Search

Examining how metaphor used to describe COVID-19 vaccine process (development, approval, etc.) might influence relevant attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours.

Aiming to replicate effects of framing of COVID-19 vaccine development/distribution/approval (etc.) as a race vs. effort. Biggest study design changes are 1) rewording messages somewhat (e.g., trying to further emphasize speed/strength distinctions), 3) adding additional materials potentially impacted by metaphor (e.g., preference for prioritization of U.S. vs. global concerns in vaccine distribution), 4) adding 'prescriptive' questions as well as 'descriptive' questions, 5) removing control condition, and 6) removing non-essential covariate (Urbanicity)

Aiming to replicate effects of framing of COVID-19 vaccine development/distribution/approval (etc.) as a race vs. effort. Biggest study design changes are 1) using a no-message control condition to ensure a neutral control, rather than the "issue"-focused (attempted neutral) wording used previously, 2) rewording messages somewhat (e.g., emphasizing distribution of vaccines given that vaccine development has progressed), 3) adding additional materials potentially impacted by metaphor (e.g., imagined regret after vaccinating)

Aiming to mitigate previously-found message inconsistency effects (e.g., reduced trust & expertise) via an intervention describing the nature of change in science and the role of public health authorities

Examining effects of COVID-19 message (in)consistency on trust and behaviour (e..g, vaccination intention). Also examining relation between metaphor used for vaccine development/approval (race vs. effort measures) and vaccination intention.

Follow-up, aiming to strengthen effects of inconsistency on trust etc. and show moderation by forewarning

Examining determinants of when people attribute illness to a vaccine versus to chance