Abstract
Background: Democrats and Republicans in the United States were divided on their COVID-related risk perceptions and their adoption of preventive measures (e.g., getting vaccinated). Based on moral foundations theory and the matching hypothesis, this study hypothesized that parents with a Democratic affiliation would be persuaded by messages featuring a harm/care or a fairness moral appeal, whereas parents with a Republican affiliation would be persuaded by messages featuring an authority or ingroup loyalty appeal.
Method: An experiment was conducted among 567 parents with children aged 5-11, whereby each participant was randomly assigned to read one of the four moral appeals or a control message. Each participant then completed a questionnaire.
Results: The results showed that, in general, the moral appeals did not interact with parents’ political affiliations, and the moral appeal messages did not significantly increase the parents' risk perceptions or vaccine uptake intent for their children. Additional analysis showed that trust in government and future orientation were strong predictors of parents’ risk perceptions and vaccine uptake intent, whereas COVID fatigue was a weak predictor of their message evaluation.
Conclusion: Moral framing in persuasive messages may have limited effects on a health problem widely known to the public. Instead, participants' internalized value orientations and personal differences may be more predictive of their attitudes and adoption of preventive measures.
Keywords: COVID-19, Vaccine uptake intent, Parents, Moral appeals, Political affiliation
Recommended Citation
Wang X, Xu J.
A Randomized Experiment on the Effects of Moral Appeals on U.S. Parents’ Intentions to Vaccinate Their 5e11-Year-Old Children Against COVID-19.
J Health Res.
2023;
37(5):289-296.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.56808/2586-940X.1022
References
[1] Brenan M. Willingness to get COVID-19 vaccine ticks up to 63% in U.S. [updated 2020 Dec 8; cited 2022 Jun 1]. Available from: https://news.gallup.com/poll/327425/willingness-covidvaccine-ticks.aspx.
[2] Lewis T. Nine COVID-19 myths that just won’t go away [updated 2020 Aug 18; cited 2022 Jun 1]. Available from: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nine-covid-19-myths-that-just-wont-go-away/.
[3] See how vaccinations are going in your county and state [cited 2022 Aug 25]. Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine-doses.html#age.
[4] Hsu T. Pope Francis encourages Covid vaccines in media campaign [updated 2021 Aug 17; cited 2022 June 1]. Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/17/business/media/pope-covid-vaccine-ad.html.
[5] Feinberg M, Willer R. From gulf to bridge: when do moral arguments facilitate political influence? Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2015;41(12):1665-81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215607842.
[6] Graham J, Haidt J, Koleva S, Motyl M, Iyer R, Wojcik SP, et al. Moral foundations theory: the pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In: Devine P, Plant A, editors. Advances in experimental social psychology. Amsterdam: Academic Press; 2013. p. 55-130.
[7] Maio GR, Olson JM. Why we evaluate: functions of attitudes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.
[8] Schemer C, Wirth W, Matthes J. Value resonance and value framing effects on voting intentions in direct-democratic campaigns. Am Behav Sci 2012;56(3):334-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426329.
[9] Ball H, Wozniak TR. Why do some americans resist COVID-19 prevention behavior? An analysis of issue importance,message fatigue, and reactance regarding COVID-19 messaging. Health Commun 2021:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1920717.
[10] Guan M, Li Y, Scoles JD, Zhu Y. COVID-19 message fatigue: how does it predict preventive behavioral intentions and what types of information are people tired of hearing about? Health Commun 2022:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.2023385.
[11] Zhang N, Kou Y. Implicit theories of health, consideration of future consequences, and engagement in health protective behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. J Health Psychol 2022;27(6):1462-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053211017191.
[12] Han Q, Zheng B, Cristea M, Agostini M, B_elanger JJ, Gützkow B, et al. Trust in government regarding COVID-19 and its associations with preventive health behaviour and prosocial behaviour during the pandemic: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Psychol Med 2021:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291721001306.
[13] Wang X, Zhao X. The mediating role of temporal considerations on the effects of self-affirmation on responses to organ donation messages. Health Commun 2018;33(2):148-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1250190.
[14] Rosenstock IM. The health belief model and preventive health behavior. Health Educ Monogr 1974;2(4):354-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200405.
[15] Conner M, Sparks P. Theory of planned behaviour and health behaviour. In: Conner M, Norman P, editors. Predicting health behaviour: research and practice with social cognition models. Berkshire: Open University Press; 2005. p.121-62.
[16] Quinn SC, Parmer J, Freimuth VS, Hilyard KM, Musa D, Kim KH. Exploring communication, trust in government, and vaccination intention later in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic: results of a national survey. Biosecur Bioterror 2013;11(2):96-106. https://doi.org/10.1089/bsp.2012.0048.
[17] Lilleholt L, Zettler I, Betsch C, B€ohm R. Pandemic fatigue: measurement, correlates, and consequences. PsyArXiv 2020. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2xvbr [Preprint].
[18] Strathman A, Gleicher F, Boninger DS, Edwards CS. The consideration of future consequences: weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 1994;66(4):742-52. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742.
[19] Arpan LM, Xu X, Raney AA, Chen CF, Wang Z. Politics, values, and morals: assessing consumer responses to the framing of residential renewable energy in the United States. Energy Res Social Sci 2018;46:321-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.08.007.
