Should Communication Campaigns Promoting Vaccination Address Misinformation Beliefs? Implications from a Nationally Representative Longitudinal Survey Study among U.S. Adults.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Journal of Health Communication Pub Date : 2024-04-02 DOI:10.1080/10810730.2024.2331488
Danielle Clark, Ava Kikut-Stein, Emma Jesch, R. Hornik
{"title":"Should Communication Campaigns Promoting Vaccination Address Misinformation Beliefs? Implications from a Nationally Representative Longitudinal Survey Study among U.S. Adults.","authors":"Danielle Clark, Ava Kikut-Stein, Emma Jesch, R. Hornik","doi":"10.1080/10810730.2024.2331488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Public health communication campaign planners must carefully consider whether misinformation beliefs are important to target and, ideally, correct. Guided by the reasoned action approach, we hypothesized that behavior-specific beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination would account for any observed relationship between general coronavirus misinformation beliefs (misinformation beliefs that are not specific to the anticipated consequences of COVID-19 vaccination) and subsequent vaccine uptake. To test our hypothesis, we used panel data from a two-wave nationally representative sample of U.S. adults pre- and post-vaccine availability (T1: July 2020, T2: April/June 2021, analytic sample: n = 665). Contrary to our hypothesis, we find a residual observed relationship between general coronavirus misinformation beliefs and subsequent vaccine uptake (AOR = 0.40, SE = 0.10). Intriguingly, our post-hoc analyses do show that after also adjusting for T2 behavioral beliefs, this association was no longer significant. With this and other justifications, we recommend that messages promoting vaccination prioritize targeting relevant behavioral beliefs.","PeriodicalId":16026,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2024.2331488","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public health communication campaign planners must carefully consider whether misinformation beliefs are important to target and, ideally, correct. Guided by the reasoned action approach, we hypothesized that behavior-specific beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination would account for any observed relationship between general coronavirus misinformation beliefs (misinformation beliefs that are not specific to the anticipated consequences of COVID-19 vaccination) and subsequent vaccine uptake. To test our hypothesis, we used panel data from a two-wave nationally representative sample of U.S. adults pre- and post-vaccine availability (T1: July 2020, T2: April/June 2021, analytic sample: n = 665). Contrary to our hypothesis, we find a residual observed relationship between general coronavirus misinformation beliefs and subsequent vaccine uptake (AOR = 0.40, SE = 0.10). Intriguingly, our post-hoc analyses do show that after also adjusting for T2 behavioral beliefs, this association was no longer significant. With this and other justifications, we recommend that messages promoting vaccination prioritize targeting relevant behavioral beliefs.
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
促进疫苗接种的宣传活动是否应消除错误信息信念?一项具有全国代表性的美国成年人纵向调查研究的启示》。
公共卫生传播活动的策划者必须仔细考虑错误信息信念是否是重要的目标,并在理想情况下予以纠正。在合理行动方法的指导下,我们假设有关 COVID-19 疫苗接种的特定行为信念将解释所观察到的一般冠状病毒错误信息信念(非针对 COVID-19 疫苗接种预期后果的错误信息信念)与后续疫苗接种率之间的关系。为了验证我们的假设,我们使用了疫苗接种前后两波具有全国代表性的美国成年人样本的面板数据(T1:2020 年 7 月,T2:2021 年 4 月/6 月,分析样本:n = 665)。与我们的假设相反,我们发现一般冠状病毒错误信息信念与后续疫苗接种之间存在残差观察关系(AOR = 0.40,SE = 0.10)。耐人寻味的是,我们的事后分析表明,在对 T2 行为信念进行调整后,这种关系不再显著。有鉴于此和其他原因,我们建议在宣传疫苗接种时优先考虑相关的行为信念。
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
5.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Communication: International Perspectives is the leading journal covering the full breadth of a field that focuses on the communication of health information globally. Articles feature research on: • Developments in the field of health communication; • New media, m-health and interactive health communication; • Health Literacy; • Social marketing; • Global Health; • Shared decision making and ethics; • Interpersonal and mass media communication; • Advances in health diplomacy, psychology, government, policy and education; • Government, civil society and multi-stakeholder initiatives; • Public Private partnerships and • Public Health campaigns. Global in scope, the journal seeks to advance a synergistic relationship between research and practical information. With a focus on promoting the health literacy of the individual, caregiver, provider, community, and those in the health policy, the journal presents research, progress in areas of technology and public health, ethics, politics and policy, and the application of health communication principles. The journal is selective with the highest quality social scientific research including qualitative and quantitative studies.
期刊最新文献
Correction. Intersectionality in Health Communication: How Health Communication Influences the Association Between Intersectional Discrimination and Health Information Seeking. "It's Your Body and Your Life:" Formative Audience Research to Develop a Sexual Health Campaign with Youth of Color. Narrative or Facts: Two Paths to Vaccine Advocacy. Testing the Feasibility, User Experiences, and Preliminary Effect of Conversation Cards for Adolescents© For Behavior Change and Collaborative Goal Setting in Primary Care: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
×
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