Contextual agility informing market shaping

Making sense of a markets is a necessary precursor to any strategizing such as shaping. Still, the nature of this sense-making is oftentimes kept in the dark. It is somehow subordinate to what follows. The lack of such explicit market portrayals entails the risk of myopia to the detriment of seeing shaping possibilities. It also means that ensuing strategic efforts risk to go in vain as they possibly mirror an oversimplified reality. Making agile sense of the surrounding market context turns these two potential shortcomings into opportunities. Such contextual agility is an aptitude of some firms. It is a knowledge ability which prepares for agency in a prompt and responsive way as some representational practices translate into shaping practices. This conceptual research introduces contextual agility which hosts representational, entrepreneurial, and agile elements. This ability of individual firms promises to inform market shaping as its points of departure are clarified. It is here illustrated via contested product qualification, consumer Covid-19 vaccine skepticism. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Correcting vaccine misinformation on social media: Effect of social correction methods on vaccine skeptics' intention to take COVID-19 vaccine

This study identifies the effect of six social correction methods on vaccine skeptics' intention to take COVID-19 vaccine. In April–May 2021, we conducted a 3 (corrector on Twitter: ordinary person vs medical doctor vs nurse) × 2 (correction strategy: priming vs rebuttal) + 1 (control: misinformation only) between-subjects online experiment with 569 vaccine skeptics in the United States. Results show that exposure to priming-based corrections performed by a corrector, regardless of their expertise, is positively associated with intention to take COVID-19 vaccine if the information shared by the corrector is perceived to be trustworthy. This is evident among those with high or moderate vaccine skepticism. What is only evident among those with moderate vaccine skepticism is that exposure to corrections using priming (any corrector) or rebuttal (ordinary person or medical doctor) is positively associated with intention to take COVID-19 vaccine if the respondents perceived that the corrector was an expert. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of New Media & Society is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Social media skepticism and belief in conspiracy theories about COVID-19: the moderating role of the dark triad.

The prevalence of conspiracy theories about COVID-19 in the wide-open social media environment has raised considerable concerns about the adverse effects of believing such theories. The previous work showed that skepticism is negatively associated with acceptance of media content. However, this association has yet to be investigated between skepticism towards content on social media and conviction of COVID-19 conspiracy theories. Furthermore, this association can be a function of social media users' dark triad traits comprising Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy. A convenient sample of 439 Malaysian young adult social media users was recruited to complete the survey. Results showed that skepticism has a negative relationship with belief in conspiracy theories about COVID-19. However, the strength of the relationship is varied depending on respondents' Machiavellianism and narcissism levels. The negative association between skepticism and belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories is weaker for individuals with high scores on Machiavellianism. High and moderate scores on narcissism were also found to diminish the negative relationship of skepticism with COVID-19 conspiracy ideation. The results yield implications for enhancing healthy skepticism to mitigate belief in conspiracy theories promulgated on social media. Nonetheless, Machiavellianism and narcissism appeared to weaken the power of skepticism on conspiracy theories.

The Impact of Socioeconomic Status, Perceived Threat and Healthism on Vaccine Hesitancy

The ideology of healthism and low perceptions of the threat of vaccine-preventable diseases may explain the positive link between socioeconomic status (SES) and vaccine hesitancy in high-income countries. The present study aimed to examine the effect of three measures of SES (education, income and family economic status), the perceived threat of infectious diseases and two dimensions of healthism (personal responsibility for own health and distrust in healthcare institutions) on vaccine hesitancy, adjusting for sociodemographic variables. A cross-sectional quantitative study was performed in 2019. Non-probability sampling was employed by sending invitations to respondents over the age of 18 to participate in the study. The snowball technique was used, employing e-mails and digital social networks (Facebook, Twitter and Instagram). Data from 661 respondents were collected via 1 ka.si, an online survey tool. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that vaccine hesitancy was significantly more likely to be expressed by women (β = 0.09;p < 0.001), high-income respondents (β = 0.09;p < 0.01), those who have lower perceptions of the threat of vaccine-preventable diseases (β = 0.39;p < 0.001) and those scoring high on two healthism measures (expressing high perceived control of their own health (β = 0.18;p < 0.001) and high distrust in the Slovenian healthcare system and institutions (β = 0.37;p < 0.001)). The findings indicate that among the examined predictors, low perceived threat of vaccine-preventable diseases and low trust in the healthcare system are among the strongest predictors of vaccine hesitancy among the Slovenian public. Policymakers, physicians and other healthcare workers should be especially attentive to the public's and patients' perceptions of the risk of infectious diseases and distrust in medical institutions, including during doctor–patient communication and through public health campaigns and policies.

The Impact of Auditor's Competency, Audit Risk, and Professional Skepticism to Audit Quality in Fraud Detection Using Remote Audit

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of auditors' professional skepticism, audit risk, and auditor competence on audit quality in conducting remote audits in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. To determine this effect, the researcher used the Simple Random Sampling method by analyzing the data using primary data with a questionnaire as a tool to collect data. The results of this study indicate that the application of professional skepticism and auditor competence has a significant effect on audit quality. So that these two things are very important to note so that the resulting audit quality is good. Meanwhile, audit risk has no significant effect on audit quality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Audit risk can be minimized by using audit technology that is increasingly sophisticated from time to time. © 2022 ACM.

Science skepticism in times of COVID-19

In the current paper, we argue that to get a better understanding of the psychological antecedents of COVID-related science skepticism, it is pivotal to review what is known about the (social) psychology of science skepticism. Recent research highlighting the role of ideologies and worldviews in shaping science skepticism can inform research questions as well as pandemic responses to COVID-19. It is likely that the antecedents of general COVID-19-related skepticism substantially overlap with the antecedents of climate change skepticism. Additionally, skepticism about a potential vaccine in particular will likely be fueled by similar worries and misperceptions to those shaping more general antivaccination attitudes, of which conspiracy thinking is particularly worth highlighting. We conclude by reflecting on how the COVID-19 crisis may shape future social-psychological research aimed at understanding trust in science and science skepticism. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

The Pandemic Factor The COVID-19 Crisis in the Alternative for Germany's 2021 Federal Election Campaign

This article examines how and why the covid-19 pandemic featured as a central issue in the Alternative for Germany's 2021 Bundestag election campaign. Using a wide range of political communication tools, the radical right party's opposition to public health policies against the pandemic ranged from a critique of hygienic measures to hosting coronavirus denialism and conspiracy myths suggesting that "the elite” had manufactured "corona hysteria” to subjugate the German people. Mirroring its general radicalization process toward an anti-system movement party, the AfD's campaign primarily gave voice to an ideologically driven, conspiracist, and authoritarian-nationalist core electorate, which has its center of gravity in the East. In the environment of an emerging "pandemic divide,” the party also sought to appeal to a robust minority of corona skeptics. More generally, the AfD's campaign points to the still underresearched role of science denialism and conspiracy myths in radical right mobilizations of a counterfactual age © Georgetown University and Berghahn Books

Robert K. Merton, Cudos and Magical Thinking in the Age of Covid

The ongoing efforts to explain the disease COVID-19 and the parallel efforts to devise and implement public health measures that mitigate it, are an opportunity to reconsider the values of science as identified to Merton. What is revealed is that science is always partial and always tentative. This leaves much scope for magical thinking and for flat science denial. © The Author(s) 2023.

CSR crises from the consumers' perspective: a multidimensional typology and future research agenda

Purpose>The purpose of this paper is to develop a multidimensional corporate social responsibility (CSR) crisis typology from the consumers' perspective and to provide an agenda for future research.Design/methodology/approach>Basic content-related dimensions for characterizing CSR crises from the consumers' perspective are derived from a review of relevant static crisis typologies. Different types of consumer responses to negative CSR information are derived from various theoretical approaches. Dynamic process models of corporate crises are reviewed to assign various types of consumer responses to different crisis phases. Linking both static and dynamic approaches leads to a comprehensive consumer-oriented typology of CSR crises that is illustrated with examples.Findings>A CSR crises typology is developed based on three consumer-related dimensions: the extent to which the company is attributed blame by consumers;the amount of perceived damage potential;and the perceived CSR relevance of the crisis situation. The combination of these dimensions results in eight different crisis types. For each of these crisis types, different forms of consumer responses are assigned that prevail in the so-called potential, latent and manifest crisis phase.Research limitations/implications>Future research could address the empirical review of the crisis typology presented, its refinement by considering various consumer and stakeholder segmentation approaches and the advanced dynamic analysis of CSR crises by including stakeholder characteristics that impact the diffusion of CSR-related negative publicity.Practical implications>The results of this paper support early crisis detection and effective crisis management by identifying relevant target variables for crisis communication.Originality/value>The typology developed enables a broad spectrum of CSR crises to be classified, including those that have been neglected in previous systematization approaches, such as CSR-related tensions, general sustainability crises and product-harm crises. Due to its theoretical foundation, this paper also contributes to a clearer demarcation of existing CSR crisis constructs.

The Presentation of Self in Virtual Life: Disinformation Warnings and the Spread of Misinformation Regarding COVID-19

In our analysis, we examine whether the labeling of social media posts as misinformation affects the subsequent sharing of them by social media users. Conventional understandings of the presentation of self and work in cognitive psychology provide different understandings of whether labeling misinformation in social media posts will reduce sharing behavior. Part of fthe problem with understanding whether interventions will work hinges on how closely social media interactions mirror other interpersonal interactions with friends and associates in the offline world. Our analysis looks at rates of misinformation labeling during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic on Facebook and Twitter, and then assesses whether sharing behavior is deterred by misinformation labels applied to social media posts. Our results suggest that labeling is relatively successful at lowering sharing behavior. We discuss how our results contribute to a larger understanding of the role of existing inequalities and government responses to crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Taking a Shot: The Impact of Information Frames and Channels on Vaccination Willingness in a Pandemic.

The reluctance of people to receive safe and recommended available vaccines is a well-documented public health challenge. As information and communication technologies evolve, this challenge gets more complex and even harder to manage during complex public health situations. In this experimental study, we examine the relationship between vaccine information frames (with scientific information vs. without scientific information) and channels (through government vs. religious organizations) and vaccination willingness in the U.S. in the context of a pandemic. Additionally, we evaluate the interaction between vaccine skepticism, vaccine information frames, and vaccine information channels on vaccination willingness. This experimental study uses data from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTURK) to evaluate the relationships between vaccine skepticism, vaccine information frames, and channels on vaccination willingness. We find that contrary to our hypothesis, a vaccine advisory framed with scientific information decreases people's vaccination willingness compared to one framed without scientific information. Additionally, the impact of framing on vaccination willingness is conditioned on participants' skepticism-participants who hold skepticism toward the vaccine but received information framed with scientific information score significantly higher in vaccination willingness compared to participants who do not hold skepticism toward a vaccine. The results suggest that the factors impacting vaccination willingness are complex and nuanced. Thus, policymakers should be more strategic with the delivery of vaccination information, especially during complex health crises.

Factors contributing to COVID-19 skepticism and information gaps among older adults in the United States and Canada: An analysis of nationality, gender, education, family, and politics

This study examines relationships between demographic attributes of older adults, information challenges surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and skepticism about the efficacy of COVID-19 preventative measures (social distancing, mask wearing, good hygiene). A 12-question survey was distributed on the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform in late June 2021, receiving 400 responses. Findings indicate that gender, political affiliation, relationship status, family closeness, and perceived family control over one's information source preferences are the greatest predictors of elevated gaps in information and skepticism towards COVID-19 prevention. Specifically, in this study, married, conservative men with close family ties often expressed elevated inadequacy of information and COVID-19 skepticism.

The COVID-19 Crisis in the Alternative forGermany's 2021 Federal Election Campaign

This article examines how and why the coven-19 pandemic featured as a central issue in the Alternative for Germany's 2021 Bundestag election campaign. Using a wide range of political communication tools, the radical right party's opposition to public health policies against the pandemic ranged from a critique of hygienic measures to hosting coronavirus denialism and con-spiracy myths suggesting that "the elite" had manufactured "corona hysteria" to subjugate the German people. Mirroring its general radicalization process toward an anti-system movement party, the AfD's campaign primarily gave voice to an ideologically driven, conspiracist, and authoritarian-nationalist core electorate, which has its center of gravity in the East. In the environment of an emerging "pandemic divide," the party also sought to appeal to a robust minority of corona skeptics. More generally, the AfD's campaign points to the still under researched role of science denialism and conspiracy myths in radical right mobilizations of a counterfactual age.

"The chilling effect": Medical scientists' responses to audience feedback on their media appearances during the COVID-19 pandemic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many medical scientists became public personas as a result of their media appearances. However, this prominence also made them likely targets of harassment from an increasingly science-skeptic public. Such experiences may lead to scientists cutting back on their public engagement activities, threatening the quality of science communication. This study examines how medical scientists evaluate feedback they received as a result of their media appearances, and how they relate their experiences to general views of the public, as well as their motivations to serve as media experts. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 24 Austrian medical scientists who served as media experts during the first year of the pandemic, we find substantial amounts of online abuse. Yet, this did not cause our respondents to avoid future media appearances, because their motivations to meet the needs of an unsettled public outweighed the experience of being harassed online.

Vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy theories: a Jungian perspective

Introduction: Endorsing conspiracy theories seems to constitute a major feature of contemporary collective anti-vaccine movements (Vignaud & Salvadori, 2019). As revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic, this contributes to increased worldwide vaccine hesitancy (de Figueiredo et al., 2020). Objective(s): The present work aims at providing novel insight into the collective psychological underpinnings of conspiracy-based vaccine discourses. Method(s): Our approach is inspired by Jung's view that human groups produce narratives to project their collective conflicts (e.g., social, religious, political) onto reality. Weanalyze these projections in relation to the "halo effect" phenomenon, namely taking metaphorical extensions of (scientific) concepts at face value (e.g. Keller, 1995). Accordingly, we discuss one version of "the Great Reset" theory, claiming that COVID-19 vaccines are used by "the elite" to control behavior and abolish fundamental freedoms. Result(s): Our analysis suggests that Western societies are manifesting some of their existential concerns through anti-vaccine discourse. In "the Great Reset" narrative, characters (people, vaccines, elites, immune systems, etc.) and plot can be read as symbols of, respectively, structural elements of the collective psyche (sociocultural values, aggressive drives, death anxiety, psychic defenses, etc.), and dynamic interrelations among these elements. Conclusion(s): Conspiracy theories can be understood as shared narratives serving the purpose of giving shape to collective fears. Within such a framework, references to "vaccines" and "immunity" are the manifestations of a state of crisis of collective psychic defenses.

Spirituality and religiosity contribute to ongoing COVID-19 vaccination rates: Comparing 195 regions around the world.

Vaccine hesitancy has taken global prominence with the rapid spread of COVID-19, but what factors are related to this considerable variation in vaccination rates globally? Three studies that encompass 195 unique regions from around the world found that the relative spirituality and religiosity of a region predict ongoing COVID-19 vaccination rates, such that those regions higher in spirituality and/or religiosity are regions with lower COVID-19 vaccination rates. In Study 1, data from 23 regions globally were obtained, and both spirituality and religiosity were negatively associated with vaccination rates. These effects held when applying two methods to account for vaccine supply issues. In Study 2, data from 144 regions globally were obtained, and once again religiosity negatively predicted COVID-19 vaccination rates. It remained a significant predictor of vaccination rates when controlling for GDP, population age, collectivism, general skepticism towards vaccinations, and previous inoculation history. In Study 3, data from all USA states and the District of Columbia were obtained, and religiosity and spirituality once again were negatively associated with COVID-19 vaccination rates. Effects held controlling for other factors. Across studies, spirituality and religiosity account for a large amount of the variance in vaccination rates. These results suggest that real-world behavior can be predicted by the relative spirituality and religiosity of a region.

Behavioral and psychosocial factors associated with COVID-19 skepticism in the United States.

COVID-19 skepticism can be conceptualized as the denial of the seriousness of the illness and the perception that the pandemic is overblown or a hoax. In the current study, we examined the association between COVID-19 skepticism and frequency of engaging in COVID-19 prevention behaviors, political ideology, social norms about distancing, COVID-19 information-seeking behaviors, and COVID-19 conspiracy theories. A survey was administered from May 5th-14th. At that time, there were over 1 million COVID-19 cases in the US. Participants were recruited online through MTurk. The three outcome variables were handwashing, mask wearing, and social distancing. Injunctive and descriptive norms were assessed as well as measures of perceived risk to self and others. There were 683 participants in the analyses. In the multiple logistic regression model, those who were of younger age (aOR = 0.97, p < 0.05), better health (aOR = 0.56, p < 0.01), and more politically conservative (aOR = 1.32, p < 0.01) were more likely to endorse COVID-19 skepticism statements. People who reported higher Skepticism were also less likely to that believe people close to them would die from COVID-19 (aOR = 4.2, p < 0.01), engage in COVID-19 prevention behaviors, including spending time inside to prevent coronavirus (aOR = 0.33, p < 0.01) and frequently wear a mask outside (aOR = 0.44, p < 0.01). Those who were more skeptical about COVID-19 were also more likely to believe the conspiracy theory that China purposefully spread the virus (aOR = 6.38 p < 0.01). COVID-19 Skepticism was strongly associated with reduced engagement in COVID-19 prevention behaviors. These findings bolster the arguments for making these public health recommendations mandatory.

Health Coaching Across the Stages of Vaccine Readiness and Action: A Practical Guide for Public Health Nurses

Yet, lack of vaccine uptake puts in peril the goal of controlling the spread ofthe virus, particularly among communities that are at greatest risk of contracting and dying ofthe illness.8 The reasons for the lack of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among some communities in the United States are multifaceted, some of which include concerns about the safety or effectiveness ofthe vaccines, the speed in which the vaccines were developed, misinformation about the vaccines, and systemic barriers affecting community access (i.e., online appointment systems, inadequate transportation, and lack of child care).9,10 For many communities of color, including African American and Latinx individuals, COVID-19 vaccine reluctance is rooted in both historical and contemporary experiences of systemic racism, forced sterilization of Latinx women in California, the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male (renamed as the US Public Health Service Syphilis Study at Tuskegee), marginalization, medical distrust, neglect from the scientific and medical communities, poor public health infrastructure, and institutional abandonment.2,3,10 In addition to those reasons, the politicization ofthe vaccine development process and efforts to increase vaccination after the 2020 US presidential election have deepened distrust among some communities. A 2021 Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that 79% of US adults who have not yet been vaccinated say they would likely turn to a trusted nurse, doctor, or other health care provider when deoiding wherher to ger a vaooination.11 As health oare professionals, nurses and other public health workers are often a patient's first clinical contact and are among the most trusted sources of information about the vaccines. Nurses are leading the nation's vaccine administration efforts and, to many, are the most accessible source of information for questions about safety, side effects, and benefits.11,12 To be effective, nurses and other public health workers require an understanding of the reasons that prevent people from getting vaccinated and have practical tools to support people with their decisions regarding if, when, and how they get vaccinated against COVID-19. The relationship between the stages in the framework are cyclical, and individuals can move in either direction at different points in time when exposed to new information tog., negative news reports) or negative experiences (e.g., a family member who had an adverse reaction).

Dreaming of a Flat Earth : Disease and Insurrection in a Disconnected Age;The Political Sphere of the Twenty-First Century

Since the turn of the Millennium, it has become increasingly difficult to understand the socio-political landscape using the traditional models. Although this is a global phenomenon, it is particularly evident in the United States, which is where we will focus the majority of this article. The current era is dominated by a series of overlapping phenomena, rooted in a series of what we term “disconnections,” that bring into view a new “spherical” political reality. These disconnections describe situations where the empirical, or observable, world differs from the actual, but often hidden, reality. Deriving from these disconnections, the traditional “flat” understanding of political structures, focused on “traditional” axes of Liberal to Conservative and Libertarian to Authoritarian, ignores an important third dimension that we will examine. This third axis relates to issues of rural / nationalist / science-skeptical versus urban / globalist / science-positive. This article explores how this third axis informs, and is informed, by the three most significant issues facing the world at this moment: climate change, COVID-19, and the attempted coup of January 2021.

A New Time of Reckoning, a Time for New Reckoning: Views on Health and Society, Tensions between Medicine and the Social Sciences, and the Process of Medicalization

This article seeks to capture variations and tensions in the relationships between the health–illness–medicine complex and society. It presents several theoretical reconstructions, established theses and arguments are reassessed and criticized, known perspectives are realigned according to a new theorizing narrative, and some new notions are proposed. In the first part, we argue that relations between the medical complex and society are neither formal– nor historically necessary. In the second part, we take the concept of medicalization and the development of medicalization critique as an important example of the difficult coalescence between health and society, but also as an alternative to guide the treatment of these relationships. Returning to the medicalization studies, we suggest a new synthesis, reconceptualizing it as a set of modalities, including medical imperialism. In the third part, we endorse replacing a profession-based approach to medicalization with a knowledge-based approach. However, we argue that such an approach should include varieties of sociological knowledge. In this context, we propose an enlarged knowledge-based orientation for standardizing the relationships between the health–illness–medicine complex and society.