Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36329314›Full record

ArticleNature human behaviour2023

The association between vaccination status identification and societal polarization.

Luca Henkel, Philipp Sprengholz, Lars Korn, Cornelia Betsch, Robert Böhm

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature human behaviour, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Vaccine hesitancy in postpandemic times-A guide for physicians].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

5 authors.

Luca Henkel *Department of Economics, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4307-6369
Philipp Sprengholz *Media and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany. philipp.sprengholz@uni-erfurt.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9925-1920
Lars KornMedia and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6544-3839
Cornelia BetschMedia and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2856-7303
Robert BöhmFaculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6806-0374

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public discord between those vaccinated and those unvaccinated for COVID-19 has intensified globally. Theories of intergroup relations propose that identifying with one's social group plays a key role in the perceptions and behaviours that fuel intergroup conflict. We test whether identification with one's vaccination status is associated with current societal polarization. The study draws on panel data from samples of vaccinated (n = 3,267) and unvaccinated (n = 2,038) respondents in Germany and Austria that were collected in December 2021 and February, March and July 2022. The findings confirm that vaccination status identification (VSI) explains substantial variance in a range of polarizing attitudes and behaviours. VSI was also related to higher psychological reactance toward mandatory vaccination policies among the unvaccinated. Higher levels of VSI reduced the gap between intended and actual counterbehaviours over time by the unvaccinated. VSI appears to be an important measure for predicting behavioural responses to vaccination policies.

Indexed as

COVID-19Dissent and DisputesGermanyHumansPolicyVaccination

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.