Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: The effects of scientific messages and narratives about vaccination
Authors: Kuru, Ozan 
Stecula, Dominik
Lu, Hang
Ophir, Yotam
Chan, Man-Pui Sally
Winneg, Ken
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall
Albarracín, D.
Issue Date: 24-Mar-2021
Publisher: Public Library of Science
Citation: Kuru, Ozan, Stecula, Dominik, Lu, Hang, Ophir, Yotam, Chan, Man-Pui Sally, Winneg, Ken, Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, Albarracín, D. (2021-03-24). The effects of scientific messages and narratives about vaccination. PLoS ONE 16 (3 March) : e0248328. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Abstract: A fundamental challenge complicates news decisions about covering vaccine side effects: although serious vaccine side effects are rare, less severe ones do occur occasionally. The study was designed to test whether a side effect message could induce vaccine hesitancy and whether that could be countered by pro-vaccine messages about vaccine safety. A large (N = 2,345), nationally representative experiment was conducted by randomly exposing participants to one of six videos about the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine edited from news programs produced during the 2019 measles outbreak in the United States. The design was a 2x3 factorial crossing the presence or absence of a hesitancyinducing narrative message with a pro-vaccine science-supporting message (i.e., no message, science-supporting expert message, or pro-vaccine narrative message), leading to a total of six conditions. A general linear model was used to assess the effects of these videos on respondents' (1) vaccine risk perceptions, (2) policy views on vaccination, (3) willingness to encourage others to vaccinate their children, and (4) intention to send a pro-vaccine letter to their state representative. Findings indicated that the science-supporting expert message about vaccine safety led to higher pro-vaccine evaluations relative to other conditions [e.g., b = -0.17, p < .001, a reduction in vaccine risk perceptions of 0.17 as compared to the control]. There was also suggestive evidence that the hesitancy-inducing narrative may limit the effectiveness of a science-supporting expert message, although this finding was not consistent across different outcomes. When shown alone the hesitancy-inducing narrative did not shift views and intentions, but more research is needed to ascertain whether exposure to such messages can undercut the pro-vaccine influence of science-supporting (expert) ones. All in all, however, it is clear that science-supporting messages are effective and therefore worthwhile in combating vaccine misinformation. Copyright: © 2021 Kuru et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Source Title: PLoS ONE
ISSN: 1932-6203
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248328
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1371_journal_pone_0248328.pdf816.84 kBAdobe PDF



Google ScholarTM



This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons