Speaker
Description
Background. Vaccine hesitancy encompasses a complex attitude intertwined with social, cognitive, and affective processes not clearly understood. We aimed to provide new insights to the field by focusing on the role of ethical appraisal in vaccine hesitancy.
Methods. We utilized the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) and a set of moral dilemmas to investigate potential links between explicit measures of moral appraisal such as moral reasoning and moral decision making and vaccine hesitancy (VH), as measured by the adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. Furthermore, we investigated whether Misinformation susceptibility about COVID-19 could affect the aforementioned link.
Results. The MFQ results document a higher endorsement of authoritarianism in individuals with high VH than low VH, in contrast to the previous literature. The Moral dilemma results document a negative relationship between the tendency to apply incidental (but not instrumental or filler) moral dilemma resolutions and VH scores, regardless of moral judgement, emotional valence and arousal associated to the dilemmas. Additionally, a moderation effect of misinformation susceptibility about COVID-19 showed that only in highly (+1SD) and medium (but not low, i.e., -1SD) informed people VH scores are negatively predicted by the tendency to apply incidental dilemma resolutions.
Discussion. These results extend current research in the field by showing that that moral decision-making and misinformation susceptibility about COVID-19 are predictors of a larger hesitancy to get vaccinated in the COVID-19 post-pandemic era.
| If you're submitting a poster, would you be interested in giving a blitz talk? | Yes |
|---|
