金钱,效能,还是同理心?激励人们接种疫苗策略的比较研究。

IF 1.7 Q2 Social Sciences
Lap-Yan Lo, Yat-Yi Tam, Cheuk-Ying Sin, Wang-On Li
{"title":"金钱,效能,还是同理心?激励人们接种疫苗策略的比较研究。","authors":"Lap-Yan Lo, Yat-Yi Tam, Cheuk-Ying Sin, Wang-On Li","doi":"10.1080/17538068.2025.2526220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Extended Parallel Process Model, behavioral model, and empathetic approach proposed different theoretical assumptions in explaining why people take vaccines. Yet no single reviewed empirical study tried to compare their theoretical effectiveness in motivating people to join the vaccination campaign. This study therefore tried to fill this gap via examining the persuasiveness of different promotion materials to the participants in a hypothetical vaccination campaign, while controlling a number of personal factors and writing styles of the materials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 216 adult participants were recruited for this questionnaire-based study. All participants were firstly introduced to a hypothetical scenario and then randomly assigned into 4 different groups. They were asked to read corresponding promotion materials before deciding their likeness to receive a vaccination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All promotion materials were effective in enhancing the likeliness of taking the vaccination, compared with the control condition. After controlling participants' age, their vaccination records, and health efficacy, participants were more likely to join the vaccination campaign after reading the promotion materials related with efficacies and caring for others, than reading the materials about positive reinforcements, regardless of the writing styles.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These exploratory findings provide empirical evidence in further understanding the ways of delivering the important messages in public communication. The current research suggests that the feasibility of the effective resources and empathetic gestures to the needy should be prominently emphasized in the promotion of vaccination campaigns, whereas participants might feel a diminution of their prosocial behaviors when money rewards were associated. Limitation of the research design is also discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":38052,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Money, efficacy, or empathy? A comparative study on strategies to motivate people to get vaccinated.\",\"authors\":\"Lap-Yan Lo, Yat-Yi Tam, Cheuk-Ying Sin, Wang-On Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17538068.2025.2526220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Extended Parallel Process Model, behavioral model, and empathetic approach proposed different theoretical assumptions in explaining why people take vaccines. Yet no single reviewed empirical study tried to compare their theoretical effectiveness in motivating people to join the vaccination campaign. This study therefore tried to fill this gap via examining the persuasiveness of different promotion materials to the participants in a hypothetical vaccination campaign, while controlling a number of personal factors and writing styles of the materials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 216 adult participants were recruited for this questionnaire-based study. All participants were firstly introduced to a hypothetical scenario and then randomly assigned into 4 different groups. They were asked to read corresponding promotion materials before deciding their likeness to receive a vaccination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All promotion materials were effective in enhancing the likeliness of taking the vaccination, compared with the control condition. After controlling participants' age, their vaccination records, and health efficacy, participants were more likely to join the vaccination campaign after reading the promotion materials related with efficacies and caring for others, than reading the materials about positive reinforcements, regardless of the writing styles.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These exploratory findings provide empirical evidence in further understanding the ways of delivering the important messages in public communication. The current research suggests that the feasibility of the effective resources and empathetic gestures to the needy should be prominently emphasized in the promotion of vaccination campaigns, whereas participants might feel a diminution of their prosocial behaviors when money rewards were associated. Limitation of the research design is also discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Communication in Healthcare\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Communication in Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2025.2526220\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2025.2526220","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:扩展平行过程模型、行为模型和共情方法在解释人们为什么接种疫苗方面提出了不同的理论假设。然而,没有一项经过审查的实证研究试图比较它们在激励人们加入疫苗接种运动方面的理论有效性。因此,本研究试图通过在假设的疫苗接种活动中检查不同宣传材料对参与者的说服力来填补这一空白,同时控制一些个人因素和材料的写作风格。方法:共招募216名成人受试者进行问卷调查。所有的参与者首先被介绍到一个假设的场景中,然后被随机分为4个不同的组。在决定是否接种疫苗之前,他们被要求阅读相应的宣传材料。结果:与对照组相比,各项宣传材料均能有效提高儿童接种疫苗的可能性。在控制了参与者的年龄、疫苗接种记录和健康功效后,无论写作风格如何,参与者在阅读了与功效和关爱他人相关的宣传材料后,都比阅读了有关积极强化的材料后更有可能加入疫苗接种运动。结论:这些探索性发现为进一步理解公共传播中重要信息的传递方式提供了经验证据。目前的研究表明,有效资源的可行性和对有需要的人的同情姿态应该在促进疫苗接种运动中得到突出的强调,而当金钱奖励相关时,参与者可能会感到他们的亲社会行为减少。本文还讨论了研究设计的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Money, efficacy, or empathy? A comparative study on strategies to motivate people to get vaccinated.

Background: Extended Parallel Process Model, behavioral model, and empathetic approach proposed different theoretical assumptions in explaining why people take vaccines. Yet no single reviewed empirical study tried to compare their theoretical effectiveness in motivating people to join the vaccination campaign. This study therefore tried to fill this gap via examining the persuasiveness of different promotion materials to the participants in a hypothetical vaccination campaign, while controlling a number of personal factors and writing styles of the materials.

Methods: A total of 216 adult participants were recruited for this questionnaire-based study. All participants were firstly introduced to a hypothetical scenario and then randomly assigned into 4 different groups. They were asked to read corresponding promotion materials before deciding their likeness to receive a vaccination.

Results: All promotion materials were effective in enhancing the likeliness of taking the vaccination, compared with the control condition. After controlling participants' age, their vaccination records, and health efficacy, participants were more likely to join the vaccination campaign after reading the promotion materials related with efficacies and caring for others, than reading the materials about positive reinforcements, regardless of the writing styles.

Conclusion: These exploratory findings provide empirical evidence in further understanding the ways of delivering the important messages in public communication. The current research suggests that the feasibility of the effective resources and empathetic gestures to the needy should be prominently emphasized in the promotion of vaccination campaigns, whereas participants might feel a diminution of their prosocial behaviors when money rewards were associated. Limitation of the research design is also discussed.

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
Journal of Communication in Healthcare
Journal of Communication in Healthcare Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信