eitze, P. Shamsrizi, M. Addo, C. Betsch
{"title":"Debunking Misinformation and Communicating Critical Events in Vaccine Trials","authors":"Paula Memenga, S. Eitze, P. Shamsrizi, M. Addo, C. Betsch","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2022.204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Misinformation and media reports about critical events in vaccine trials challenge public confidence in Covid-19 vaccine safety. Three online experiments using 2×2 between-subjects designs examined the impact of vaccine type, misinformation debunking, and critical events during vaccine trials. In Experiment 1, N = 984 participants received information about different vaccines and misinformation was debunked. In Experiment 2, N = 1,018 participants were informed about different vaccines and trial discontinuation. In Experiment 3, N = 1,006 participants received information about discontinuation and questionable research practices of a manufacturer. The main dependent variables were confidence in vaccine safety, vaccination intention, and willingness to participate in a vaccine trial. Debunking increased vaccination intention and confidence (both η2p = .01) which was partly higher for classical than for new vaccines (η2p  = .01). Information about discontinuation had no effect, but having heard about it before had benefits. Information about questionable research practices decreased confidence ( η2p = .01) and vaccination intention ( η2p = .02) regarding the target vaccine but did not affect other vaccines. Confidence (β = .47) was most strongly associated with willingness to participate in vaccine trials. Critical events in vaccine trials should be communicated transparently to increase confidence, trial participation, and vaccination intentions.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2022.204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Misinformation and media reports about critical events in vaccine trials challenge public confidence in Covid-19 vaccine safety. Three online experiments using 2×2 between-subjects designs examined the impact of vaccine type, misinformation debunking, and critical events during vaccine trials. In Experiment 1, N = 984 participants received information about different vaccines and misinformation was debunked. In Experiment 2, N = 1,018 participants were informed about different vaccines and trial discontinuation. In Experiment 3, N = 1,006 participants received information about discontinuation and questionable research practices of a manufacturer. The main dependent variables were confidence in vaccine safety, vaccination intention, and willingness to participate in a vaccine trial. Debunking increased vaccination intention and confidence (both η2p = .01) which was partly higher for classical than for new vaccines (η2p  = .01). Information about discontinuation had no effect, but having heard about it before had benefits. Information about questionable research practices decreased confidence ( η2p = .01) and vaccination intention ( η2p = .02) regarding the target vaccine but did not affect other vaccines. Confidence (β = .47) was most strongly associated with willingness to participate in vaccine trials. Critical events in vaccine trials should be communicated transparently to increase confidence, trial participation, and vaccination intentions.
揭穿疫苗试验中的错误信息并传达关键事件
关于疫苗试验关键事件的错误信息和媒体报道挑战了公众对Covid-19疫苗安全性的信心。三个使用2×2受试者间设计的在线实验检查了疫苗类型、错误信息的揭穿和疫苗试验期间的关键事件的影响。在实验1中,N = 984名参与者收到了关于不同疫苗的信息,并揭穿了错误信息。在实验2中,N = 1,018名参与者被告知不同的疫苗和试验中止。在实验3中,N = 1,006名参与者收到了关于制造商停产和可疑研究实践的信息。主要的因变量是对疫苗安全性的信心、接种意愿和参与疫苗试验的意愿。揭穿真相增加了疫苗接种意愿和信心(两者的η2p = 0.01),其中经典疫苗的接种意愿和信心部分高于新疫苗(η2p = 0.01)。关于停药的信息没有影响,但之前听说过会有好处。关于可疑研究实践的信息降低了对目标疫苗的信心(η2p = 0.01)和接种意图(η2p = 0.02),但对其他疫苗没有影响。信心(β = 0.47)与参与疫苗试验的意愿密切相关。疫苗试验中的关键事件应透明地进行沟通,以增加信心、试验参与和疫苗接种意愿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信