Seatbelts and raincoats, or banks and castles: Investigating the impact of vaccine metaphors.
Seatbelts and raincoats, or banks and castles: Investigating the impact of vaccine metaphors.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0294739
复制
发表时间：
2024
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
虽然隐喻经常被用来解决对疫苗的误解和犹豫，但目前还不清楚它们在健康信息中的有效性。采用前测/后测的受试间设计，我们调查了解释性隐喻对人们对疫苗态度的影响。我们在美国在线招募了参与者（N = 301），并要求他们提供关于（虚构的）健康信息活动的反馈，我们围绕对疫苗的五个常见问题的回答组织了这些反馈。所有参与者在评估对五个问题的回答之前和之后完成了一项关于他们对疫苗态度的24项测量。我们为每个疫苗问题创建了三个可能的响应通道：两个包含扩展的解释性隐喻，一个包含字面响应（即，没有解释性隐喻）。参与者被随机分配接受所有隐喻或所有“字面”的反应。他们从几个方面对每个回答进行评分，然后描述如果由朋友提出关于疫苗的目标问题，他们将如何回答。结果显示，两种情况下的参与者都认为大多数信息都是可以理解的，信息丰富的，有说服力的，只有少数例外。在这两种情况下的参与者也表现出类似的小，但显着增加，从测试前到测试后，对疫苗的有利态度。值得注意的是，隐喻条件下的参与者对假设的朋友提出的问题提供了更长的自由回答，不同的隐喻在他们的回答中以不同的程度和方式被重复使用。综上所述，我们的研究结果表明：（a）简短的健康信息段落可能有潜力改善对疫苗的态度，（B）隐喻既不会增强也不会减少这种态度效应，（c）隐喻可能比字面语言更有助于促进关于疫苗的进一步社会沟通。
While metaphors are frequently used to address misconceptions and hesitancy about vaccines, it is unclear how effective they are in health messaging. Using a between-subject, pretest/posttest design, we investigated the impact of explanatory metaphors on people’s attitudes toward vaccines. We recruited participants online in the US (N = 301) and asked them to provide feedback on a (fictional) health messaging campaign, which we organized around responses to five common questions about vaccines. All participants completed a 24-item measure of their attitudes towards vaccines before and after evaluating the responses to the five questions. We created three possible response passages for each vaccine question: two included extended explanatory metaphors, and one contained a literal response (i.e., no explanatory metaphors). Participants were randomly assigned to receive either all metaphors or all ‘literal’ responses. They rated each response on several dimensions and then described how they would answer the target question about vaccines if it were posed by a friend. Results showed participants in both conditions rated most messages as being similarly understandable, informative, and persuasive, with a few notable exceptions. Participants in both conditions also exhibited a similar small—but significant—increase in favorable attitudes towards vaccines from pre- to posttest. Notably, participants in the metaphor condition provided longer free-response answers to the question posed by a hypothetical friend, with different metaphors being reused to different extents and in different ways in their responses. Taken together, our findings suggest that: (a) Brief health messaging passages may have the potential to improve attitudes towards vaccines, (b) Metaphors neither enhance nor reduce this attitude effect, (c) Metaphors may be more helpful than literal language in facilitating further social communication about vaccines.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
9.9
作者：
Flesch, Rudolf
通讯作者：
Flesch, Rudolf
影响因子：
1.1
作者：
Brugman, Britta C.;Droog, Ellen;de Lavalette, Kiki Y. Renardel
通讯作者：
de Lavalette, Kiki Y. Renardel
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Ervas, Francesca;Salis, Pietro;Sechi, Cristina;Fanari, Rachele
通讯作者：
Fanari, Rachele
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Douglas, Benjamin D.;Ewell, Patrick J.;Brauer, Markus
通讯作者：
Brauer, Markus
影响因子：
12.6
作者：
Buhrmester, Michael;Kwang, Tracy;Gosling, Samuel D.
通讯作者：
Gosling, Samuel D.