Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34795017›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021

Religious identity cues increase vaccination intentions and trust in medical experts among American Christians.

James Chu, Sophia L Pink, Robb Willer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The importance of scientists' intellectual humility for communicating effectively across ideological and identity-based divides.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Political polarization and health.Nature medicine · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James ChuDepartment of Sociology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027; jyc2163@columbia.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-2702-470X
Sophia L PinkDepartment of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.
Robb WillerDepartment of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.ORCID 0000-0003-3404-6472
Stanford University · USColumbia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Containing the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States requires mobilizing a large majority of the mass public to vaccinate, but many Americans are hesitant or opposed to vaccination. A significant predictor of vaccine attitudes in the United States is religiosity, with more-religious individuals expressing more distrust in science and being less likely to get vaccinated. Here, we test whether explicit cues of common religious identity can help medical experts build trust and increase vaccination intentions. In a preregistered survey experiment conducted with a sample of unvaccinated American Christians (

Indexed as

CuesHealth PersonnelIntentionReligionTrustVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansUnited StatesCOVID-19 Vaccinescommon identity cuesCOVID-19religiosityvaccines

Identifiers

PMID34795017
PMCPMC8670469
OpenAlexW3211908181

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.