The Effect of Newspaper Reporting on COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: a Randomised Controlled Trial
Condition: Vaccine Hesitancy
Study type: Interventional

Summary: 
      COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy can be observed at different rates in different countries. 1,068
      people were surveyed in France and Italy to inquire about individual potential acceptance,
      focusing on time preferences, in a risk-return framework: having the vaccination today, in a
      month, and in 3 months; perceived risks of vaccination and COVID-19; and expected benefit of
      the vaccine. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to understand how everyday stimuli,
      such as fact-based news about vaccines, impact on audience acceptance of vaccination. The
      main experiment involved two groups of participants and two different articles about
      vaccine-related thrombosis taken from two Italian newspapers. One article used a more
      abstract description and language, and the other used a more anecdotical description and
      concrete language; each group read only one of these articles. Two other groups were assigned
      categorization tasks; one was asked to complete a concrete categorization task and the other
      an abstract categorization task.
    

Detailed description: 
      The goal of this RCT is to learn how journalistic news can affect vaccine hesitancy. 2
      cohorts of unvaccinated individual, one Italian, one French. 5 arms design:

        1. participants reading a fact-based newspaper article written in an abstract language

        2. participants reading a fact-based newspaper article written in a more concrete language

        3. participants performing abstract categorization task

        4. participants performing concrete categorization task

        5. control group answering questionnaire

      Research questions:

      i) Does a more abstract vs concrete language increase the willingness to receive the vaccine?
      ii) Does a more abstract vs concrete mindset increase the willingness to receive the vaccine?
      iii) Is a gender effect detectable?
    

Intervention name(s): abstract vs concrete texts
Intervention type(s): Other
Intervention description(s): The main experiment involved two groups of participants and two different articles about vaccine-related thrombosis taken from two Italian newspapers. One article used a more abstract descriptive style and language, while the other used a more anecdotical style and concrete language: each group read only one of these articles. Both articles are the same length and describe an episode of vaccine-related thrombosis. The abstract text uses a more formal and impersonal language, reporting more scientific considerations; the concrete text uses a more familiar and emotional style and provides a more anecdotical description of the case. Texts were also weighted according to a concreteness semantic vocabulary. French received translated versions.Two other groups were assigned categorization tasks; one was asked to complete a concrete categorization task and the other an abstract categorization task.
Other intervention name(s): abstract vs concrete tasks
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)
Primary purpose: Other
Keywords: vaccine hesitancy