Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36307454›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

No-vaxxers are different in public good games.

Marcello Basili, Alessio Muscillo, Paolo Pin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Marcello BasiliDepartment of Economics and Statistics, Università di Siena, 53100, Siena, Italy.
Alessio MuscilloDepartment of Economics and Statistics, Università di Siena, 53100, Siena, Italy. alessio.muscillo2@unisi.it.
Paolo PinDepartment of Economics and Statistics, Università di Siena, 53100, Siena, Italy.

Funding

Ministero dell 'Istruzione, dell 'Universit à e della Ricerca (Ministry of Education, University and Research) 20178293XTMinistero dell 'Istruzione, dell 'Universit à e della Ricerca (Ministry of Education, University and Research) 2017ELHNNJRegione Toscana (Tuscany Region) Spin.Ge.Vac.S.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In September 2021 we conducted a survey to 1482 people in Italy, when the vaccination campaign against Covid19 was going on. In the first part of the survey we run three simple tests on players' behavior in standard tasks with monetary incentives to measure their risk attitudes, willingness to contribute to a public good in an experimental game, and their beliefs about others' behavior. In the second part, we asked respondents if they were vaccinated and, if not, for what reason. We classified as no-vaxxers those (around [Formula: see text] of the sample) who did not yet start the vaccination process and declared that they intended not to do it in the future. We find that no-vaxxers contribute less to the public good in the experimental game because they trust others less to do so. from the three tests we extrapolated a classification based on the benchmark of rationality and other-regarding preferences for each respondent, and we found that in this respect no-vaxxers do not differ from the rest of the population.

Indexed as

COVID-19Game TheoryHumansMotivationTrustVaccination

Identifiers

PMID36307454
PMCPMC9616914

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.