Message framing and COVID-19 vaccination intention: Moderating roles of partisan media use and pre-attitudes about vaccination

The Impact of Media Literacy on Substance Use Behavior: Analyzing the Role of Media Consumption Behaviors as a Moderator

PurposeTo investigate how media literacy and varied media consumption influenced substance use behavior.DesignA cross-sectional survey was conducted.SettingOnline survey was conducted June 22-July 18, 2020, with quality checks.SubjectsThe study recruited U.S. residents aged 18 and older who were proficient in English (N = 1264). Panel sampling using quotas reflecting U.S. census was employed as an alternative to random digit dialing sampling.MeasuresSubstance use behavior, media literacy for news, liberal media use, conservative media use, social media use, and demographics were assessed.ResultsHierarchical multiple regression analysis was conducted. Media literacy for news was negatively associated with substance use (β = -.15, SE = .08, P < 0.01, [95% CI: -.36, .06]) and interaction effect between social media use and media literacy for news on substance use behavior was significant (β = .47, SE = .05, P = 0.02, [95% CI: .02, .20]) in the final model (F(12, 1207) = 33.21, R2 = 25%).ConclusionsMedia literacy for news has a negative association with substance use behavior. Social media use, specifically, diminishes the effect of media literacy skills on substance use behavior. The prediction is based on correlational data. Further investigations are required to examine how individuals' specific patterns of media use impact substance use behavior as part of media literacy intervention efforts.

Communication-based interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine willingness and uptake: a systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review investigates the effectiveness of different communication strategies to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and willingness.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), following recommendations from the Cochrane Handbook and reporting according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the following databases until 27 July 2022: Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection and WHO COVID-19 Global literature.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

We included RCTs investigating, any population, communication-based interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and comparing these with no intervention (with or without placebo), another communication strategy or another type of intervention.

METHODS

Screening, data extraction and bias assessment, using the Cochrane ROB 1.0 tool, were conducted by two authors independently. We performed meta-analyses if studies were homogeneous using the Review Manager (RevMan 5) software, synthesised the remaining results narratively and assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

We identified 49 studies reporting on the predefined four categories of communication interventions. Evidence from our meta-analyses shows that COVID-19 vaccine uptake may increase when education and information strategies are applied (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.28; high-certainty evidence) or social norms are communicated (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.33; high-certainty evidence) compared with no intervention. The different communication strategies mostly have little to no impact on vaccine intention; however, there may be a slight increase in vaccine confidence when gain framing is applied compared with no intervention.

CONCLUSION

Overall, we found that education and information-based interventions or social norm-framing strategies are most effective compared with no intervention given. Our findings show that some of the investigated communication strategies might influence policy decision-making, and our results could be useful for future pandemics as well.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO (CRD42021296618).

Credibility Perceptions of Information and Vaccine Intention: The Role of Collective Vs. Individual Framing Messages

After four years into the pandemic, we know that COVID-19 vaccines are effective, and it is crucial to increase public compliance with getting the COVID-19 vaccines. The current study examines the interplay of credibility perceptions, perceived benefits, and two different types of vaccine promotion messages: individual versus collective. Data was collected using an online randomized experiment. Findings demonstrated that individual versus collective frames did not influence everyone similarly. The results show a significantly moderated mediation model, such that the association between message frame and vaccine intention was mediated by the credibility of the message, and the relationship between message frame and perceived credibility was moderated by perceived benefits of the vaccine.

Communication Strategies to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: How Effective are Source, Appeal, Framing, and Evidence Type Approaches?

This systematic review analyzed the effectiveness of key persuasive strategies - source, appeal, framing, and evidence (SAFE) - on COVID-19 vaccination intention. Quantitative studies were searched in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed following the PRISMA guidelines. From the 61 studies that met inclusion criteria, source and framing are the most commonly applied SAFE strategies. However, source characteristics are a more consistent influence on vaccine intentions than message framing strategies, with expert sources and general practitioners emerging as the key sources contributing to greater vaccine intentions. In addition, a range of mediators and moderators influence the process through which SAFE message strategies impact vaccine intentions. Framing effects, in particular, are moderated by political identity, source characteristics, and vaccine perceptions. Tests of mediating processes highlight how health behavior judgments (e.g. perceived vaccine benefits, risks, trust in vaccination, perceived severity) and message response/perceptions (e.g. counterarguing, perceived similarity/empathy) operate as key intervening factors between SAFE message strategies and vaccine intentions. Overall, when practitioners apply various structural approaches (narrative elements, fear appeals, framing cues) to vaccine promotion campaigns, they should be cognizant of who is providing that appeal. Targeted populations may benefit most from different structural elements if they are integrated with sources that resonate with the audience.

The Resilience of Attitude Toward Vaccination: Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial on the Processing of Misinformation

BACKGROUND

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, it was already recognized that internet-based misinformation and disinformation could influence individuals to refuse or delay vaccination for themselves, their families, or their children. Reinformation, which refers to hyperpartisan and ideologically biased content, can propagate polarizing messages on vaccines, thereby contributing to vaccine hesitancy even if it is not outright disinformation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of reinformation on vaccine hesitancy. Specifically, the goal was to investigate how misinformation presented in the style and layout of a news article could influence the perceived tentativeness (credibility) of COVID-19 vaccine information and confidence in COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

We conducted a web-based randomized controlled trial by recruiting English-speaking Canadians aged 18 years and older from across Canada through the Qualtrics (Silver Lake) paid opt-in panel system. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 distinct versions of a news article on COVID-19 vaccines, each featuring variations in writing style and presentation layout. After reading the news article, participants self-assessed the tentativeness of the information provided, their confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and their attitude toward vaccination in general.

RESULTS

The survey included 537 participants, with 12 excluded for not meeting the task completion time. The final sample comprised 525 participants distributed about equally across the 4 news article versions. Chi-square analyses revealed a statistically significant association between general attitude toward vaccination and the perceived tentativeness of the information about COVID-19 vaccines included in the news article (χ21=37.8, P<.001). The effect size was small to moderate, with Cramer V=0.27. An interaction was found between vaccine attitude and writing style (χ21=6.2, P=.01), with a small effect size, Cramer V=0.11. In addition, a Pearson correlation revealed a significant moderate to strong correlation between perceived tentativeness and confidence in COVID-19 vaccination, r(523)=0.48, P<.001. The coefficient of determination (r2) was 0.23, indicating that 23% of the variance in perceived tentativeness was explained by confidence in COVID-19 vaccines. In comparing participants exposed to a journalistic-style news article with those exposed to an ideologically biased article, Cohen d was calculated to be 0.38, indicating a small to medium effect size for the difference in the perceived tentativeness between these groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to a news article conveying misinformation may not be sufficient to change an individual's level of vaccine hesitancy. The study reveals that the predominant factor in shaping individuals' perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines is their attitude toward vaccination in general. This attitude also moderates the influence of writing style on perceived tentativeness; the stronger one's opposition to vaccines, the less pronounced the impact of writing style on perceived tentativeness.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/41012.

Message Effectiveness of Fear Appeals in Vaccination Communication Campaigns: A Systematic Review

This systematic review of 54 cross-disciplinary peer-reviewed causal empirical studies helps public health officials, researchers, and healthcare professionals better comprehend the effects of fear appeals in vaccine promotional campaigns on message processing, persuasion, vaccination attitudes, and vaccination intentions. This review documents inconsistent findings across studies, which it attempts to clarify by considering differences in research designs, sample populations, and outcomes measured. In general, we find that fear appeals increase risk perceptions, message involvement, and vaccination attitudes. However, fear appeals have less influence on vaccination intentions, especially among female and general adult populations or populations from the U.S. and other Western cultures. On the other hand, the effect of fear appeals on vaccination intentions is stronger among student populations and those from China (People's Republic of China and Hong Kong) and other non-Western cultures. Also, fear appeals are less persuasive when promoting COVID-19 vaccines and boosters than they are for other vaccines (e.g., HPV, influenza, MMR). Future research should compare fear appeal effectiveness in messages across vaccines or when combined with other executional elements, such as the endorser or type of evidence provided. Finally, future studies should explore other methodological approaches and measure underexplored message outcomes, such as vaccine uptake behavior, in more naturalistic settings.

An Evaluation of Messages to Promote Parental Intent to Vaccinate Children Aged <12 Years Against COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

Effective health communication can increase intent to vaccinate. We compared 8 messages that may influence parents' intent to vaccinate their children against COVID-19.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional survey of adults in the United States administered online in August 2021, 1837 parents and legal guardians were exposed to 8 messages (individual choice, gain/practical benefits, nonexpert, health care provider recommendation, altruism/community good, safety/effectiveness, safety, and effectiveness) to determine message reception and influence on intent to vaccinate their children. Parents responded to 10 questions using a Likert scale. We computed odds ratios (ORs) for each message, with an OR >1.0 indicating greater observed odds of participant agreement with the follow-up statement as compared with a reference message. We compared outcomes individually across messages with ordinal logistic regression fit using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

The individual choice message had the highest odds of agreement for understanding intent (OR = 2.10; 95% CI, 1.94-2.27), followed by the health care provider recommendation message (OR = 1.58; 95% CI, 1.46-1.71). The individual choice message had the highest odds of memorability, relatability, and trustworthiness. The altruism/community good message was at or near second best. The altruism/community good message had the highest or near-highest odds of increasing parents' intent to vaccinate their children, asking friends and family for their thoughts, and searching for additional information. The message that most motivated parents to vaccinate their children depended on parental intent to vaccinate prior to being exposed to the tested messages.

CONCLUSIONS

Messages with themes of individual choice, health care provider recommendation, and altruism/community good may be used in future message campaigns. Further research is needed to refine message concepts related to altruism/community good.

How Information Framing Nudges Acceptance of China's Delayed Retirement Policy: A Moderated Mediation Model of Anchoring Effects and Perceived Fairness

China's delayed retirement policy will be prudently rolled out at the appropriate time, yet the public's acceptance of this policy is concerning. To address this issue, our endeavor explores the impact of framing and anchoring effects on policy acceptance, aiming to mitigate the populace's resistance to the new policy. We conducted two survey studies on the Chinese population aged 16-65. Achieved through an online survey, Study 1 (N = 225) demonstrated that information framing significantly influences the public's acceptance of the delayed retirement policy. It was found that perceived fairness plays a mediating role between information framing and policy acceptance. Notably, the positive frame had a more pronounced effect on acceptance than its negative counterpart, with the positive presentation being perceived as more fair. Study 2 (N = 383), utilizing a combination of online and offline approaches, revealed that the anchoring effect moderates the relationship between information framing and perceived fairness. The interaction of anchoring and framing effects significantly influences perceived fairness, subsequently promoting public policy acceptance. The interplay between anchoring and framing effects significantly shapes perceived fairness, in turn bolstering the public's receptiveness to policy. These insights offer reasonable communication strategies for the smooth advancement of new policies, further enriching the field of behavioral science.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among US Adults: Safety and Effectiveness Perceptions and Messaging to Increase Vaccine Confidence and Intent to Vaccinate

OBJECTIVE

Public health agencies have a critical role in providing effective messaging about mitigation strategies during a public health emergency. The objectives of this study were (1) to understand perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines, including concerns about side effects, safety, and effectiveness and how these perceptions influence vaccine decision-making among US adults and (2) to learn what messages might motivate vaccine uptake.

METHODS

In April and May 2021, we conducted 14 online focus groups with non-Hispanic English-speaking and English- and Spanish-speaking Hispanic adults (N = 99) not vaccinated against COVID-19. We oversampled adults aged 18-39 years and rural residents and systematically assessed 10 test messages. Researchers used a standardized guide and an a priori codebook for focus group discussions, coding transcripts, and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Vaccine hesitancy factors included fear of the unknown; long-term side effects, including infertility; and beliefs that the vaccines were developed too quickly and were not sufficiently effective. Motivating factors for receiving vaccination included the ability to safely socialize and travel. Health care providers were considered important trusted messengers. Participants were critical of most messages tested. Messages that came across as "honest" about what is not yet known about COVID-19 vaccines were perceived more positively than other messages tested. Messages were seen as ineffective if perceived as vague or lacking in data and specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

Messages that were simple and transparent about what is unknown about vaccines relative to emerging science were viewed most favorably. Health care providers, friends, and family were considered influential in vaccination decision-making. Findings underscore the benefits of research-informed strategies for developing and disseminating effective messages addressing critical issues in a public health emergency.

Applying the Hornik & Woolf Approach to Identify Messaging Themes and Improve COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence Among Federally Qualified Health Centers' Workforce in Wisconsin

The Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in Wisconsin serve the most under-resourced communities in the state and are trusted sources in local communities. Although healthcare workers can be leveraged to champion COVID-19 vaccines, existing vaccine hesitancy among the FQHC workforce itself calls for research to identify promising messaging themes that can boost their vaccine confidence. In spring 2021, through a partnership with the Wisconsin Primary Health Association, we took a community-engaged approach to develop and field a survey including 46 beliefs (Ms = 1.36-4.25, SDs = 0.81-1.46, all on 5-point Likert scales) among employees of 10 out of the 17 FQHCs in Wisconsin. In total, 347 clinical team members and 349 non-clinical staff members (a) indicated their levels of (dis)agreement with all 46 belief items and (b) reported vaccine acceptance (dichotomized, acceptance = 77.6%) as well as recommendation intentions (dichotomized, yes = 73.9%). We carried out the Hornik & Woolf analyses in a multilevel logistic regression framework with bootstrapping to rank order all beliefs, segmented by subgroup and behavioral outcome. Our results suggest that communication-based interventions should promote beliefs such as those related to perceived safety and efficacy, rather than normative pressure from peers, while aiming to reduce doubts about information withholding and manipulation, the safety of the mRNA technology, the approval process, and "unnatural" ingredients in the vaccines. Subgroup-specific belief rankings are also provided. This study demonstrates the usefulness of incorporating the H&W approach into community-engaged research with local healthcare systems to improve health messaging for vaccine promotion.

College students' influence on COVID-19 vaccination uptake among seniors in China: a protocol of combined cross-sectional and experimental study

BACKGROUND

College students generally have good knowledge about COVID-19 and may facilitate COVID-19 vaccination in family. The purpose of this study is to understand college students' willingness to persuade their grandparents to initiate COVID-19 vaccination and the effect of their persuasion.

METHODS

A combined cross-sectional and experimental study will be conducted online. In the cross-sectional study (Phase I), eligible participants are college students who are aged ≥ 16 years and have at least one living grandparent aged ≥ 60 years who has/have not completed the COVID-19 vaccination. Participants self-complete Questionnaire A to collect information on the socio-demographics of themselves and their grandparents, their knowledge about older adults' COVID-19 vaccination, as well as Health Belief Model (HBM) and Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) predictor variables. The primary outcome at Phase I is college students' willingness to persuade grandparents to receive COVID-19 vaccines. Those who are willing to persuade grandparents and participate in a follow-up survey will be invited to participate in a randomized controlled trial (Phase II). At Phase II, eligible participants are those who have at least one living grandparent aged ≥ 60 years who completed the COVID-19 initial vaccination series but has/have not received a booster dose. At the baseline, participants self-complete Questionnaire B to collect information on individual grandparents' COVID-19 vaccination status, attitude towards and intention to COVID-19 booster dose. Participants will then be randomly allocated 1:1 to either intervention arm (one-week smartphone-based health education on older adults' COVID-19 vaccination plus two weeks' waiting period) or control arm (three weeks' waiting period). At the end of week three, participants in both arms self-complete Questionnaire C to collect information on their grandparents' COVID-19 vaccination status. The primary outcome at Phase II is the uptake rate of COVID-19 booster dose among grandparents. Secondary outcomes include grandparents' attitude and intention to get a COVID-19 booster dose.

DISCUSSION

No previous study had measured the effect of college students' persuasion on COVID-19 vaccination uptake in older adults. Findings from this study will provide evidence for innovative and potentially feasible interventions that further promote COVID-19 vaccination in older adults.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200063240. Registered 2 September 2022.

Overcoming Vaccine Hesitancy Using Community-Based Efforts

Vaccine acceptance by parents and caregivers remains a public health challenge that can potentially be addressed via community-based strategies. Such strategies might augment current vaccine hesitancy interventions occurring within medical homes. This article reviews the key challenges and advantages of evidence-based community strategies for overcoming parent/caregiver vaccine hesitancy, specifically (1) community-participatory vaccine hesitancy measurement, (2) communication approaches, (3) reinforcement techniques (eg, incentives, mandates), and (4) community-engaged partnerships (eg, vaccine champion training, vaccination in community settings). This article also discusses important considerations when vaccinating children and adolescents in non-primary care settings (school-based health centers, pharmacies, community events).

Economic risk framing increases intention to vaccinate among Republican COVID-19 vaccine refusers

OBJECTIVE

To determine if framing communications about COVID-19 vaccines in economic terms can increase Republicans' likelihood to get vaccinated.

METHODS

We examined Twitter posts between January 2020 and September 2021 by Democratic and Republican politicians to determine how they framed the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on these posts, we carried out a survey study between September and November 2021 to examine whether motivations for COVID-19 vaccine uptake matched message frames that were widely used by these politicians. Finally, we conducted a randomized controlled experiment to examine how these frames (economic vs. health) affected intentions to vaccinate by vaccine refusers in both parties.

RESULTS

Republican politicians were more likely to frame the pandemic in economic terms, whereas Democrats predominantly used health frames. Accordingly, vaccinated Republicans' choices were more likely to be motivated by economic consideration (β = 0.25, p = 0.02) and personal financial rationales (β = 0.24, p = 0.03). Among vaccine refusers, Republicans exposed to messages using economic rationales to encourage vaccination reported higher vaccination intentions compared to those exposed to messages using public health rationales (F1,119 = 4.16, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Messages highlighting economic and personal financial risks could increase intentions to vaccinate for vaccine-hesitant Republicans.

PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS

Agencies should invest in developing messages that are congruent with frames that are already widely used by co-partisans. Social media may be helpful in eliciting these frames.

Using Health Behavior Theory to Address COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Scoping Review of Communication and Messaging Interventions

Vaccine hesitancy has been among the most vexing challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, ultimately leading to maladaptive health behaviors such as vaccine delay and refusal. A variety of approaches have been employed to address this problem, including communication and messaging interventions targeting the underlying determinants of vaccine hesitancy. However, there exists no published evidence synthesis examining how such interventions are using health behavior theory to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review of health communication and messaging interventions aimed at addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and to systematically evaluate the use of health behavior theory in the design of these interventions. The review followed a five-step iterative framework proposed by Levac and colleagues. Comprehensive searches using an exhaustive list of keyword combinations were used across three online databases to identify articles to screen for inclusion. A structured, validated coding scheme was then applied to assess the use of health behavior theory. Additional study data were extracted using a separate structured form. A total of 36 articles published between January 2020 and February 2022 met inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Ten studies (27.7%) did not mention or use health behavior theory at all. Most studies (n = 26) at least mentioned theory or theory-relevant constructs, with 26 different theories and 52 different theoretical constructs represented in the sample. Although theory and theoretical determinants of vaccination behavior were often mentioned, few studies used theory to specify and target causal pathways of behavior change, and only one study targeted misinformation as a determinant of vaccine hesitancy. The findings from this review provide critical insight into the state of theory-based intervention design and point to significant gaps in the literature to prioritize in future research.

When do persuasive messages on vaccine safety steer COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and recommendations? Behavioural insights from a randomised controlled experiment in Malaysia

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine safety is a primary concern among vaccine-hesitant individuals. We examined how seven persuasive messages with different frames, all focusing on vaccine safety, influenced Malaysians to accept the COVID-19 vaccine, and recommend it to individuals with different health and age profiles; that is, healthy adults, the elderly, and people with pre-existing health conditions.

METHODS

A randomised controlled experiment was conducted from 29 April to 7 June 2021, which coincided with the early phases of the national vaccination programme when vaccine uptake data were largely unavailable. 5784 Malaysians were randomly allocated into 14 experimental arms and exposed to one or two messages that promoted COVID-19 vaccination. Interventional messages were applied alone or in combination and compared against a control message. Outcome measures were assessed as intent to both take the vaccine and recommend it to healthy adults, the elderly, and people with pre-existing health conditions, before and after message exposure. Changes in intent were modelled and we estimated the average marginal effects based on changes in the predicted probability of responding with a positive intent for each of the four outcomes.

RESULTS

We found that persuasive communication via several of the experimented messages improved recommendation intentions to people with pre-existing health conditions, with improvements ranging from 4 to 8 percentage points. In contrast, none of the messages neither significantly improved vaccination intentions, nor recommendations to healthy adults and the elderly. Instead, we found evidence suggestive of backfiring among certain outcomes with messages using negative attribute frames, risky choice frames, and priming descriptive norms.

CONCLUSION

Message frames that briefly communicate verbatim facts and stimulate rational thinking regarding vaccine safety may be ineffective at positively influencing vaccine-hesitant individuals. Messages intended to promote recommendations of novel health interventions to people with pre-existing health conditions should incorporate safety dimensions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05244356.

Conservative Media Use and COVID-19 Related Behavior: The Moderating Role of Media Literacy Variables

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no vaccine to cure or slow its impact due to the novelty of the virus, nor were there were any other standardized measures to handle its spread. Yet, despite the detrimental consequences of the pandemic and its impact on people's lives, the behavior of individuals to combat the pandemic was not necessarily consistent with official guidelines. To make things worse, the pandemic was highly politicized in countries such as the U.S. With a help of a national survey from the U.S., we examine the associations between media literacy variables and willingness to perform recommended COVID-19 related health behavior. Moreover, we also examine the moderating role of conservative media use in this relationship. Our findings show that conservative media use was negatively associated with these protective behaviors, and that both media literacy variables were positively related with willingness to perform recommended COVID-19 related health behavior. Our results show that media literacy can mitigate some of the impact of conservative media use on individuals. Our findings help understand the complexity of protective behavior against the virus during a highly politicized pandemic.