ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: There is growing evidence of intergroup hostility between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, a process of polarization that threatens to derail population health efforts. This study explores the moral underpinnings of intergroup antipathy between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was employed to investigate the associations between the view of vaccination as a social contract or individual choice, perceived vulnerability to disease, perceptions of outgroup morality, feelings of warmth, and experiences of schadenfreude. METHODS: Data were extracted from an online, quantitative survey of 233 vaccinated and 237 unvaccinated participants collected between June and July 2022. RESULTS: Results revealed that vaccinated people had stronger negative attitudes towards unvaccinated people than vice versa. In line with hypotheses, the extent to which vaccinated people saw vaccination as a social contract was significantly associated with perceiving unvaccinated people as immoral. For unvaccinated people, seeing vaccination as an individual choice (the opposite of a social contract) was significantly associated with perceiving vaccinated people as immoral. Among both groups, viewing the other as immoral was associated with feeling significantly less warmth towards the opposing vaccination group, and more schadenfreude in the face of an outgroup member's suffering. Participants' perceived vulnerability to disease played a relatively small role in explaining polarization between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. CONCLUSIONS: This research builds on previous studies by identifying moral mechanisms associated with intergroup antipathy in the vaccine debate.
ABSTRACT
ISSUE ADDRESSED: Sexual violence is an important public health issue affecting significant numbers of university students across Australia and internationally. In response, online modules have been widely implemented and there is an urgent need to better understand their effectiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate an online sexual violence prevention and response education module designed for and implemented in one Australian university. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach that included pre/post module completion surveys of key measures relating to sexual consent, being a bystander, and response to disclosures as well as knowledge of resources and support services. We conducted post module completion semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Results indicated potential effectiveness of the module on beliefs about sexual consent, confidence intervening when witnessing potentially harmful situations, willingness to report incidents, confidence supporting a peer who discloses an incident, and knowledge of support services. Qualitative results indicated support for the online module as an accessible, private and self-paced tool for sexual violence education. Interactive, relevant and engaging content that can be applied in real-life contexts was noted as key for effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study suggests there may be potential for online modules to be effective, as one aspect of universities' sexual violence prevention and response strategies-particularly modules aimed at addressing primary, secondary and tertiary prevention. Further rigorous research is required to strengthen best practice in the development and implementation of online modules as part of whole-of-campus strategies. SO WHAT?: Universities across Australia and internationally are grappling with sexual violence response and prevention in light of high prevalence rates among students. Online modules may be one effective tool when implemented as part of a wider strategy.
