Testing two attention-related effects in COVID-19 vaccine likelihood

Two studies (combined N = 2,044 with online U.S.-based participants) were conducted to test attention theory-based methods intended to increase vaccine intentions: (a) the presence versus absence of having a choice and (b) in choice’s absence, the effect of offering a single option and describing it...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied research in memory and cognition 2024-04
Main Authors: Peters, Ellen, Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany, Chansiri, Karikarn
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attention
Choice Behavior
COVID-19
Female
Human
Intention
Male
Theories
Vaccination
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Journal of applied research in memory and cognition
container_volume
creator Peters, Ellen
Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany
Chansiri, Karikarn
description Two studies (combined N = 2,044 with online U.S.-based participants) were conducted to test attention theory-based methods intended to increase vaccine intentions: (a) the presence versus absence of having a choice and (b) in choice’s absence, the effect of offering a single option and describing it versus offering the same option and describing it plus additional options. Consistent with attention-based choice, participants (both unvaccinated and vaccinated) expressed a stronger positive affect to the vaccine and a greater likelihood to get vaccinated when allowed to choose among multiple vaccines. The pleasure of choice is an overlooked factor when considering how to increase vaccine uptake. In the absence of choice, however, effects were mixed about whether informing about a single vaccine would increase intentions over informing about multiple vaccines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)
doi_str_mv 10.1037/mac0000170
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3037066226</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3037066226</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c148t-d796cba18ddd9a96d574073abfe470437966a24234ab280577ed15b64da9fb7a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkE1LAzEQQIMoWGov_oKAN2E1X5vsHqXVWij0UsXbMptkNXW7qUmq-O9NqehcZph5zAwPoUtKbijh6nYLmuSgipygEWOUFlzWL6d_dUXP0STGzQGShObuCM3WNiY3vOL05TGkZIfk_FAE20OyBtuuszpF7AY8XT0vZgWt8Sdo7QaLe_due_fmvblAZx300U5-8xg9Pdyvp4_FcjVfTO-WhaaiSoVRtdQt0MoYU0MtTakEURzazgpFBM9jCUwwLqBlFSmVsoaWrRQG6q5VwMfo6rh3F_zHPj_ebPw-DPlkw7MAIiVjMlPXR0oHH2OwXbMLbgvhu6GkOYhq_kXxHzV7WUs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3037066226</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Testing two attention-related effects in COVID-19 vaccine likelihood</title><source>PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Peters, Ellen ; Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany ; Chansiri, Karikarn</creator><creatorcontrib>Peters, Ellen ; Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany ; Chansiri, Karikarn</creatorcontrib><description>Two studies (combined N = 2,044 with online U.S.-based participants) were conducted to test attention theory-based methods intended to increase vaccine intentions: (a) the presence versus absence of having a choice and (b) in choice’s absence, the effect of offering a single option and describing it versus offering the same option and describing it plus additional options. Consistent with attention-based choice, participants (both unvaccinated and vaccinated) expressed a stronger positive affect to the vaccine and a greater likelihood to get vaccinated when allowed to choose among multiple vaccines. The pleasure of choice is an overlooked factor when considering how to increase vaccine uptake. In the absence of choice, however, effects were mixed about whether informing about a single vaccine would increase intentions over informing about multiple vaccines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)</description><identifier>ISSN: 2211-3681</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2211-369X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/mac0000170</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washigton: Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition</publisher><subject>Attention ; Choice Behavior ; COVID-19 ; Female ; Human ; Intention ; Male ; Theories ; Vaccination</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied research in memory and cognition, 2024-04</ispartof><rights>2024, American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0003-0702-6169 ; 0000-0002-2844-4995 ; 0000-0003-4924-0905</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Peters, Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chansiri, Karikarn</creatorcontrib><title>Testing two attention-related effects in COVID-19 vaccine likelihood</title><title>Journal of applied research in memory and cognition</title><description>Two studies (combined N = 2,044 with online U.S.-based participants) were conducted to test attention theory-based methods intended to increase vaccine intentions: (a) the presence versus absence of having a choice and (b) in choice’s absence, the effect of offering a single option and describing it versus offering the same option and describing it plus additional options. Consistent with attention-based choice, participants (both unvaccinated and vaccinated) expressed a stronger positive affect to the vaccine and a greater likelihood to get vaccinated when allowed to choose among multiple vaccines. The pleasure of choice is an overlooked factor when considering how to increase vaccine uptake. In the absence of choice, however, effects were mixed about whether informing about a single vaccine would increase intentions over informing about multiple vaccines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)</description><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Choice Behavior</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Intention</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Theories</subject><subject>Vaccination</subject><issn>2211-3681</issn><issn>2211-369X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkE1LAzEQQIMoWGov_oKAN2E1X5vsHqXVWij0UsXbMptkNXW7qUmq-O9NqehcZph5zAwPoUtKbijh6nYLmuSgipygEWOUFlzWL6d_dUXP0STGzQGShObuCM3WNiY3vOL05TGkZIfk_FAE20OyBtuuszpF7AY8XT0vZgWt8Sdo7QaLe_due_fmvblAZx300U5-8xg9Pdyvp4_FcjVfTO-WhaaiSoVRtdQt0MoYU0MtTakEURzazgpFBM9jCUwwLqBlFSmVsoaWrRQG6q5VwMfo6rh3F_zHPj_ebPw-DPlkw7MAIiVjMlPXR0oHH2OwXbMLbgvhu6GkOYhq_kXxHzV7WUs</recordid><startdate>20240411</startdate><enddate>20240411</enddate><creator>Peters, Ellen</creator><creator>Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany</creator><creator>Chansiri, Karikarn</creator><general>Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0702-6169</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2844-4995</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4924-0905</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240411</creationdate><title>Testing two attention-related effects in COVID-19 vaccine likelihood</title><author>Peters, Ellen ; Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany ; Chansiri, Karikarn</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c148t-d796cba18ddd9a96d574073abfe470437966a24234ab280577ed15b64da9fb7a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Choice Behavior</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Intention</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Theories</topic><topic>Vaccination</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Peters, Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chansiri, Karikarn</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PsycARTICLES</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied research in memory and cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Peters, Ellen</au><au>Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany</au><au>Chansiri, Karikarn</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Testing two attention-related effects in COVID-19 vaccine likelihood</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied research in memory and cognition</jtitle><date>2024-04-11</date><risdate>2024</risdate><issn>2211-3681</issn><eissn>2211-369X</eissn><abstract>Two studies (combined N = 2,044 with online U.S.-based participants) were conducted to test attention theory-based methods intended to increase vaccine intentions: (a) the presence versus absence of having a choice and (b) in choice’s absence, the effect of offering a single option and describing it versus offering the same option and describing it plus additional options. Consistent with attention-based choice, participants (both unvaccinated and vaccinated) expressed a stronger positive affect to the vaccine and a greater likelihood to get vaccinated when allowed to choose among multiple vaccines. The pleasure of choice is an overlooked factor when considering how to increase vaccine uptake. In the absence of choice, however, effects were mixed about whether informing about a single vaccine would increase intentions over informing about multiple vaccines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)</abstract><cop>Washigton</cop><pub>Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition</pub><doi>10.1037/mac0000170</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0702-6169</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2844-4995</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4924-0905</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2211-3681
ispartof Journal of applied research in memory and cognition, 2024-04
issn 2211-3681
2211-369X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3037066226
source PsycARTICLES
subjects Attention
Choice Behavior
COVID-19
Female
Human
Intention
Male
Theories
Vaccination
title Testing two attention-related effects in COVID-19 vaccine likelihood
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T17%3A06%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Testing%20two%20attention-related%20effects%20in%20COVID-19%20vaccine%20likelihood&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20research%20in%20memory%20and%20cognition&rft.au=Peters,%20Ellen&rft.date=2024-04-11&rft.issn=2211-3681&rft.eissn=2211-369X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/mac0000170&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3037066226%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c148t-d796cba18ddd9a96d574073abfe470437966a24234ab280577ed15b64da9fb7a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3037066226&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true