When views about alternative medicine, nature and god come in the way of people's vaccination intentions

IF 2.8 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL European Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-02-25 DOI:10.1002/ejsp.3047
Pascaline Van Oost, Mathias Schmitz, Olivier Klein, Marie Brisbois, Olivier Luminet, Sofie Morbée, Eveline Raemdonck, Omer Van den Bergh, Maarten Vansteenkiste, Joachim Waterschoot, Vincent Yzerbyt
{"title":"When views about alternative medicine, nature and god come in the way of people's vaccination intentions","authors":"Pascaline Van Oost,&nbsp;Mathias Schmitz,&nbsp;Olivier Klein,&nbsp;Marie Brisbois,&nbsp;Olivier Luminet,&nbsp;Sofie Morbée,&nbsp;Eveline Raemdonck,&nbsp;Omer Van den Bergh,&nbsp;Maarten Vansteenkiste,&nbsp;Joachim Waterschoot,&nbsp;Vincent Yzerbyt","doi":"10.1002/ejsp.3047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In spite of the safety and efficiency of the COVID-19 vaccines and the many promotion efforts of political and expert authorities, a fair portion of the population remained hesitant if not opposed to vaccination. Public debate and the available literature point to the possible role of people's attitudes towards medical institutions as well as their preference for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) on their motivations and intentions to be vaccinated. Other potential ideological factors are beliefs about environmental laissez-faire and divine providence insofar as they encourage people to let the pandemic unfold without human interference. In three cross-sectional samples (total <i>N</i> = 8214), collected at successive moments during the Belgian vaccination campaign, the present research examines the distal role of these psychological and ideological factors on vaccination intentions via motivational processes. Study 1 gauges the relation between trust in medical institutions and preference for CAM on intentions to get vaccinated via motivations. Study 2 examined the role of beliefs in the desirability of letting nature take its course (‘environmental laissez-faire beliefs’) on vaccination intention via motivations. Study 3 tests whether people's adherence to environmental laissez-faire and beliefs about divine providence are linked to their motivations for vaccination via trust in the medical institutions and CAM. Results show that adherence to CAM has a deleterious effect on vaccination intentions, whereas trust in medical institutions has a positive effect. Both ideological factors pertaining to external control are only moderately related, with environmental laissez-faire beliefs having stronger effects on CAM, medical trust and vaccination motivations. We discuss the importance of this set of results in light of the growing interest in CAM and the increasing presence of messages appealing to the environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48377,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.3047","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In spite of the safety and efficiency of the COVID-19 vaccines and the many promotion efforts of political and expert authorities, a fair portion of the population remained hesitant if not opposed to vaccination. Public debate and the available literature point to the possible role of people's attitudes towards medical institutions as well as their preference for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) on their motivations and intentions to be vaccinated. Other potential ideological factors are beliefs about environmental laissez-faire and divine providence insofar as they encourage people to let the pandemic unfold without human interference. In three cross-sectional samples (total N = 8214), collected at successive moments during the Belgian vaccination campaign, the present research examines the distal role of these psychological and ideological factors on vaccination intentions via motivational processes. Study 1 gauges the relation between trust in medical institutions and preference for CAM on intentions to get vaccinated via motivations. Study 2 examined the role of beliefs in the desirability of letting nature take its course (‘environmental laissez-faire beliefs’) on vaccination intention via motivations. Study 3 tests whether people's adherence to environmental laissez-faire and beliefs about divine providence are linked to their motivations for vaccination via trust in the medical institutions and CAM. Results show that adherence to CAM has a deleterious effect on vaccination intentions, whereas trust in medical institutions has a positive effect. Both ideological factors pertaining to external control are only moderately related, with environmental laissez-faire beliefs having stronger effects on CAM, medical trust and vaccination motivations. We discuss the importance of this set of results in light of the growing interest in CAM and the increasing presence of messages appealing to the environment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当有关替代医学、自然和上帝的观点阻碍了人们的疫苗接种意愿时
尽管 COVID-19 疫苗安全有效,政治和专家当局也做了许多宣传工作,但仍有相当一部分人对接种疫苗犹豫不决,甚至持反对态度。公众辩论和现有文献表明,人们对医疗机构的态度以及对补充和替代医学(CAM)的偏好可能会影响他们接种疫苗的动机和意向。其他潜在的意识形态因素还包括对环境自由放任和上天旨意的信仰,因为这些信仰鼓励人们在没有人类干预的情况下任由大流行病发展。本研究在比利时疫苗接种活动期间连续收集了三个横截面样本(总人数 = 8214),通过动机过程研究了这些心理和意识形态因素对疫苗接种意愿的远端作用。研究 1 通过动机来衡量对医疗机构的信任和对 CAM 的偏好与接种疫苗意愿之间的关系。研究 2 通过动机考察了顺其自然的信念("环境自由放任信念")对疫苗接种意向的影响。研究 3 通过对医疗机构和 CAM 的信任,检验了人们对环境自由放任的坚持和对天意的信仰是否与他们的疫苗接种动机有关。结果显示,信奉 CAM 对疫苗接种意愿有负面影响,而对医疗机构的信任则有正面影响。与外部控制有关的两个意识形态因素仅有适度的相关性,而环境自由放任信念对CAM、医疗信任和疫苗接种动机的影响更大。鉴于人们对 CAM 的兴趣与日俱增,以及呼吁环境的信息越来越多,我们讨论了这组结果的重要性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: Topics covered include, among others, intergroup relations, group processes, social cognition, attitudes, social influence and persuasion, self and identity, verbal and nonverbal communication, language and thought, affect and emotion, embodied and situated cognition and individual differences of social-psychological relevance. Together with original research articles, the European Journal of Social Psychology"s innovative and inclusive style is reflected in the variety of articles published: Research Article: Original articles that provide a significant contribution to the understanding of social phenomena, up to a maximum of 12,000 words in length.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information ‘(N)One of us but all of them!’ Ingroup favouritism on individual and group levels in the context of deviant behaviour Never again: Lessons of genocide in survivor testimonies from the Holocaust, Nanjing massacre and Rwandan genocide Age of the examiner and older people's memory performances: A test of the stereotype threat theory using variations on negative age stereotypes across 18 European countries Do women only apply when they are 100% qualified, whereas men already apply when they are 60% qualified?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1