COVID-19 and a biased public mentality toward infection and vaccination: A case of unrealistic optimism and social comparisons between the vaccinated and unvaccinated

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/18344909221122573
Wojciech Kulesza, D. Doliński, Paweł Muniak, T. Grzyb, A. Rizulla
{"title":"COVID-19 and a biased public mentality toward infection and vaccination: A case of unrealistic optimism and social comparisons between the vaccinated and unvaccinated","authors":"Wojciech Kulesza, D. Doliński, Paweł Muniak, T. Grzyb, A. Rizulla","doi":"10.1177/18344909221122573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unrealistic Optimism in the context of COVID-19 is described as the tendency to perceive peers as being more at risk of infection. To date, however, no research has proposed more specific comparisons. The present article not only replicates the most recent body of literature showing that people perceive themselves as less prone to COVID-19 infection than their peers, but fills the aforementioned gap by providing additional and more specific comparisons between those vaccinated and unvaccinated against COVID-19. Such comparisons may be crucial to curb the possibility of resurgence of COVID-19 by assessing how unvaccinated individuals perceive the probability of being infected by coronavirus. Some 622 Prolific—(un)vaccinated against COVID-19—users participated in an online quasi-experiment. Participants estimated the risk of COVID-19 infection for themselves, their peers or the average (un)vaccinated peer, which is a new addition to the literature. Results showed that there was an unrealistic optimism effect. Participants estimated their risk for infection as lower in comparison to others. Surprisingly, results showed that for unvaccinated people, vaccines seem to be an effective tool to reduce the risk of infection, but not for themselves.","PeriodicalId":45049,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18344909221122573","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Unrealistic Optimism in the context of COVID-19 is described as the tendency to perceive peers as being more at risk of infection. To date, however, no research has proposed more specific comparisons. The present article not only replicates the most recent body of literature showing that people perceive themselves as less prone to COVID-19 infection than their peers, but fills the aforementioned gap by providing additional and more specific comparisons between those vaccinated and unvaccinated against COVID-19. Such comparisons may be crucial to curb the possibility of resurgence of COVID-19 by assessing how unvaccinated individuals perceive the probability of being infected by coronavirus. Some 622 Prolific—(un)vaccinated against COVID-19—users participated in an online quasi-experiment. Participants estimated the risk of COVID-19 infection for themselves, their peers or the average (un)vaccinated peer, which is a new addition to the literature. Results showed that there was an unrealistic optimism effect. Participants estimated their risk for infection as lower in comparison to others. Surprisingly, results showed that for unvaccinated people, vaccines seem to be an effective tool to reduce the risk of infection, but not for themselves.
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
COVID-19和对感染和疫苗接种有偏见的公众心态:不切实际的乐观主义和接种疫苗和未接种疫苗之间的社会比较
在2019冠状病毒病背景下,不切实际的乐观主义被描述为认为同龄人更有感染风险的倾向。然而,到目前为止,还没有研究提出更具体的比较。本文不仅复制了最新的文献,表明人们认为自己比同龄人更不容易感染COVID-19,而且通过在接种COVID-19疫苗和未接种疫苗的人之间提供额外和更具体的比较,填补了上述空白。通过评估未接种疫苗的人如何看待被冠状病毒感染的可能性,这种比较对于遏制COVID-19卷土重来的可能性至关重要。622名多产(未接种)用户参加了在线准实验。参与者估计了自己、同龄人或平均(未)接种疫苗的同龄人感染COVID-19的风险,这是文献的新补充。结果表明,存在不切实际的乐观效应。参与者估计自己感染的风险比其他人要低。令人惊讶的是,结果表明,对于未接种疫苗的人来说,疫苗似乎是降低感染风险的有效工具,但对他们自己却不是。
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
Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology
Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Need satisfaction and compliance behaviors in two different phases of COVID-19 in China: Multiple mediation of social satisfaction, negative emotions, and risk perception Impact of death anxiety on mental health during COVID-19: The mediating role of the meaning in life Cross-lagged regression study on daily stress, mental health, and psychological burden among young adults during the COVID-19 pandemic Comparing the ideological correlates of anti-government and anti-Roma conspiracy beliefs in Romania Smartphone use increases the likelihood of making short-sighted financial decisions
×
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