Persuasive Effects of Temporal Framing in Health Messaging: A Meta-Analysis.

This meta-analysis investigated the persuasive effects of temporal framing in health messaging. Our analysis included 39 message pairs from 22 studies in 20 articles (N = 4,998) that examined the effects of temporal framing (i.e. present-oriented messages vs. future-oriented messages) on attitudes, intentions, and behaviors in health contexts. We found that present-oriented messages were significantly more persuasive than future-oriented messages in terms of intentions and integrated persuasive outcomes. Effects of temporal framing on attitudes and behaviors were not statistically significant. We tested six moderators of temporal framing effects (gain vs. loss framing, temporal framing operationalization, behavior type, timing of effect assessment, age, CFC levels) but none of them was statistically significant. Implications for future temporal framing research are discussed.

Beliefs in COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation Among Unvaccinated Black Americans: Prevalence, Socio-Psychological Predictors, and Consequences.

Health-related misinformation is a major threat to public health and particularly worrisome for populations experiencing health disparities. This study sets out to examine the prevalence, socio-psychological predictors, and consequences of beliefs in COVID-19 vaccine misinformation among unvaccinated Black Americans. We conducted an online national survey with Black Americans who had not been vaccinated against COVID-19 (N = 800) between February and March 2021. Results showed that beliefs in COVID-19 vaccine misinformation were prevalent among unvaccinated Black Americans with 13-19% of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing with various false claims about COVID-19 vaccines and 35-55% unsure about the veracity of these claims. Conservative ideology, conspiracy thinking mind-set, religiosity, and racial consciousness in health care settings predicted greater beliefs in COVID-19 vaccine misinformation, which were associated with lower vaccine confidence and acceptance. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Moral Foundations Predict COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Evidence from a National Survey of Black Americans.

In this study we examine the role of moral values in predicting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Black Americans. Guided by moral foundations theory, we assess the associations between six moral foundations (care, fairness, loyalty, authority, purity, liberty) and attitudes and intentions toward COVID-19 vaccination. Results of a national survey of Black Americans (N = 1,497) indicate that the care and loyalty moral foundations consistently predicted less vaccine hesitancy with overall more favorable attitudes and intentions toward COVID-19 vaccination, whereas the purity and liberty moral foundations were consistently associated with greater vaccine hesitancy. Relationships between the foundations and vaccine hesitancy were mediated by perceived vaccine effectiveness and safety. Implications of the findings for COVID-19 vaccine communication are discussed.

Understanding the psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among Black Americans: implications for vaccine communication.

BACKGROUND: Guided by the 5C (confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility) model of vaccination behavior, we examine the psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (i.e. attitudes and intentions toward COVID-19 vaccination) among Black Americans, a group disproportionately affected by the coronavirus pandemic. METHOD: We conducted a national survey of Black Americans (N = 1,497) in February/March 2021. RESULTS: We found that, among the five psychological antecedents, three (confidence, calculation - or extensive information searching, and collective responsibility) significantly predicted attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and had indirect effects on vaccination intentions through vaccination attitudes. Two antecedents (confidence and collective responsibility) also directly predicted vaccination intentions. Our analysis suggests that a partially mediated model produced better fit than a fully mediated model. CONCLUSIONS: Developing culturally tailored interventions for Black Americans that build confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, highlight collective responsibility, and attend to Black Americans' information sources is key to boosting Black Americans' COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Future research is needed to understand how historical and ongoing racism affects the psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among Black Americans.

Why do people believe health misinformation and who is at risk? A systematic review of individual differences in susceptibility to health misinformation.

RATIONALE: Health misinformation poses a significant threat to public health. Understanding why people believe health misinformation and who is at risk is crucial for developing effective interventions to reduce the harmful impact of misinformation. APPROACH: We conducted a systematic review of published empirical research that examined individual differences in susceptibility to health misinformation, focusing on the psychological, demographic, and behavioral correlates of health misinformation susceptibility. To guide our review on psychological correlates, we developed an integrative psychological model of susceptibility to health misinformation based on one's ability and motivation to reason. RESULTS: We identified 47 publications (61 empirical studies) that met our criteria. Our review suggests that subject knowledge, literacy and numeracy, analytical thinking (vs. intuitive thinking), and trust in science confer strong resistance to health misinformation, whereas conspiracy thinking, religiosity, conservative ideology, and conservative party identification are associated with more susceptibility to health misinformation. Demographically, older age and higher educational attainment predict less susceptibility to health misinformation, whereas racial minority status is associated with greater susceptibility. Behaviorally, relying on health professionals or scientists as information sources predicts less susceptibility to health misinformation, whereas social media use is associated with greater susceptibility. CONCLUSIONS: Susceptibility to health misinformation is driven by multiple psychological processes. Interventions for reducing the spread and impact of health misinformation should be tailored to the psychological mechanism underlying susceptibility to health misinformation. Limited resources should be used to support interventions targeted at individuals at risk.