持久高阴谋心态的个人是否也持久地对疫苗犹不决? 来自三波小组研究的发现
Monika Lamot1, Andrej Kirbiš1, Katja Kerman2
1Department of Sociology, Faculty of Arts, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia.
Social science & medicine (1982)
|November 15, 2025
概括
阴谋思维和对疫苗的犹是稳定的特征,与之密切相关,而不是短期反应. 对科学信任的降低显著影响了这种关系,强调了建立科学信任的干预措施的必要性.
科学领域:
- 心理学 心理学 心理学
- 公共卫生 公共卫生
- 社会学 社会学 社会学
背景情况:
- 阴谋思维和疫苗犹往往是相关的,但先前的研究主要是横截面的.
- 目前尚不清楚阴谋思维是否影响疫苗犹,或者反之亦然.
- 对科学的信任是这两种构造之间拟议的调解者.
研究的目的:
- 调查阴谋思维和疫苗犹之间的纵向关系.
- 检查科学信任在这种关系中的调解作用.
- 区分稳定的特征级别关联和短期的人内动态.
主要方法:
- 这是一项为期四个月的574名成年人进行的三波纵向面板研究.
- 测量阴谋思维,对科学的信任,以及在每一波疫苗的犹.
- 使用交叉滞后面板模型和随机截图交叉滞后面板模型进行分析.
主要成果:
- 从阴谋思维 (第2波) 到疫苗犹 (第3波) 发现了显著的,虽然很小的交叉滞后效应.
- 在构造者之间没有观察到显著的人内,短期影响.
- 在特征层面的强烈相关性表明,阴谋思维和疫苗犹之间的实质性重叠.
- 对科学信心下降显著调解了从阴谋思维到疫苗犹的间接影响.
结论:
- 阴谋思维和疫苗犹似乎是稳定的,相关的倾向,而不是动态的个人内部过程.
- 人们对科学的信心下降是连接阴谋思维与疫苗犹的关键途径.
- 旨在减少对接种疫苗的犹的干预措施应专注于增强对科学的信任.
相关概念视频
Social Proof
31.5K
Social proof is a form of persuasion based on comparison and conformity. People compare their behavior and actions to what others are doing and will change to conform to do what their peers do.
31.5K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
1.2K
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
1.2K
Vaccinations
51.2K
Overview
51.2K
Confirmation Biases
7.6K
The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
7.6K
Group Polarization
38.4K
Group polarization is the strengthening of an original group attitude following the discussion of views within a group (Teger & Pruitt, 1967). That is, if a group initially favors a viewpoint, after discussion the group consensus is likely a stronger endorsement of the viewpoint. Conversely, if the group was initially opposed to a viewpoint, group discussion would likely lead to stronger opposition.
38.4K
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
565
Confounding in statistical epidemiology represents a pivotal challenge, referring to the distortion in the perceived relationship between an exposure and an outcome due to the presence of a third variable, known as a confounder. This variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome but is not a direct link in their causal chain. Its presence can lead to erroneous interpretations of the exposure's effect, either exaggerating or underestimating the true association. This...
565


