Suppr超能文献

我更相信我的免疫力,而不是你的疫苗:“诉诸自然”偏见强烈预测了 COVID-19 大流行期间有问题的健康行为。

I trust my immunity more than your vaccines: "Appeal to nature" bias strongly predicts questionable health behaviors in the COVID-19 pandemic.

机构信息

Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Psychology, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.

Faculty of Philosophy, LIRA Laboratory for Individual Differences, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2023 Feb 22;18(2):e0279122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279122. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

Health care policies often rely on public cooperation, especially during a health crisis. However, a crisis is also a period of uncertainty and proliferation of health-related advice: while some people adhere to the official recommendations, others tend to avoid them and resort to non-evidence based, pseudoscientific practices. People prone to the latter are often the ones endorsing a set of epistemically suspect beliefs, with two being particularly relevant: conspiratorial pandemic-related beliefs, and the appeal to nature bias regarding COVID-19 (i.e., trusting natural immunity to fight the pandemic). These in turn are rooted in trust in different epistemic authorities, seen as mutually exclusive: trust in science and trust in the "wisdom of the common man". Drawing from two nationally representative probability samples, we tested a model in which trust in science/wisdom of the common man predicted COVID-19 vaccination status (Study 1, N = 1001) or vaccination status alongside use of pseudoscientific health practices (Study 2, N = 1010), through COVID-19 conspiratorial beliefs and the appeal to nature bias regarding COVID-19. As expected, epistemically suspect beliefs were interrelated, related to vaccination status, and to both types of trust. Moreover, trust in science had both a direct and indirect effect on vaccination status through both types of epistemically suspect beliefs. Trust in the wisdom of the common man had only an indirect effect on vaccination status. Contrary to the way they are typically portrayed, the two types of trust were unrelated. These results were largely replicated in the second study, in which we added pseudoscientific practices as an outcome; trust in science and the wisdom of the common man contributed to their prediction only indirectly, through epistemically suspect beliefs. We offer recommendations on how to make use of different types of epistemic authorities and how to tackle unfounded beliefs in communication during a health crisis.

摘要

卫生保健政策通常依赖于公众的合作,尤其是在卫生危机期间。然而,危机也是一个不确定和大量出现与健康相关建议的时期:一些人遵守官方建议,而另一些人则倾向于回避这些建议,并诉诸于非基于证据的、伪科学的做法。倾向于后者的人通常是那些认同一套可疑认识论信念的人,其中两个特别相关:与阴谋论相关的大流行病信念,以及对 COVID-19 的自然倾向偏见(即,相信自然免疫力可以对抗大流行病)。这些反过来又植根于对不同认识论权威的信任,这些权威被视为相互排斥的:对科学的信任和对“大众智慧”的信任。我们从两个具有全国代表性的概率样本中,测试了一个模型,该模型表明,对科学/大众智慧的信任预测了 COVID-19 疫苗接种状况(研究 1,N = 1001),或者与使用伪科学健康做法一起预测了 COVID-19 疫苗接种状况(研究 2,N = 1010),这是通过 COVID-19 阴谋论信念和对 COVID-19 的自然倾向偏见来实现的。正如预期的那样,可疑的认识论信念是相互关联的,与疫苗接种状况以及这两种信任都有关。此外,对科学的信任通过这两种可疑的认识论信念对疫苗接种状况既有直接影响,也有间接影响。对大众智慧的信任对疫苗接种状况只有间接影响。与它们通常被描绘的方式相反,这两种类型的信任是不相关的。在第二项研究中,我们将伪科学实践作为一个结果添加到研究中,这些结果得到了很大程度的复制;对科学和大众智慧的信任仅通过可疑的认识论信念间接地对疫苗接种状况产生影响。我们提供了如何在卫生危机期间利用不同类型的认识论权威以及如何解决毫无根据的信念的建议。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ef7/9946228/7b8c99186597/pone.0279122.g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验