ABSTRACT
In April 2021, the use of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine was paused to investigate whether it had caused serious blood clots to a small number of women (six out of 6.8 million Americans who had been administered that vaccine). As these events were unfolding, we surveyed a sample of Americans (N = 625) to assess their reactions to this news, whether they supported the pausing of the vaccine, and potential psychological factors underlying their decision. In addition, we employed automated text analyses as a supporting method to more classical quantitative measures. Results showed that political ideology influenced the support for the pausing of the vaccine; liberals were more likely to oppose it than conservatives. In addition, the effect of political ideology was mediated by the difference between perceived benefit and risk and the language style used to produce reasons in support (or against) the decision to pause the vaccine. Liberals perceived the benefit of vaccines higher than the risk, used a more analytic language style when stating their reasons, and had a more positive attitude toward the vaccine. We discuss the implications of our findings considering vaccine hesitancy and risk perception during the COVID-19 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
The present research explored the influence of thinking style and the perception of threats to health and wealth on protective actions and well-being within the framework of the first wave of COVID-19 in Spain. We expected that an (versus concrete) thinking style would be related to greater protective behaviours while maintaining a higher sense of well-being. Through an online questionnaire (N = 1,043), we explored these relationships and found that the most severe perceived threats to health and wealth and the highest degree of ion were associated with the greatest protective behaviours. Importantly, when people did not feel very threatened, those who thought ly reported more protective behaviours. Regarding well-being, when people perceived greater threats, those who had an thinking style reported greater well-being. Against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, the present research provides support indicating that an thinking style is a protective factor against adversities because it is related to protective behaviours and increased well-being even when people perceive severe health and wealth threats. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Spanish) En este estudio se explora la influencia que ejercen el estilo de pensamiento y la percepcion de amenazas a la salud y a la riqueza en las conductas de proteccion y en el bienestar de las personas en el contexto de la primera ola de COVID-19 en Espana. Anticipabamos que un estilo de pensamiento o (frente a uno concreto) estaria relacionado con una mayor adopcion de comportamientos de proteccion y con una sensacion de bienestar mas alta. Exploramos estas relaciones mediante un cuestionario en linea (N = 1,043) y hallamos que una percepcion de mayor gravedad en las amenazas contra la salud y la riqueza y un nivel mas elevado de abstraccion estaban vinculados con mas conductas de proteccion. Un resultado relevante fue encontrar que, cuando los participantes no se sentian amenazados en exceso, quienes presentaban un pensamiento o mostraban comportamientos mas protectores. Por lo que se refiere al bienestar, cuando las personas percibian amenazas mas graves, quienes tenian un estilo de pensamiento o expresaban mayor nivel de bienestar. En el contexto de la pandemia de COVID-19, nuestra investigacion corrobora la idea de que el estilo de pensamiento o es un factor de proteccion frente a la adversidad, puesto que esta relacionado con conductas de proteccion y con un mayor nivel de bienestar percibido, incluso cuando las personas perciben amenazas graves a su salud y su riqueza. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Research on the reasons for vaccine hesitancy has largely focused on factors directly related to vaccines. In contrast, the present study focused on cognitive factors that are not conceptually related to vaccines but that have been linked to other epistemically suspect beliefs such as conspiracy theories and belief in fake news. This survey was conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic (N = 356). The results showed that anti-vaccination attitudes decreased slightly with cognitive abilities and analytic thinking styles, and strongly with scientific literacy. In addition, anti-vaccination attitudes increased slightly with teleological bias and strongly with an intuitive thinking style, ontological biases, and religious and paranormal beliefs. The results suggest that the same cognitive mechanisms that predispose to other epistemically suspect beliefs may predispose to anti-vaccination attitudes as well. The findings also indicate that pro-vaccination communication should focus on early prevention and that interventions against vaccine hesitancy should strive to be intuitively appealing. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
ABSTRACT
The research considered the principles of institutional analysis of journalism. The study is particularly relevant in terms of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on social institutions and media consumption practices, formation of new approaches to the definition of the institution, weakening of globalization trends, sovereignization of local world-systems and media spaces. The stages of professional development differ based on the prevailing thinking styles of team of authors, organizers, regulators, researchers and teachers of journalism. The parameters of the definition of the institution are determined accordance to the levels of analysis of the social system. The individual level corresponds to the status-role parameter, the level of professional activity corresponds to the organizational, the level of mass profession corresponds to the socio-institutional, the level of mass activity corresponds to the practical and normative. Based on the principles of analysis, we determined the stages of the evolution of journalism as a social institution. We employed institutional and historiosophical approaches to the analysis of journalism. At the first stage, journalism is organized as an individual activity and is characterized as a system of roles and statuses. At the second stage, journalism acquires the properties of professional activity and is formed as a developed organizational structure. At the third stage of widely accepted profession, a system of professional functions is formed, including personnel training. In addition, the structural organization of journalism acquires the characteristics of a media system. At the fourth stage, journalism becomes a mass activity and manifests itself as a set of practices. The institutional parameters of journalism are misshaped, the principles are questioned, and the need of its regulation comes forward. At each stage, journalism acquires new properties, while keeping essential characteristics and forming institutional memory as a means of preserving professional ideology and identity. In the theory of journalism, institutional memory takes the form of historical self-knowledge, professional ideology and paradigmatic consensus.
ABSTRACT
In the present research, we examined the links among relative financial scarcity, thinking style, fatalism, and well-being and their roles in predicting protective behaviors against COVID-19. Study 1 (N = 120) revealed that after an experimental manipulation to induce the perception of relative financial scarcity (versus financial abundance), people who perceived higher relative financial scarcity changed their thinking style to a more concrete mindset. In Study 2 (N = 873), the relative financial abundance-scarcity situation was measured, and the results showed that the greater the perceived relative financial scarcity was, the more concrete the mindset and the lower the sense of well-being. Importantly, we found that individuals who felt poorer but maintained an abstract thinking style reported higher well-being. Study 3 (N = 501) examined the influence of a concrete thinking style in people who perceived that their economic situation had worsened with the pandemic. The results showed that when this vulnerable population presented a more concrete mindset, they reported lower well-being, higher fatalism, and lower protective behavior against COVID-19. Thus, maintaining an abstract mindset promotes higher well-being, lower fatalism, and greater protective behaviors against COVID-19, even under economic difficulties. Because thinking style can be modified, our results encourage the development of new social intervention programs to promote an abstract mindset when people face important challenges.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Thinking , CognitionABSTRACT
Following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the scientific community responded promptly by developing effective vaccines. Still, even though effective vaccines against COVID-19 became available, many people did not seem to be in a rush to become immunized. Community protection can be enhanced if more people decide to vaccinate, and thus it is necessary to identify relevant factors involved in vaccination behavior to find better ways of encouraging it. Vaccination behavior is the result of a decision process that might vary according to individual differences in information processing. We investigated the role of cognitive reflection ability and thinking styles in predicting self-reported vaccination behavior against COVID-19. A sample of 274 Romanian participants was surveyed for the present study, out of which 217 (Mage = 24.58, SD = 8.31; 53% female) declared they had the possibility to become vaccinated. Results showed that a higher level of cognitive reflection ability significantly increased the odds of becoming vaccinated. A rational thinking style was not linked to vaccination behavior. However, an experiential thinking style indirectly predicted vaccination behavior by means of attitudes towards vaccination. Since individual differences in information processing are, to a certain extent, linked to vaccination behavior, the design of vaccination campaigns could consider that people have specific information needs and address them as such.
ABSTRACT
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), a highly infectious virus transmitted through droplets from sneezes and coughs, was declared a global pandemic in 2020. Measures implemented by organizations as a result of COVID-19 were controversial among United States (U.S.) citizens. Perceptions of governmental and scientific information further divided U.S. citizens and distrust in science fostered conspiratorial thinking toward the origin of the virus. The purpose of this study was to determine if critical thinking style (CTS), the use of COVID-19 information sources, and social media connections were predictors of origin of COVID-19 beliefs. A survey was disseminated to 1,048 U.S. adults in May 2020 when most states were under shelter-in-place orders. Results indicated select COVID-19 information sources used and social media connections predicted origin of COVID-19 beliefs. CTS was not a significant predictor. Findings revealed a partisan divide between COVID-19 information sources. Implications for science communicators engaging the public during crisis were discussed.