Dataset Information

Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance: taking measurement seriously.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Freeman et al. (2020a, Psychological Medicine, 21, 1-13) argue that there is widespread support for coronavirus conspiracy theories in England. We hypothesise that their estimates of prevalence are inflated due to a flawed research design. When asking respondents to their survey to agree or disagree with pro-conspiracy statements, they used a biased set of response options: four agree options and only one disagree option (and no 'don't know' option). We also hypothesise that due to these flawed measures, the Freeman et al. approach under-estimates the strength of the correlation between conspiracy beliefs and compliance. Finally, we hypothesise that, due to reliance on bivariate correlations, Freeman et al. over-estimate the causal connection between conspiracy beliefs and compliance.

Methods

In a pre-registered study, we conduct an experiment embedded in a survey of a representative sample of 2057 adults in England (fieldwork: 16-19 July 2020).

Results

Measured using our advocated 'best practice' approach (balanced response options, with a don't know option), prevalence of support for coronavirus conspiracies is only around five-eighths (62.3%) of that indicated by the Freeman et al. approach. We report mixed results on our correlation and causation hypotheses.

Conclusions

To avoid over-estimating prevalence of support for coronavirus conspiracies, we advocate using a balanced rather than imbalanced set of response options, and including a don't know option.

SUBMITTER: Garry J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7844213 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance: taking measurement seriously.

Garry John J Ford Rob R Johns Rob R

Psychological medicine 20201210 14

<h4>Background</h4>Freeman <i>et al</i>. (, <i>Psychological Medicine</i>, 21, 1-13) argue that there is widespread support for coronavirus conspiracy theories in England. We hypothesise that their estimates of prevalence are inflated due to a flawed research design. When asking respondents to their survey to agree or disagree with pro-conspiracy statements, they used a biased set of response options: four agree options and only one disagree option (and no 'don't know' option). We also hypothesi ...[more]

PMID: 33298239

Similar Datasets

Project description:Because the public health response to the disproportionate HIV burden faced by Black sexual minority men (BSMMM) has focused on sexual risk reduction and disease prevention, other vital components of sexual health (e.g., intimacy, pleasure, benefits of sex) have been often overlooked. Sex-positive describes a more open, holistic approach toward sex and sexuality that prioritizes these other components, though such an approach is rarely applied to BSMM's sexual health. For sex-positive BSMM, risk/preventive discourse may foster or exacerbate medical mistrust as a reaction to the dissonance between how these men view sexual health and how the medical establishment views it, which may discourage sexual healthcare-seeking. We assessed sex-positivity and its association with medical mistrust and PrEP conspiracy beliefs among 206 HIV-negative cisgender BSMM in Atlanta, Georgia. We performed exploratory factor analytic procedures on responses to a sex-positivity scale, followed by multivariable linear regressions to determine sex-positivity's associations with medical mistrust and PrEP conspiracy beliefs. We extracted two sex-positivity factors: sexual freedom (α = 0.90), reflecting openness toward casual sex and rejection of sexual mores, and essence of sex (α = 0.77), reflecting the intimate, relational, and pleasurable qualities of sex. Sexual freedom was independently associated with perceived provider deception (β = 0.19, CI = 0.04, 0.34). Essence of sex was independently associated with PrEP conspiracy beliefs (β = 0.16, CI = 0.02, 0.31) and marginally associated with perceived provider deception (β = 0.14, CI = - 0.00, 0.29). Healthcare providers and public health practitioners may cultivate greater trust with BSMM by incorporating a sex-positive approach into patient/participant interactions, clinical decision-making, and interventions. Improving access to sexual pleasure acknowledges BSMM's right to optimal, holistic sexual health.

Project description:Vaccine hesitancy, associated with medical mistrust, confidence, complacency and knowledge of vaccines, presents an obstacle to the campaign against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The relationship between vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs may be a key determinant of the success of vaccination campaigns. This study provides a conceptual framework to explain the impact of pathways from conspiracy beliefs to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy with regard to medical mistrust, confidence, complacency and knowledge of vaccines. A non-probability study was conducted with 1015 respondents between 17 April and 28 May 2021. Conspiracy beliefs were measured using the coronavirus conspiracy scale of Coronavirus Explanations, Attitudes, and Narratives Survey (OCEANS), and vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale. Medical mistrust was measured using the Oxford trust in doctors and developers questionnaire, and attitudes to doctors and medicine scale. Vaccine confidence and complacency were measured using the Oxford COVID-19 vaccine confidence and complacency scale. Knowledge of vaccines was measured using the vaccination knowledge scale. Vaccine hesitancy was measured using the Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to evaluate the measurement models for conspiracy beliefs, medical mistrust, confidence, complacency, and knowledge of vaccines and vaccine hesitancy. The structural equation modeling (SEM) approach was used to analyze the direct and indirect pathways from conspiracy beliefs to vaccine hesitancy. Of the 894 (88.1%) respondents who were willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine without any hesitancy, the model fit with the CFA models for conspiracy beliefs, medical mistrust, confidence, complacency and knowledge of vaccines, and vaccine hesitancy was deemed acceptable. Conspiracy beliefs had significant direct (β = 0.294), indirect (β = 0.423) and total (β = 0.717) effects on vaccine hesitancy; 41.0% of the total effect was direct, and 59.0% was indirect. Conspiracy beliefs significantly predicted vaccine hesitancy by medical mistrust (β = 0.210), confidence and complacency (β = 0.095), knowledge (β = 0.079) of vaccines, explaining 29.3, 11.0, and 13.2% of the total effects, respectively. Conspiracy beliefs significantly predicted vaccine hesitancy through the sequential mediation of knowledge of vaccines and medical mistrust (β = 0.016), explaining 2.2% of the total effects. Conspiracy beliefs significantly predicted vaccine hesitancy through the sequential mediation of confidence and complacency, and knowledge of vaccines (β = 0.023), explaining 3.2% of the total effects. The SEM approach indicated an acceptable model fit (χ2/df = 2.464, RMSEA = 0.038, SRMR = 0.050, CFI = 0.930, IFI = 0.930). The sample in this study showed lower vaccine hesitancy, and this study identified pathways from conspiracy beliefs to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in China. Conspiracy beliefs had direct and indirect effects on vaccine hesitancy, and the indirect association was determined through medical mistrust, confidence, complacency, and knowledge of vaccines. In addition, both direct and indirect pathways from conspiracy beliefs to vaccine hesitancy were identified as intervention targets to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Dataset Information

Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance: taking measurement seriously.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance: taking measurement seriously.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets