The Roles of Identity Conflict, Emotion, and Threat in Learning from Refutation Texts on Vaccination and Immigration

Conspire to one's own detriment: Strengthening HPV Program Support Through Debunking Epistemically Suspect Beliefs

The study experimentally tested an intervention that debunks epistemically suspect beliefs about vaccines. After answering questions about pre-existing epistemically suspect beliefs (irrational health beliefs and conspiracy mentality), 565 participants were randomly assigned into one of three conditions and exposed either to neutral information about domestic animals, salient epistemically suspect content about vaccination or an intervention that debunks epistemically suspect beliefs about vaccination. Afterwards, the participants answered questions about vaccination-related conspiracy narratives (manipulation check), vaccination attitudes, intentions to vaccinate against HPV, support for an HPV vaccination programme and intentions to seek health guidance. Although the intervention demonstrated the potential to inhibit the endorsement of conspiracy narratives, we found no differences in the other outcome variables. Nevertheless, across the conditions, pre-existing epistemically suspect beliefs were associated with less favourable attitudes towards vaccination, lower intentions to vaccinate against HPV, less support for the vaccination programme and lower intentions to seek health guidance. The results indicate that debunking may be futile in curbing long-term negative impacts associated with epistemically suspect beliefs, and they contribute to the debate about assessing the effectiveness of interventions related to highly controversial topics such as vaccination. The study enhances understanding of persistent adverse impacts that epistemically suspect beliefs may have on public health outcomes.

"Let's get back to normal": emotions mediate the effects of persuasive messages on willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19

Objective

We examined the effectiveness of three different messages for persuading individuals to get vaccinated against COVID-19, and the role that emotions play in persuasion.

Methods

Four hundred-thirty-six participants reported their concern about the COVID-19 pandemic and confidence/hesitancy toward vaccines. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three text conditions: (1) self-interest: a persuasive message that focused on how much of a "serious threat COVID-19 is to you," and to get vaccinated to "protect yourself"; (2) self-interest + altruistic: a persuasive message that focused on the "threat to you and your community" and to get vaccinated to "protect you and your loved ones"; (3) self-interest + altruistic + normal: a persuasive message that included (2) but added "This is the only way we can get back to a normal life."; and, (4) a baseline control: no text. After reading, participants reported their emotions toward COVID-19 vaccines and their willingness to get vaccinated.

Results

Individuals in the self-interest + altruistic + normal condition were more willing to get vaccinated compared to the control condition and self-interest + altruistic condition. However, there were no differences in willingness between the self-interest + altruistic + normal condition and the self-interest condition. Moreover, emotions mediated relations between vaccine confidence/hesitancy and willingness.

Conclusion

A message that focuses on "getting back to normal" can achieve important public health action by increasing vaccine uptake to protect the population. Future work is needed across multiple countries and contexts (i.e., non-pandemic) to assess message effectiveness.

The nature of misinformation in education

In this opinion piece, we review and characterize the nature of misinformation in education and discuss the implications for corrective efforts. In education, misinformation manifests at three different levels: the individual, the community, and the system. At the individual level, misinformation manifests as naive beliefs or misconceptions students hold before they receive instruction or because of instruction. At the community level, misinformation manifests as shared flawed views or misconceptions about certain topics often around risk factors and treatments of learning disabilities. At the system level, misinformation manifests as state or district educational policies and practices that have no scientific evidence. Thus, corrective efforts in education must be implemented at all three levels and follow best practices.

Gender-based violence in Latin America (Ecuador and Argentina): current state and challenges in the development of psychoeducational materials

Gender-based violence (GBV) is a complex social and public health problem, which represents a human rights violation. Globally, GBV tends to occur in intimate partner relationships. Latin American countries report high rates of this violence. Despite their social and historical differences, Ecuador and Argentina are among Latin countries that aim to dismantle patriarchy. Developing psychoeducation materials is one way in which communities can recognize and prevent GBV. Psycholinguistics can provide useful tools to facilitate learning about this social issue: prior studies suggest that promoting the establishment of discourse connections, the generation of emotion inferences and the emotional involvement of the comprehender facilitate written and spoken discourse comprehension. The aim of this commentary article is to present an overview of the current incidence of GBV in Ecuador and Argentina, and to highlight the contributions that preliminary research on discourse comprehension can make to facilitate learning about GBV prevention strategies. Finally, we will discuss possible research guidelines and future directions. We expect that this manuscript will contribute to highlighting the importance of promoting social awareness of GBV and, therefore, the crucial role of the design and implementation of scientifically based interventions.

Flattening the COVID-19 curve: Emotions mediate the effects of a persuasive message on preventive action

Introduction

Across four countries (Canada, USA, UK, and Italy), we explored the effects of persuasive messages on intended and actual preventive actions related to COVID-19, and the role of emotions as a potential mechanism for explaining these effects.

Methods

One thousand seventy-eight participants first reported their level of concern and emotions about COVID-19 and then received a positive persuasive text, negative persuasive text, or no text. After reading, participants reported their emotions about the pandemic and their willingness to take preventive action. One week following, the same participants reported the frequency with which they engaged in preventive action and behaviors that increased the risk of contracting COVID-19.

Results

Results revealed that the positive persuasive text significantly increased individuals' willingness to and actual engagement in preventive action and reduced risky behaviors 1 week following the intervention compared to the control condition. Moreover, significant differences were found between the positive persuasive text condition and negative persuasive text condition whereby individuals who read the positive text were more willing and actually engaged in more preventive action compared to those who read the negative text. No differences were found, however, at the 1-week follow-up for social distancing and isolation behaviors. Results also revealed that specific discrete emotions mediated relations between the effects of the texts and preventive action (both willing and actual).

Discussion

This research highlights the power of educational interventions to prompt behavioral change and has implications for pandemic-related interventions, government policy on health promotion messages, and future research.

EXPRESS: Combining Refutations and Social Norms Increases Belief Change

Misinformed beliefs are difficult to change. Refutations that target false claims typically reduce false beliefs, but tend to be only partially effective. In this study, a social norming approach was explored to test whether provision of peer norms could provide an alternative or complementary approach to refutation. Three experiments investigated whether a descriptive norm-by itself or in combination with a refutation-could reduce the endorsement of worldview-congruent claims. Experiment 1 found that using a single point estimate to communicate a norm affected belief but had less impact than a refutation. Experiment 2 used a verbally-presented distribution of four values to communicate a norm, which was largely ineffective. Experiment 3 used a graphically-presented social norm with 25 values, which was found to be as effective at reducing claim belief as a refutation, with the combination of both interventions being most impactful. These results provide a proof of concept that normative information can aid in the debunking of false or equivocal claims, and suggests that theories of misinformation processing should take social factors into account.