Durham Cultural Evolution Research Centre, Department of Anthropology, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom.
Conspiracy Theories in Health Special Interest Group, Wolfson Research Institute for Health and Wellbeing, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2020 Mar 4;15(3):e0228898. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228898. eCollection 2020.
Despite the spectacular success of vaccines in preventing infectious diseases, fears about their safety and other anti-vaccination claims are widespread. To better understand how such fears and claims persist and spread, we must understand how they are perceived and recalled. One influence on the perception and recall of vaccination-related information might be universal cognitive biases acting against vaccination. An omission bias describes the tendency to perceive as worse, and recall better, bad outcomes resulting from commissions (e.g. vaccine side effects) compared to the same bad outcomes resulting from omissions (e.g. symptoms of vaccine preventable diseases). Another factor influencing the perception and recall of vaccination-related information might be people's attitudes towards vaccines. A confirmation bias would mean that pre-existing pro-vaccination attitudes positively predict perceptions of severity and recall of symptoms of vaccine preventable diseases and negatively predict perceptions of severity and recall of vaccine side effects. To test for these hypothesized biases, 202 female participants aged 18-60 (M = 38.15, SD = 10.37) completed an online experiment with a between-subjects experimental design. Participants imagined that they had a 1-year old child who suffered from either vaccine side effects (Commission Condition) or symptoms of a vaccine-preventable disease (Omission Condition). They then rated a list of symptoms/side effects for their perceived severity on a 7-point Likert scale. Finally, they completed a surprise recall test in which they recalled the symptoms/side effects previously rated. An additional scale was used to measure their attitudes towards vaccines. Contrary to the hypotheses, perceptions of severity and the recall of symptoms/side effects were not associated with experimental condition, failing to support the omission bias, nor did they interact with attitudes towards vaccines, failing to support the confirmation bias. This cast doubt on the possibility that the spread of anti-vaccination claims can be explained by these particular universal cognitive biases.
尽管疫苗在预防传染病方面取得了巨大成功,但人们对其安全性的担忧以及其他反疫苗接种的说法仍然广泛存在。为了更好地理解这些担忧和说法是如何持续存在和传播的,我们必须了解人们如何感知和回忆这些信息。影响人们对疫苗接种相关信息的感知和回忆的一个因素可能是普遍存在的认知偏见,这些偏见不利于人们接受疫苗接种。遗漏偏差描述了一种倾向,即人们会认为由作为(例如疫苗副作用)导致的不良后果比由不作为(例如疫苗可预防疾病的症状)导致的相同不良后果更糟糕,并且会更好地回忆起这些后果。另一个影响人们对疫苗接种相关信息的感知和回忆的因素可能是人们对疫苗的态度。确认偏差意味着,先前存在的支持疫苗接种的态度会积极预测对疫苗可预防疾病的严重程度的感知和对其症状的回忆,而会消极预测对疫苗副作用的严重程度的感知和对其症状的回忆。为了检验这些假设的偏见,202 名年龄在 18 岁至 60 岁之间的女性参与者(M = 38.15,SD = 10.37)完成了一项在线实验,采用了组间实验设计。参与者想象他们有一个 1 岁的孩子,孩子患有疫苗副作用(作为条件)或疫苗可预防疾病的症状(不作为条件)。然后,他们使用 7 点李克特量表对一系列症状/副作用的严重程度进行评分。最后,他们完成了一项惊喜回忆测试,在测试中他们回忆起之前评价过的症状/副作用。还使用了一个额外的量表来衡量他们对疫苗的态度。与假设相反,对严重程度的感知和对症状/副作用的回忆与实验条件无关,这一结果不支持遗漏偏差,也没有与对疫苗的态度相互作用,这一结果不支持确认偏差。这使人对反疫苗接种说法的传播是否可以用这些特定的普遍认知偏见来解释产生了怀疑。