Conspiracy Thinking, Conspiracy Beliefs, Denialism, Motivation, and COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions in Costa Rica.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Health Communication Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1080/10410236.2024.2428868
Benjamín Reyes Fernández
{"title":"Conspiracy Thinking, Conspiracy Beliefs, Denialism, Motivation, and COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions in Costa Rica.","authors":"Benjamín Reyes Fernández","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2024.2428868","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>An observational cross-sectional study was conducted among inhabitants of Costa Rica to examine motivational determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intentions (CVI), as well as to better understand the role of a set of conspiracy-related variables within the framework of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Data were collected online, and a subsample of those not yet vaccinated (<i>N</i> = 406, age = 44.35, <i>S. D</i>. = 13.23, 74.9% women) was selected. They reported TPB-variables, risk perception, conspiracy-related variables, and sociodemographic information. Structural equation was used to model the assumption that conspiracy beliefs presented direct and indirect effects on intentions. Conspiracy thinking, denialism, and sociodemographic information were also specified as determinants of conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions. Most determinants presented direct effects on intentions. Only perceived behavioral control, denialism, and conspiracy thinking presented no direct effects on intentions. Conspiracy beliefs had indirect effects on intentions via most TPB-variables and risk perception. Conspiracy beliefs were predicted only by conspiracy thinking, gender (male), and education. Sociodemographic variables had no effects on intentions. Evidence suggested that a mechanism integrating conspiracy-related variables, risk perception, and TPB-variables predicted CVI. Education and gender played a role in the onset of conspiracy beliefs and thereafter vaccination intentions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2428868","RegionNum":3,"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

An observational cross-sectional study was conducted among inhabitants of Costa Rica to examine motivational determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intentions (CVI), as well as to better understand the role of a set of conspiracy-related variables within the framework of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Data were collected online, and a subsample of those not yet vaccinated (N = 406, age = 44.35, S. D. = 13.23, 74.9% women) was selected. They reported TPB-variables, risk perception, conspiracy-related variables, and sociodemographic information. Structural equation was used to model the assumption that conspiracy beliefs presented direct and indirect effects on intentions. Conspiracy thinking, denialism, and sociodemographic information were also specified as determinants of conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions. Most determinants presented direct effects on intentions. Only perceived behavioral control, denialism, and conspiracy thinking presented no direct effects on intentions. Conspiracy beliefs had indirect effects on intentions via most TPB-variables and risk perception. Conspiracy beliefs were predicted only by conspiracy thinking, gender (male), and education. Sociodemographic variables had no effects on intentions. Evidence suggested that a mechanism integrating conspiracy-related variables, risk perception, and TPB-variables predicted CVI. Education and gender played a role in the onset of conspiracy beliefs and thereafter vaccination intentions.

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
哥斯达黎加的阴谋论思维、阴谋论信念、否认主义、动机和 COVID-19 疫苗接种意向。
我们在哥斯达黎加居民中开展了一项观察性横断面研究,以考察 COVID-19 疫苗接种意愿(CVI)的动机决定因素,并在计划行为理论(TPB)框架内更好地理解一系列与阴谋相关的变量的作用。数据通过网络收集,并选取了尚未接种疫苗的人群作为子样本(样本数 = 406,年龄 = 44.35,S. D. = 13.23,74.9% 为女性)。他们报告了 TPB 变量、风险认知、阴谋相关变量和社会人口信息。使用结构方程建立模型,假设阴谋信念对意向产生直接和间接影响。阴谋论思想、否认主义和社会人口信息也被指定为阴谋论信念和疫苗接种意向的决定因素。大多数决定因素都对意向产生了直接影响。只有行为控制感知、否认主义和阴谋论思想对意向没有直接影响。阴谋信念通过大多数 TPB 变量和风险认知对意向产生间接影响。只有阴谋论思维、性别(男性)和教育程度能预测阴谋论信念。社会人口变量对意向没有影响。有证据表明,阴谋相关变量、风险认知和 TPB 变量的综合机制可以预测 CVI。教育和性别对阴谋论信念的产生以及随后的疫苗接种意向都有影响。
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
8.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.
期刊最新文献
Advancing the Integrative Theory of Communication Work: Developing and Validating a Measure of Communication Work Among U.S. Adults with Chronic Illnesses. The Impact of Healthcare Digitalization on Communication with Healthcare Providers: The Case of People Who are Hard of Hearing. Disclosing Sexual Dysfunction in Newly Established Romantic Relationships: An Experimental Test of Five Strategies from the Revelation Risk Model. Conspiracy Thinking, Conspiracy Beliefs, Denialism, Motivation, and COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions in Costa Rica. Cognitive Fatigue, Humor, and Physical Activity: A Field Experiment Testing Whether Humorous Messages Promote Walking in Cognitively Fatigued Individuals.
×
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