How Communicating Vaccine Benefits and Harms in Fact Boxes Affects Risk Perceptions

IF 1.3 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL European Journal of Health Psychology Pub Date : 2023-07-20 DOI:10.1027/2512-8442/a000134
Lisa Felgendreff, Frank Renkewitz, C. Betsch
{"title":"How Communicating Vaccine Benefits and Harms in Fact Boxes Affects Risk Perceptions","authors":"Lisa Felgendreff, Frank Renkewitz, C. Betsch","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Background: A fact box is a promising tool for benefit-risk communication. This compact table summarizes the benefits and harms of a health-related intervention and compares the intervention to a control group. Although previous research has demonstrated that fact boxes are well understood, little is known about how they affect risk perceptions. Risk perception is particularly relevant to vaccination behavior. Aims: Two experiments investigated how different profiles of vaccine benefits and harms influence risk perceptions and the intention to vaccinate. Method: In Experiment 1, 430 participants were included in a 4 (benefits [vaccine effectiveness]) × 2 (harms [probability of vaccine adverse events]) between-subjects design. In Experiment 2, 541 participants were included in a 2 (benefits) × 2 (harms) × 2 (comprehension test conducted before or after assessment of risk perceptions) between-subjects design. Measures: Perceived risk of vaccination, intention to vaccinate, comprehension, and, in Experiment 2 only, perceived risk of non-vaccination. Results: Greater benefits decreased the perceived risk of vaccination and increased the intention to vaccinate. More harms increased the perceived risk of vaccination and, in Experiment 2 only, decreased the intention to vaccinate. More benefits increased the perceived risk of non-vaccination. Exploratory analyses showed that the comprehension and position of a comprehension test influenced risk perceptions. Limitations: The experiments used MTurk convenience samples and a fictitious disease. Conclusion: Communicating vaccine profiles in fact boxes affects risk perceptions. Additional measures may cue a deeper elaboration of the vaccine profile.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000134","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Background: A fact box is a promising tool for benefit-risk communication. This compact table summarizes the benefits and harms of a health-related intervention and compares the intervention to a control group. Although previous research has demonstrated that fact boxes are well understood, little is known about how they affect risk perceptions. Risk perception is particularly relevant to vaccination behavior. Aims: Two experiments investigated how different profiles of vaccine benefits and harms influence risk perceptions and the intention to vaccinate. Method: In Experiment 1, 430 participants were included in a 4 (benefits [vaccine effectiveness]) × 2 (harms [probability of vaccine adverse events]) between-subjects design. In Experiment 2, 541 participants were included in a 2 (benefits) × 2 (harms) × 2 (comprehension test conducted before or after assessment of risk perceptions) between-subjects design. Measures: Perceived risk of vaccination, intention to vaccinate, comprehension, and, in Experiment 2 only, perceived risk of non-vaccination. Results: Greater benefits decreased the perceived risk of vaccination and increased the intention to vaccinate. More harms increased the perceived risk of vaccination and, in Experiment 2 only, decreased the intention to vaccinate. More benefits increased the perceived risk of non-vaccination. Exploratory analyses showed that the comprehension and position of a comprehension test influenced risk perceptions. Limitations: The experiments used MTurk convenience samples and a fictitious disease. Conclusion: Communicating vaccine profiles in fact boxes affects risk perceptions. Additional measures may cue a deeper elaboration of the vaccine profile.
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
在事实框中传达疫苗的益处和危害如何影响风险认知
摘要:背景:事实箱是一种很有前途的利益-风险沟通工具。这个紧凑的表格总结了与健康相关的干预措施的益处和危害,并将干预措施与对照组进行了比较。尽管先前的研究已经证明事实框已经被很好地理解,但人们对它们如何影响风险认知知之甚少。风险认知与疫苗接种行为尤其相关。目的:两个实验调查了不同的疫苗益处和危害概况如何影响风险认知和接种意愿。方法:在实验1中,430名参与者被纳入4(获益[疫苗有效性])× 2(危害[疫苗不良事件概率])的受试者间设计。实验2采用2(益处)× 2(危害)× 2(风险认知评估前后进行理解性测试)的被试设计,共纳入541名被试。测量:接种疫苗的感知风险,接种疫苗的意图,理解,以及(仅在实验2中)不接种疫苗的感知风险。结果:更大的益处降低了接种疫苗的感知风险,增加了接种疫苗的意愿。更多的危害增加了接种疫苗的感知风险,并且,仅在实验2中,降低了接种疫苗的意愿。更多的益处增加了未接种疫苗的感知风险。探索性分析表明,理解测验的理解和位置影响风险感知。局限性:实验使用了MTurk方便样本和虚构的疾病。结论:传播疫苗概况会影响风险认知。进一步的措施可能促使对疫苗概况进行更深入的阐述。
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
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Die "Zeitschrift für Gesundheitspsychologie" wurde gegründet, um dem raschen Anwachsen gesundheitspsychologischer Forschung sowie deren Relevanz für verschiedene Anwendungsfelder gerecht zu werden. Gesundheitspsychologie versteht sich als wissenschaftlicher Beitrag der Psychologie zur Förderung und Erhaltung von Gesundheit, zur Verhütung und Behandlung von Krankheiten, zur Bestimmung von Risikoverhaltensweisen, zur Diagnose und Ursachenbestimmung von gesundheitlichen Störungen sowie zur Verbessung des Systems gesundheitlicher Vorsorge.
期刊最新文献
Unintended Consequences of Digital Behavior Change Interventions Personal Resources, Well-Being, Internalizing and Externalizing Symptoms of Youth in Out-Of-Home Care New Insights Into Predictors of Antihypertensive Adherence Peer-Recommended Coping Strategies for Individuals Living With Alopecia Areata Peer-Recommended Coping Strategies for Individuals Living With Alopecia Areata
×
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