Dixon Graham N
a School of Communication , The Ohio State University , Columbus , Ohio , USA.
J Health Commun. 2017 Aug;22(8):631-637. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2017.1337832. Epub 2017 Jul 6.
Health officials often face challenges in communicating the risks associated with not vaccinating, where persuasive messages can fail to elicit desired responses. However, the mechanisms behind these failures have not been fully ascertained. To address this gap, an experiment (N = 163) tested the differences between loss-framed messages-one emphasizing the consequence of not receiving a flu vaccine; the other emphasizing the consequence of receiving the flu vaccine. Despite an identical consequence (i.e., Guillain-Barre syndrome), the message highlighting the consequence of not receiving the flu vaccine produced lower negative affect scores as compared to the message highlighting the consequence of receiving the flu vaccine. Mediation analyses suggest that one reason for this difference is due to non-vaccination being perceived as temporary and reversible, whereas vaccination is perceived as being permanent. Implications on health communication and future research are discussed.
卫生官员在传达不接种疫苗所带来的风险时常常面临挑战,在这种情况下,有说服力的信息可能无法引发预期的反应。然而,这些失败背后的机制尚未完全确定。为了填补这一空白,一项实验(N = 163)测试了损失框架信息之间的差异——一种强调不接种流感疫苗的后果;另一种强调接种流感疫苗的后果。尽管后果相同(即格林-巴利综合征),但与强调接种流感疫苗后果的信息相比,强调不接种流感疫苗后果的信息产生的负面影响得分更低。中介分析表明,这种差异的一个原因是,未接种疫苗被视为暂时的且可逆转的,而接种疫苗则被视为永久性的。本文还讨论了对健康传播和未来研究的启示。