Back to Search Start Over

A brief forewarning intervention overcomes negative effects of salient changes in COVID-19 guidance.

Authors :
Gretton, Jeremy D.
Meyers, Ethan A.
Walker, Alexander C.
Fugelsang, Jonathan A.
Koehler, Derek J.
Source :
Judgment & Decision Making. Nov2021, Vol. 16 Issue 6, p1549-1574. 26p.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, public health guidance (e.g., regarding the use of non-medical masks) changed over time. Although many revisions were a result of gains in scientific understanding, we nonetheless hypothesized that making changes in guidance salient would negatively affect evaluations of experts and health-protective intentions. In Study 1 (N = 300), we demonstrate that describing COVID-19 guidance in terms of inconsistency (versus consistency) leads people to perceive scientists and public health authorities less favorably (e.g., as less expert). For participants in Canada (n = 190), though not the U.S. (n = 110), making guidance change salient also reduced intentions to download a contact tracing app. In Study 2 (N = 1399), we show that a brief forewarning intervention mitigates detrimental effects of changes in guidance. In the absence of forewarning, emphasizing inconsistency harmed judgments of public health authorities and reduced health-protective intentions, but forewarning eliminated this effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
19302975
Volume :
16
Issue :
6
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Judgment & Decision Making
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
153943958
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500008548