Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36670135›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Comparative analysis of Australian climate change and COVID-19 vaccine audience segments shows climate skeptics can be vaccine enthusiasts.

Lucy M Richardson, Jagadish Thaker, David C Holmes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 2 countries.

Lucy M RichardsonMonash University, Melbourne, Australia. lucy.richardson@monash.edu.
Jagadish ThakerUniversity of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
David C HolmesMonash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Monash University · AUUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Denialism and the spreading of misinformation have occurred regarding both climate change and COVID-19, delaying uptake of urgent actions. Audience segmentation analysis identifies audience subgroups likely to have similar responses to messaging, and is a valuable tool for effective campaigns encouraging critical behaviors in both contexts. This study compared audience segmentations based on a representative sample of 1054 Australians. One segmentation was based on the 'Global Warming's Six Americas' online SASSY tool. The second segmentation applied the Theory of Planned Behavior and found five distinct COVID-19 vaccine segments. Both studies showed those most concerned and those most skeptical in the climate change segmentation tended to be in more enthusiastic COVID-19 vaccine segments, while those in the center on climate change were more skeptical on COVID-19 vaccines. Differences identified relating to age, gender, and political views may be explained by a combination of the specific nature and histories of these issues. These findings have implications for effective communication on science and health issues across diverse disciplines.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAustraliaClimate ChangeCommunicationHumansCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID36670135
PMCPMC9853496
OpenAlexW4317601980

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.