How War-Framing Effects Differ Depending on Publics’ Conspiracy Levels: Communicating the COVID-19 Vaccination

Abstract

Public conspiracy beliefs prevent various social institutions including governments from communicating effectively. Fostering effective communication with high conspiracy belief individuals, who often disregard important public health messages, is crucial. This study investigated whether war framing could be used to effectively communicate with highly suspicious individuals. Specifically, it used an online experiment with 398 Korean citizens to examine how war-framing effects vary based on individual differences in general conspiracy and government-related conspiracy beliefs in the COVID-19 vaccination context. The results generally showed that literal messages were more effective for low conspiracy belief individuals while war-framed messages were more effective for those with high conspiracy beliefs. Additional analysis indicated that general conspiracy and government-related conspiracy beliefs were negatively associated with individuals’ vaccination attitudes and intentions. This study concludes by discussing the practical implications of its findings for health communication involving highly suspicious individuals.

Keywords

health communication war framing general conspiracy government-related conspiracy COVID-19 vaccine

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bale

J. M.

(2007). Political paranoia vs. political realism: On distinguishing between bogus conspiracy theories and genuine conspiratorial politics. Patterns of Prejudice, 41(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313220601118751

Benziman

(2020). “Winning” the “battle” and “beating” the COVID-19 “enemy”: Leaders’ use of war frames to define the pandemic. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 26(3), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000494

Bosman

Hagendoorn

(1991). Effects of literal and metaphorical persuasive messages. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 6, 271–292.

Brehm

S. S.

Brehm

J. W.

(1981). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. Academic Press.

Charteris-Black

(2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.

Chilton

(2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. Routledge.

Chen

Ling

Cao

Han

(2020). Mislabeled, fragmented, and conspiracy-driven: A content analysis of the social media discourse about the HPV vaccine in China. Asian Journal of Communication, 30(6), 450–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2020.1817113

Dentith

M. R.

Orr

(2018). Secrecy and conspiracy. Episteme, 15(4), 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2017.9

Đorđević

J. M.

Mari

Vdović

Milošević

(2021). Links between conspiracy beliefs, vaccine knowledge, and trust: Anti-vaccine behavior of Serbian adults. Social Science & Medicine, 277, 113930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113930

10.

Douglas

K. M.

Sutton

R. M.

Cichocka

(2017). The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 538–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417718261.

11.

Douglas

K. M.

Uscinski

J. E.

Sutton

R. M.

Cichocka

Nefes

Ang

C. S.

Deravi

(2019). Understanding conspiracy theories. Political Psychology, 40(S1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12568

12.

Elliott

(2021, March 21). After the Covid war, the UK will struggle to win the economic peace. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/21/after-the-covid-war-the-uk-will-struggle-to-win-the-economic-peace

13.

Entman

R. M.

(1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi-org-ssl.access.yonsei.ac.kr:8443/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

14.

Freeman

Waite

Rosebrock

Petit

Causier

East

Jenner

Teale

A. L.

Carr

Mulhall

Bold

Lambe

(2022). Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance with government guidelines in England. Psychological Medicine, 52(2), 251–263. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291720001890

15.

French

Deshpande

Evans

Obregon

(2020). Key guidelines in developing a pre-emptive COVID-19 vaccination uptake promotion strategy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(16), 5893. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165893

16.

Friestad

Wright

(1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1–31.

17.

Garfin

D. R.

Silver

R. C.

Holman

E. A.

(2020). The novel coronavirus (COVID-2019) outbreak: Amplification of public health consequences by media exposure. Health Psychology, 39(5), 355. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000875

18.

Gibbs

R. W.

(2008). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge University Press.

19.

Grebe

Nattrass

(2012). AIDS conspiracy beliefs and unsafe sex in Cape Town. AIDS and Behavior, 16(3), 761–773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-011-9958-2

20.

Hampl

(2019). “Now is the time to root out evil”: The role of natural world metaphors in the construction of the “Us” and” Them” dichotomy. Brno Studies in English, 45, 57–74. https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2019-1-4

21.

Hartman

T. K.

(2012). Toll booths on the information superhighway? Policy metaphors in the case of net neutrality. Political Communication, 29(3), 278–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2012.694983

22.

Hetherington

M. J.

Nelson

(2003). Anatomy of a rally effect: George W. Bush and the war on terrorism. Political Science and Politics, 36(1), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096503001665

23.

Imhoff

Lamberty

(2020). A bioweapon or a hoax? The link between distinct conspiracy beliefs about the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and pandemic behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(8), 1110–1118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620934692

24.

Jennings

Stoker

Bunting

Valgarðsson

V. O.

Gaskell

Devine

McKay

Mills

M. C.

(2021). Lack of trust, conspiracy beliefs, and social media use predict COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Vaccines, 9(6), 593.

25.

John

(2021, March 29). The Covid-19 war in the Trump White House. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/29/world/coronavirus-newsletter-intl-03-29-21/index.html

26.

Jolley

Douglas

K. M.

(2014). The effects of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories on vaccination intentions. PloS One, 9(2), e89177. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089177

27.

Kahneman

Tversky

(1984). Choices, values and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350.

28.

Kalmoe

N. P.

(2014). Fueling the fire: Violent metaphors, trait aggression, and support for political violence. Political Communication, 31, 545–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2013.852642

29.

Keeley

B. L.

(1999). Of conspiracy theories. Journal of Philosophy, 96, 109–126. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1084585

30.

Kim

Nan

(2016). Effects of consideration of future consequences and temporal framing on acceptance of the HPV vaccine among young adults. Health Communication, 31(9), 1089–1096. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2015.1038774

31.

Kim

Nan

(2019). Temporal framing effects differ for narrative versus non-narrative messages: The case of promoting HPV vaccination. Communication Research, 46(3), 401–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215626980

32.

Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. (2021, October 01). Current status of COVID-19 outbreak and vaccination in Korea (October 01). https://www.korea.kr/news/pressReleaseView.do?newsId=156473681

33.

Kruglanski

A. W.

(2004). The psychology of closed mindedness. Taylor & Francis.

34.

Lakoff

Johnson

(1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.

35.

Landau

M. J.

Oyserman

Keefer

L. A.

Rothschild

Z. K.

(2014). Epistemic motives moderate the effect of metaphoric framing on attitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.03.009

36.

Lazarus

J. V.

Ratzan

S. C.

Palayew

Gostin

L. O.

Larson

H. J.

Rabin

Kimball

El-Mohandes

(2021). A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Nature medicine, 27(2), 225–228. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-1124-9

37.

T. T.

Andreadakis

Kumar

Román

R. G.

Tollefsen

Saville

Mayhew

(2020). The COVID-19 vaccine development landscape. Natural Reviews Drug Discovery, 19(5), 305–306. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41573-020-00073-5

38.

Levin

Schneider

Gaeth

(1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149–188.

39.

Levy

(2007). Radically socialized knowledge and conspiracy theories. Episteme, 4(2), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2007.4.2.181

40.

McCroskey

J. C.

Combs

W. H.

(1969). The effects and the use of analogy on attitude change and source credibility. Journal of Communication, 19, 333–339.

41.

Nelson

M. R.

Hitchon

J. C.

(1995). Theory of synesthesia applied to persuasion in print advertising headlines. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 346–360.

42.

Oleksy

Wnuk

Maison

Łyś

(2021). Content matters: Different predictors and social consequences of general and government-related conspiracy theories on COVID-19. Personality and Individual Differences, 168, 110289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110289

43.

Ottati

V. C.

Renstrom

R. A.

(2010). Metaphor and persuasive communication: A multifunctional approach. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(9), 783–794. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00292.x

44.

Ottati

Rhoads

Graesser

A. C.

(1999). The effect of metaphor on processing style in a persuasion task: A motivational resonance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(4), 688–697.

45.

Pawlowski

D. R.

Badzinski

D. M.

Mitchell

(1998). Effects of metaphors on children’s comprehension and perception of print advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 27, 83–98.

46.

Quinn

(2000). Tout est lié: The front national and media conspiracy theories. The Sociological Review, 48(2), 112–132. https://10.1111/j.1467-954X.2000.tb03523.x.

47.

Read

S. J.

Cesa

I. L.

Jones

D. K.

Collins

N. L.

(1990). When is the federal budget like a baby? Metaphor in political rhetoric. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 5, 125–149.

48.

Ribeiro

Hartley

Nerlich

Jaspal

(2018). Media coverage of the Zika crisis in Brazil: The construction of a ‘war’ frame that masked social and gender inequalities. Social Science & Medicine, 200, 137–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.01.023

49.

Roehm

M. L.

Sternthal

(2001). The moderating effect of knowledge and resources on the persuasive impact of analogies. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 257–272.

50.

Roozenbeek

Schneider

C. R.

Dryhurst

Kerr

Freeman

A. L.

Recchia

van der Bles

Van Der Linden

(2020). Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. Royal Society Open Science, 7(10), 201199. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199

51.

Sallam

(2021). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy worldwide: A concise systematic review of vaccine acceptance rates. Vaccines, 9(2), 160. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9020160

52.

Scherer

A. M.

Scherer

L. D.

Fagerlin

(2015). Getting ahead of illness: Using metaphors to influence medical decision making. Medical Decision Making, 35(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X14522547

53.

Scheufele

D. A.

(1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1). 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x

54.

Sopory

(2006). Metaphor and attitude accessibility. Southern Communication Journal, 71, 251–272.

55.

Sopory

Dillard

J. P.

(2002). The persuasive effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 382–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00813.x

56.

Stolberg

S. G.

Weiland.

. (2020, September 30). Study finds ‘single largest driver’ of Coronavirus misinformation: Trump. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-misinformation.html

57.

Suit

J. L.

Paradise

L. V.

(1985). Effects of metaphors and cognitive complexity on perceived counselor characteristics. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32(1), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.32.1.23

58.

Trent

Seale

Chughtai

A. A.

Salmon

MacIntyre

C. R.

(2022). Trust in government, intention to vaccinate and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A comparative survey of five large cities in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. Vaccine, 40(17), 2498-2505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.06.048

59.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2021). FDA approves first COVID-19 vaccine approval signifies key achievement for public health. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

60.

Van der Linden

. (2015). The conspiracy-effect: Exposure to conspiracy theories (about global warming) decreases pro-social behavior and science acceptance. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 171–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.045

61.

Van Prooijen

J. W

. (2019). An existential threat model of conspiracy theories. European Psychologist, 25(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000381

62.

Whaley

B. B.

Wagner

L. S.

(2000). Rebuttal analogy in persuasive messages: Communicator likability and cognitive responses. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19, 66–84.

63.

Wood

M. J.

Douglas

K. M.

Sutton

R. M.

(2012). Dead and alive: Beliefs in contradictory conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(6), 767–773. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611434786

64.

World Health Organization. (2022). WHO coronavirus (COVID-19) dashboard. http://covid19.who.int