Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34764916›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

The COVID-19 Pandemic Changes the Nudging Effect of Social Information on Individuals' Blood Donation Intention.

Wenhua Wang, Shuaiqi Li, Jianbiao Li, Yujun Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Wenhua WangChina Academy of Corporate Governance, Business School, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Shuaiqi LiSchool of Finance, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan, China.
Jianbiao LiInstitute for Study of Brain-like Economics, School of Economics, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Yujun WangDepartment of Economic and Management, Nankai University Binhai College, Tianjin, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The positive effect of social information on nudging prosocial behavior is context dependent. Understanding how sensitive intervention outcomes are to changes in the choice context is essential for policy design, especially in times of great uncertainty, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. The present paper explores the effectiveness of social information in changing voluntary blood donation intention in two contexts: before and after the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in China. In addition to the dimension of context, information content and its source are also important. Using a survey administered to 1,116 participants, we conducted an intertemporal randomized-controlled experiment to systematically analyze how information can effectively nudge the intention to donate blood. Compared with content featuring blood donors' commendation information, blood users' demand information is found to have a stronger nudging effect. An official information source has a greater influence on participants' donation intention than an unofficial source. Furthermore, our analysis of two waves of experimental data (i.e., before and after the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic) shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has further enhanced the nudging effect of blood users' demand information and official information sources. These findings provide a theoretical basis and policy recommendations for relevant institutions to develop effective blood donation campaign strategies.

Indexed as

blood donationCOVID-19information contentinformation sourcenudgesocial information

Identifiers

PMID34764916
PMCPMC8576010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.