揭穿疫苗试验中的错误信息并传达关键事件

Paula Memenga, S. Eitze, P. Shamsrizi, M. Addo, C. Betsch
{"title":"揭穿疫苗试验中的错误信息并传达关键事件","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

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。
Debunking Misinformation and Communicating Critical Events in Vaccine Trials
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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