Do cognitive styles affect vaccine hesitancy? A dual-process cognitive framework for vaccine hesitancy and the role of risk perceptions

Does COVID-19 vaccination affect post-traumatic stress symptoms via risk perception? A large cross-sectional study among the Chinese population

OBJECTIVES

Although infection rates may increase after relaxation of the zero COVID strategy, the extensive vaccination campaign in China could potentially curb the spread of COVID-19, which may be associated with a low level of risk perception and post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). However, the relationship between vaccination, risk perception and PTSS has not been studied extensively. This study aims to examine the associations between the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses, consistency in the type of each dose and time since vaccination with PTSS, and the mediating role of risk perception on such relationships in China.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional sampling with a self-report questionnaire was used to measure vaccination, PTSS and risk perception.

METHODS

The survey was conducted in Beijing, China, from 13 January to 9 February 2023. Linear regression analyses were conducted to test the relationship between vaccination, risk perception and PTSS.

RESULTS

The analysis included 55,803 individuals. In total, 72.86 % of participants received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. Regression results indicated that people with two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine had a lower level of PTSS (β = -1.232, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: -1.930, -0.534) than those who had not received any doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. Only the negative relationship between two-dose vaccination and PTSS was mediated by risk perception, while the negative relationship between the time since vaccination and PTSS was suppressed by risk perception.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that receiving the COVID-19 vaccine reduced PTSS by decreasing perceived risk. Vaccination time was negatively associated with PTSS, but this relationship was suppressed by risk perception.

PRISM and Emotions: Understanding the Role of Fear and Hope toward Vaccine Information Seeking Intentions

Vaccines represent one of the greatest health efforts to help combat diseases, yet they often evoke emotional responses among individuals. These emotional responses can influence an individual's desire to seek information about vaccines. The purpose of this research was to examine these relationships further using the Planned Risk Information Seeking Model (PRISM) and explore the role of emotions, specifically fear and hope, on vaccine-related information seeking intentions. Two separate models were tested using the PRISM model, one for fear and one for hope. Results suggest fear did not have a significant direct effect on vaccine information seeking, while hope had a positive and significant relationship. Interestingly, both attitude toward seeking and perceived current knowledge each had a positive relationship with information seeking intentions in the fear and hope models. Future research should continue to examine the role of specific emotions within the PRISM model to better predict information seeking intentions.

Can psychological distress account for the associations between COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and socio-economic vulnerability?

Socially disadvantaged individuals and communities consistently showed lower COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. We aimed to examine the psychological mechanisms that could explain such vaccination disparities. This study used data from serial population-based surveys conducted since the COVID-19 vaccination programme being launched in Hong Kong (N = 28,734). We first assessed the correlations of community-level and individual-level social vulnerability with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was then conducted to test whether psychological distress measured by PHQ-4 can account for the associations between participants' socio-economic vulnerability and COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. The third part analysis examined whether perceived negativity of vaccine-related news and affect towards COVID-19 vaccines accounted for the association between psychological distress and COVID-19 vaccination. Communities with higher social vulnerability scores and participants who had more vulnerable socio-economic status showed lower COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. Individuals with more vulnerable socio-economic status reported higher psychological distress, which lowered COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. Furthermore, higher psychological distress was associated with lower vaccination acceptance through its psychological mechanisms of processing vaccine-related information. We proposed a renewed focus on tackling psychological distress rather than merely increasing vaccine accessibility in more socio-economic-disadvantaged groups for promoting COVID-19 vaccination acceptance.

The Sociocognitive Origins of Personal Mastery

This article examines the relationship between cognitive processing and mastery. While scholars have called for the integration of sociological and cognitive analyses of mastery, sociological research has focused almost exclusively on mapping its social correlates. As a result, sociologists have relied on untested and underspecified assumptions about cognition to explain the efficacy of mastery. Taking an interdisciplinary approach integrating research on mastery, dual-process models of cognition, and intersectionality, we specify and test the hypothesis that deliberate thinking dispositions are associated with a greater sense of control over one's life chances and assess whether this relationship varies across different intersections of social positions. Regression results from survey data in a diverse student sample (N = 982) suggest a positive correlation between deliberate cognitive style and personal mastery. However, results from a quantitative intersectional analysis demonstrate that this relationship does not hold for East Asian women.

The doctor knows or the evidence shows: An online survey experiment testing the effects of source trust, pro-vaccine evidence, and dual-processing in expert messages recommending child COVID-19 vaccination to parents

Increasing child vaccination rates is a critical step toward mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Both distrust in expert sources and concern about the safety and efficacy of vaccines may contribute to parent vaccine hesitancy. The present study is the first to test the effectiveness of building trust and providing evidence supporting child COVID-19 vaccines in recommendation messages for parents. Based on dual-processing theories, emphasis on source trustworthiness and pro-vaccine evidence may each be particularly effective when the other is not present. It was hypothesized that these two approaches would have main and interaction effects on perceived message effectiveness and pro-vaccine beliefs. A between-subjects 2 (trust-building appeal vs. no trust-building appeal) X 2 (pro-vaccine evidence vs. no pro-vaccine evidence) online survey experiment was conducted in December 2021 and January 2022 with United States parents/guardians of children <18 years old (n = 401). As hypothesized, trust and pro-vaccine evidence each had significant simple main effects on both outcomes. Analysis of variance showed a significant negative interaction effect of trust and pro-vaccine evidence on perceived message effectiveness [F(3, 394) = 6.47; η2 = 0.02, p = 0.002; 95% CI (0.01, 0.11)], supporting the dual-processing hypothesis. The interaction effect on pro-vaccine beliefs was also negative but not significant [F(3, 394) = 2.69; η2 = 0.01; p = 0.102; 95% CI (0.00, 0.03)]. Either highlighting evidence supporting vaccines or building trust in expert sources can influence parent vaccine support. Messages which include strong evidence supporting recommended behaviors may influence recommendation acceptance even among those with lower trust in expert sources and establishing trust may reduce the need to describe available evidence.

Impact of social media news on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior

In order to take advantage of the power of social media to promote vaccination, this study reveals the mechanisms of positive and negative impacts of social media news on vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior. Based on the stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) framework, we developed a research model to understand the effects of vaccine safety news and risk news from social media (external stimuli) on individuals' psychological organism (i.e., safety perception and risk perception) and consequent behavioral response, vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior. The proposed model was tested by partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) on a sample gathered in China from September 2021 to November 2021 and from February 2022 to April 2022 (valid responses = 1579). The results found that the relationship between vaccine risk news from social media and risk perception was higher than the relationship between vaccine safety news from social media and safety perception. Individuals are more sensitive to vaccine risk news than safety news on social media. Moreover, both safety perception and risk perception explained the critical psychological mechanisms behind vaccine hesitancy. Interestingly, ego network density mitigated the effect of safety news on safety perception and the effect of risk news on risk perception. The findings contribute to the S-O-R model, the research on social media effects, and the literature on vaccination attitudes and behaviors. This study also informs public health officials about leveraging the power of social media to motivate the public to accept the COVID-19 vaccines.

Do psychological distress and digital sports influence the willingness to take the vaccine and precautionary saving? Empirical evidence from Shanghai

Aim

The COVID-19 epidemic has caused risk and uncertainty. This study answers whether and how psychological distress and digital sports influence willingness to take the vaccine and precautionary savings.

Subject and methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study with an online survey sample of 1016 Shanghai residents who live and work there and are aged between 16-60. All of them experienced the COVID-19 lockdown in Shanghai. We used logistic regressions to examine the relationships between the variables of interest.

Results

Three findings were demonstrated. First, psychologically distressed individuals are less inclined to take the vaccine. Second, those engaged in fitness activities via digital media platforms are more willing to get vaccinated. Third, psychologically distressed individuals and digital video-based physical exercisers are more likely to precautionary save.

Conclusions

This study contributes to the literature by documenting how people changed their life from the perspective of finance and health during the lockdown and providing practical implications.

Dark Triad and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: the role of conspiracy beliefs and risk perception

With the spread of the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the mass vaccination plan represents the primary weapon to control the infection curve. Unfortunately, vaccine hesitancy also spread out worldwide. This led to exploring the critical factors that prevent vaccination from improving the efficacy of vaccine campaigns. In the present study, the role of the Dark Triad (psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism) in vaccine hesitancy was investigated, considering the sequential mediating effects of conspiracy beliefs and risk perception. Via a cross-sectional design, the study was conducted with 210 participants surveyed using an online questionnaire to assess the Dark Triad, vaccine hesitancy, conspiracy beliefs, risk perception, and a set of demographic and socio-cultural control variables. Results showed that conspiracy beliefs and risk perception fully mediated the association between the Dark Triad and vaccine hesitancy. This finding suggested that albeit personality accounts for individual differences in human behaviour, vaccine hesitancy is also affected by irrational and false beliefs that, in turn, weaken the risk perception associated with COVID-19. Implications and future research directions were discussed.

Investigation of personal variables, technology usage, vaccine-related variables, social media-specific epistemological beliefs, media literacy, social impact strategies variables affecting vaccine hesitancy beliefs in the Covid-19 pandemic

Aim

In this study, personal variables, technology use cases, vaccine-related variables, social media-specific epistemological beliefs, media literacy, and social influence strategies were examined as predictors of Covid-19 vaccination hesitancy (VH) beliefs.

Subject and methods

The prediction design research model is used to detect the predictors of the dependent variable. The study group consists of 378 participants. Five different scales were used together with the self-description form as a data collection tool.

Results

According to the results of the research, individuals who have positive perceptions about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines and who have received the Covid-19 vaccine have lower anti-vaccine beliefs. It is another situation that prevents the opposition to vaccination of those who research the source of information on social media. As a result, age, education and income level, social media usage experience, media literacy, and social influence strategies were not effective on the participants' anti-vaccine beliefs.

Conclusion

According to the findings of the study, positive perceptions about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines, being vaccinated against Covid-19, and researching a source of information on social media variables seem to be effective in laying the foundations for constructive interventions such as using anti-vaccine beliefs to guide, reduce or eliminate negative beliefs about vaccines.

The links between COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and non-pharmaceutical interventions

The information set from which individuals make their decision on vaccination includes signals from trusted agents, such as governments, community leaders and the media. By implementing restrictions, or by relaxing them, governments can provide a signal about the underlying risk of the pandemic and indirectly affect vaccination take-up. Rather than focusing on measures specifically designed to increase vaccine acceptance, this paper studies how governments' non-pharmaceutical policy responses to the pandemic can modify the degree of preventive health behavior, including vaccination. To do so, we use repeated waves of a global survey on COVID-19 Beliefs, Behaviors and Norms covering 18 countries from October 2020 to March 2021. Controlling for the usual determinants, we explore how individuals' willingness to get vaccinated is affected by changes in government restriction measures (as measured by the Oxford Stringency Index). This relationship is mediated by individual characteristics, social norms (social pressure to conform with what most people do), and trust in government institutions. Our results point to a complex picture as the implementation of restrictions is associated with increased acceptance in some contexts and decreased acceptance in others. The stringency of government restrictions has significant positive correlations with vaccine acceptance in contexts of weak social norms of vaccine acceptance and lower trust in government. In countries or communities with tighter social norms and high trust in health authorities, vaccine acceptance is high but less sensitive to changes in policies. These results suggest that the effect of government policy stringency is stronger among individuals who report lower trust and weaker social norms of vaccine acceptance.

A systematic literature review to clarify the concept of vaccine hesitancy

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is considered a top-10 global health threat. The concept of VH has been described and applied inconsistently. This systematic review aims to clarify VH by analysing how it is operationalized. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases on 14 January 2022. We selected 422 studies containing operationalizations of VH for inclusion. One limitation is that studies of lower quality were not excluded. Our qualitative analysis reveals that VH is conceptualized as involving (1) cognitions or affect, (2) behaviour and (3) decision making. A wide variety of methods have been used to measure VH. Our findings indicate the varied and confusing use of the term VH, leading to an impracticable concept. We propose that VH should be defined as a state of indecisiveness regarding a vaccination decision.

Investigating how historical legacies of militarized violence can motivate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Evidence from global dyadic survey

BACKGROUND

In almost all countries, COVID-19 vaccines available for public use are produced outside of that country. Consistent with recent social science research, we hypothesize that legacies of violent conflict from vaccine-producing against vaccine-consuming countries may motivate vaccine hesitancy among people in targeted countries that purchase vaccines produced by the erstwhile aggressor.

METHODS

Our analyses draw on data from the Correlates of War project and a large, representative survey of 18,291 adults that asked respondents in 16 countries to self-report their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines originating from 12 potential vaccine-producing countries in December 2020 (184 country-pairs, 208,422 ratings). For the main analysis, we used random-effect linear probability models and turned to Bayesian Model Averaging to probe the robustness of the main findings.

RESULTS

We demonstrate that elevated levels of historical violence between vaccine-producing and vaccine-consuming countries are associated with increased negative feelings toward a COVID-19 vaccine produced by the vaccine producer.

CONCLUSION

Global vaccine hesitancy may result, at least in part, from public perceptions of historical conflict between vaccine-producing and vaccine-consuming countries. These results can help public health practitioners better preempt and adjust for cross-national vaccine resistance.

Psychometric properties and measurement invariance of the Vaccination Attitudes Examination Scale (VAX) in a Spanish sample

In these times of pandemic, the acceptance or rejection of vaccines has become increasingly clear, with a considerable rise in the anti-vaccine movement in Spain. It is important to understand the attitudes that lead a person to refuse vaccination in order to develop more effective public health campaigns. The objective of this study has been to study the psychometric properties and measurement invariance of the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) scale in a Spanish sample. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling have been used to study the psychometric properties of the VAX. Likewise, the measurement invariance by gender and educational level has been studied. The structure of four related factors for VAX is confirmed, as well as its predictive value, since the factor “trust in the benefit of the vaccine” clearly predicts the choice to be vaccinated. The strong measurement invariance by gender and educational level is also confirmed. The comparison of latent means between groups indicates that there are no differences by gender in any factor. However, people with a high educational level present higher scores in factors “concern about unforeseen future effects”, “concern about commercial effects and speculation” and “preference for natural immunity”. The VAX is presented as a reliable and valid tool to assess four different factors related to attitudes towards vaccines in Spain. Future studies of its cross-cultural invariance may help to determine the main factors that lead people not to be vaccinated in order to develop more effective public health campaigns.

Moving the Needle: Association Between a Vaccination Reward Lottery and COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake in Louisiana

OBJECTIVE

On June 17, 2021, Louisiana launched a lottery campaign to reward residents who received a COVID-19 vaccination. We investigated the association between the lottery and vaccination uptake by characteristics of parishes.

METHODS

We constructed an interrupted time series based on daily parish-level data on COVID-19 vaccinations to analyze the association with the lottery. We used recursive partitioning to separate vaccination uptake due to the Delta variant from vaccination uptake due to the lottery and limited our study period to May 25 through July 20, 2021. We performed subanalyses that grouped parishes by political affiliation, hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccines, race and ethnicity, and socioeconomic status to detect heterogeneous responses to the lottery by these characteristics. We ran models separately for parishes in the top and bottom tertiles of each sociodemographic indicator and used a z test to check for differences.

RESULTS

The lottery was associated with an additional 1.03 (95% CI, 0.61-1.45; P < .001) first doses per parish per day. Comparing lottery impacts between top and bottom tertiles, we found significantly larger associations in parishes with lower vaccine hesitancy rates, higher percentage of Hispanic population, higher median annual household income, and more people with a college degree.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that the lottery was associated with increased COVID-19 vaccination uptake in Louisiana. However, larger associations were observed in parishes with an already higher likelihood of accepting vaccines, which raises equity issues about the opportunity created by the lottery and its effectiveness as a long-term behavioral incentive.

Vaccine Hesitancy and Cognitive Biases: Evidence for tailored communication with parents

•

The model to analyse vaccine hesitancy should include the evaluation of cognitive biases.

•

Communication interventions should be tailored based on the drivers of parents’ choice.

•

Conspiracy mentality and risk propension correlate with the vaccine hesitancy.

Background

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) remains worldwide a reason of concern. Most of the vaccination education strategies followed a “fact-based” approach, based on the assumption that decision making is a rational process, without considering the influence of cognitive biases and heuristics. Our study aimed at identifying factors involved in the parents’ vaccination choice to inform and shape communication interventions.

Methods

We conducted an online national survey among parents between November 2020 and April 2021. The questionnaire consisted of 42 items organised in 4 parts: (1) personal information, (2) cognitive biases and risk propension, (3) Analytic Thinking (Cognitive Reflection Test), (4) conspiracy mentality, health literacy, and VH. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to identify latent variables underlying the 19 items related to the 6 cognitive biases. Factors were categorised in quintiles and the corresponding pseudo-continuous variables used as predictors of the VH. Logistic regression model was applied to assess the association of the VH with factors, conspiracy mentality and risk propension. We adjusted for age, gender, economic status, and education levels.

Results

The study included 939 parents, 764 women (81.4%), 69.8% had a degree or higher level of education. Considering cognitive biases, four factors explaining 54% of the total variance were identified and characterised as: fear of the side effects of vaccines (scepticism factor); carelessness of the risk and consequences of infections (denial factor); optimistic attitude (optimistic bias factor); preference for natural products (naturalness bias factor). All factors were positively associated to VH (p < 0.001) as were conspiracy mentality (p = 0.007) and risk propension (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

This study confirmed the need to amplify the model used to analyse the VH considering cognitive biases as important factor affecting the parents’ decision making. These results may be useful to design personalised communication interventions regarding vaccines and vaccination.

COVID-19 and seasonal flu vaccination hesitancy: Links to personality and general intelligence in a large, UK cohort

Vaccines are a powerful and relatively safe tool to protect against a range of serious diseases. Nonetheless, a sizeable minority of people express ‘vaccination hesitancy’. Accordingly, understanding the bases of this hesitancy represents a significant public health opportunity. In the present study we sought to examine the role of Big Five personality traits and general intelligence as predictors of vaccination hesitancy across two vaccination types in a large (N = 9667) sample of UK adults drawn from the Understanding Society longitudinal household study. We found that lower levels of general intelligence were associated with COVID-19 and seasonal flu vaccination hesitancy, and lower levels of neuroticism was associated with COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy. Although the self-reported reasons for being vaccine hesitant indicated a range of factors were important to people, lower general intelligence was associated with virtually all of these reasons. In contrast, Big Five personality traits showed more nuanced patterns of association.

Cognitive Networks Extract Insights on COVID-19 Vaccines from English and Italian Popular Tweets: Anticipation, Logistics, Conspiracy and Loss of Trust

Monitoring social discourse about COVID-19 vaccines is key to understanding how large populations perceive vaccination campaigns. This work reconstructs how popular and trending posts framed semantically and emotionally COVID-19 vaccines on Twitter. We achieve this by merging natural language processing, cognitive network science and AI-based image analysis. We focus on 4765 unique popular tweets in English or Italian about COVID-19 vaccines between December 2020 and March 2021. One popular English tweet contained in our data set was liked around 495,000 times, highlighting how popular tweets could cognitively affect large parts of the population. We investigate both text and multimedia content in tweets and build a cognitive network of syntactic/semantic associations in messages, including emotional cues and pictures. This network representation indicates how online users linked ideas in social discourse and framed vaccines along specific semantic/emotional content. The English semantic frame of “vaccine” was highly polarised between trust/anticipation (towards the vaccine as a scientific asset saving lives) and anger/sadness (mentioning critical issues with dose administering). Semantic associations with “vaccine,” “hoax” and conspiratorial jargon indicated the persistence of conspiracy theories and vaccines in extremely popular English posts. Interestingly, these were absent in Italian messages. Popular tweets with images of people wearing face masks used language that lacked the trust and joy found in tweets showing people with no masks. This difference indicates a negative effect attributed to face-covering in social discourse. Behavioural analysis revealed a tendency for users to share content eliciting joy, sadness and disgust and to like sad messages less. Both patterns indicate an interplay between emotions and content diffusion beyond sentiment. After its suspension in mid-March 2021, “AstraZeneca” was associated with trustful language driven by experts. After the deaths of a small number of vaccinated people in mid-March, popular Italian tweets framed “vaccine” by crucially replacing earlier levels of trust with deep sadness. Our results stress how cognitive networks and innovative multimedia processing open new ways for reconstructing online perceptions about vaccines and trust.

Explaining higher Covid-19 vaccination among some US primary care professionals

Background and objective

Research in several countries shows higher Covid-19 vaccination willingness and uptake among physicians than nurses. Our paper aims to characterize and explain this difference.

Methods

In early 2021, we surveyed 1047 U.S. primary care professionals who served adolescents, ages 11–17. The national sample included physicians (71%) as well as nurses and advanced practice providers. The survey assessed the three domains of the Increasing Vaccination Model: thinking and feeling, social processes, and direct behavior change.

Results

Covid-19 vaccine uptake was higher among physicians than among nurses and advanced practice providers (91% vs. 76%, p < .05). Overall, in the thinking and feeling domain, higher confidence in Covid-19 vaccination, higher perceived susceptibility to the disease, and stronger anticipated regret were associated with higher vaccine uptake (all p < .05). In the social processes domain, perceiving more positive social norms for Covid-19 vaccination, receiving recommendations to get the vaccine, and wanting to help others were associated with higher vaccine uptake (all p < .05). In the direct behavior change domain, receiving an invitation to get the vaccine and better access to vaccination were associated with higher uptake (both p < .05). Of these variables, most of the thinking and feeling and social processes variables mediated the association of training with vaccine uptake.

Conclusions

Physicians had higher Covid-19 vaccine uptake than nurses and advanced practice providers, corresponding with their more supportive vaccine beliefs and social experiences. Efforts to reach the remaining unvaccinated cohort can build on these findings.

Cognitive underpinnings of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

RATIONALE

Vaccines save lives. Despite the undisputed value of vaccination, vaccine hesitancy continues to be a major global challenge, particularly throughout the COVID-19 global pandemic. Since vaccination decisions are counter-intuitive and cognitively demanding, we propose that vaccine hesitancy is associated with executive function-a group of high-level cognitive skills including attentional control, working memory, inhibition, self-regulation, cognitive flexibility, and strategic planning.

OBJECTIVE

We set out to test (i) whether vaccine hesitancy is driven by individual differences in executive function beyond established socio-demographic factors (e.g., education, political orientation, gender, ethnicity, age, religiosity) and depressed mood, and (ii) whether this relationship is exacerbated by situational stress.

METHODS

Two studies were conducted with U.S. residents. Using a cross-sectional design, Study 1 examined the associations between executive function, socio-demographic factors, COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, trust in health authorities, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Using an experimental design, Study 2 focused solely on unvaccinated individuals and tested the interactive effect of executive function and stress on willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. We used ordinal logistic regressions to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Individual differences in executive function predicted participants' COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, trust in health authorities, and their willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19. Importantly, the unique contribution of executive function to vaccine hesitancy could not be explained by socio-demographic factors or depressed mood. Furthermore, Study 2 revealed that weaker executive function had detrimental effects on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and trust in health authorities mainly under heightened stress.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual differences in executive function and situational stress jointly impact COVID-19 vaccination decisions and need to be considered together when designing health communications aimed at reducing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Interventions that lower stress and promote trust have the potential to increase vaccine acceptance, especially for individuals with weaker executive function.