scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Jie Li

Bio: Jie Li is an academic researcher from University of Electronic Science and Technology of China. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Psychology. The author has co-authored 1 publications.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated the effect of gain-framed, lossframed and altruism messages on willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine and confirmed the best strategy for promoting vaccination.
Abstract: Background/objective Vaccination is an efficient public health strategy for controlling infectious diseases like the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, this study evaluates the effect of gain-framed, loss-framed, and altruism messages on willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine and confirms the best strategy for promoting vaccination. Methods Herein, we designed an online survey experiment, including a control (exposure to non-framed information) and three experimental (exposure to gain-framed, loss-framed, or altruistic messages) groups, to assess the vaccination willingness. All participants (n = 1316) were randomly assigned into one of the four groups. Results The individuals exposed to gain-framed, loss-framed, or altruism messages exhibited a higher willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine than those exposed to non-framed information. Moreover, the loss-framed information effect on vaccination willingness was more substantial than the other two messages. However, no significant difference was observed between the gain-framed and altruism messages. Conclusion This study suggests that a loss-framed information dissemination strategy could be preferable to motivate vaccination willingness against COVID-19.

18 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , the authors explored the effects of personality traits on online rumor sharing during the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the mediating role of the fear of COVID-2019 between them.
Abstract: This study aims to explore the effects of personality traits on online rumor sharing during the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the mediating role of the fear of COVID-19 between them. We conducted this research using a web-based questionnaire distributed to 452 university students who were invited to fill it out. The partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method was used to test the data and model, with the yielded results demonstrating that three—extroversion, emotional instability, and conscientiousness—of the Big Five personality traits are positively related to a fear of COVID-19, with this fear positively affecting online rumor sharing. Moreover, fear of COVID-19 was found to act as a mediator between personality traits and online rumor sharing; thus, we can conclude that persons with high levels of extroversion, emotional instability, and conscientiousness are more likely to share rumors online due to a fear of COVID-19. This study furthers our understanding of the psychological mechanism by which personality traits influence online rumor sharing and provides references for anti-rumor campaigns taking place during the COVID-19 pandemic, as it identifies key groups and sheds light on the necessity of reducing people’s fear of COVID-19.

5 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , the mediating role of cognitive reappraisal and role of resilience in the relationship between young adults' loneliness and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic by adopting a cross-sectional research approach was examined.
Abstract: Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in December 2019, millions of people have been infected with the disease. The COVID-19 pandemic also produced severe mental health problems, such as loneliness and depression. The present study aimed to examine the mediating role of cognitive reappraisal and moderating role of resilience in the relationship between young adults’ loneliness and depression during the pandemic by adopting a cross-sectional research approach. In March 2020, 654 young adults (18–29 years old) were recruited to complete the measures for loneliness, depression, emotion regulation, and resilience. Results found that loneliness was positively and moderately associated with depression (r = 0.531, p < 0.001), and that both loneliness and depression were separately negatively associated with cognitive reappraisal (r = −0.348, p < 0.001; r = −0.424, p < 0.001) and resilience (r = −0.436, p < 0.001; r = −0.419, p < 0.001). The results indicated that both loneliness and depression were not associated with expressive suppression (r = 0.067, p = 0.087; r = −0.002, p = 0.961). The moderated mediation model results revealed that only cognitive reappraisal partially mediated the relationship between loneliness and depression (b = −0.301; Boot 95% CI = −0.388, −0.215). In addition, the results of the moderated mediation model indicated that resilience moderated the association between loneliness and depression (b = 0.035, p < 0.001, Boot 95% CI = 0.014, 0.055), while also moderated the impact of cognitive reappraisal on depression (b = −0.031, p < 0.001, Boot 95% CI = −0.058, −0.005). These findings have practical implications that broaden our understanding of depression in young adults and shed light on how to enhance cognitive reappraisal and resilience as a means of combating depression in this age group during the COVID-19 pandemic.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors conducted an online self-administered survey experiment with three groups: control group (non-framed group), gain-frameed groups, and loss-frame groups to assess whether message framing can moderate the impacts of WSE on the willingness to vaccinate.
Abstract: ABSTRACT Vaccination is an effective strategy for controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, worrying about side effects (WSE) from the COVID-19 vaccine is the leading concern making people hesitant to get vaccinated. Regrettably, there are few studies on alleviating the negative impacts of WSE on COVID-19 vaccination. This study aimed to assess whether message framing (gain- and loss-framed) can moderate the impacts of WSE on the willingness to vaccinate. We conducted an online self-administered survey experiment with three groups: control group (non-framed group), gain-framed groups, and loss-framed groups. In total, 981 participants were randomly assigned to one of the three groups, and their willingness to vaccinate themselves, their children, and elderly members was recorded. People with a higher level of WSE exhibited a lower willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19. However, the gain- and loss-framed messages increased people’s willingness to vaccinate themselves, their children, and the elderly. Compared to the gain-framed messages, the loss-framed messages had a greater impact on enhancing people’s willingness to self-vaccinate, but not on vaccinating their children and the elderly. Although the gain- and loss-framed messages weakened the negative impacts of WSE on the willingness to be vaccinated, their buffer effect was non-significantly different. The findings in this study suggest that a loss-framed messaging strategy could be a valuable tool in disseminating information on vaccination against COVID-19.

2 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors evaluated the association among framed messages (egoism-, altruism-, and loss-framed information), perceived net benefits (PNB), and willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.
Abstract: Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the association among framed messages (egoism-, altruism-, and loss-framed information), perceived net benefits (PNB), and willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: A between-subject survey experiment was designed to assess the above association. A total of 1,316 individuals were included in this study. The participants were randomly assigned to one control group (receiving non-framed information) and three experimental groups (receiving egoism-, altruism-, and loss-framed information). The participants then reported their vaccination willingness and perceived effectiveness and side effects of vaccination. PNB was determined by subtracting the perceived side effects from perceived effectiveness. Results: Compared with the control group, participants in the experimental groups exhibited stronger vaccination willingness. Higher PNB levels were associated with enhanced vaccination willingness. However, only loss-framed messages indirectly affected vaccination willingness through PNB. Conclusion: PNB can mediate the impact of message framing on vaccination willingness. However, the mediation effect of PNB was only found in the relationship between loss-framed messages and vaccination willingness.

Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A scoping review of interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake and decreasing vaccine hesitancy is presented in this paper , where the authors identify and map a variety of heterogeneous interventions according to addressed populations and intervention categories.
Abstract: Background Vaccines are effective in preventing severe COVID‐19, a disease for which few treatments are available and which can lead to disability or death. Widespread vaccination against COVID‐19 may help protect those not yet able to get vaccinated. In addition, new and vaccine‐resistant mutations of SARS‐CoV‐2 may be less likely to develop if the spread of COVID‐19 is limited. Different vaccines are now widely available in many settings. However, vaccine hesitancy is a serious threat to the goal of nationwide vaccination in many countries and poses a substantial threat to population health. This scoping review maps interventions aimed at increasing COVID‐19 vaccine uptake and decreasing COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy. Objectives To scope the existing research landscape on interventions to enhance the willingness of different populations to be vaccinated against COVID‐19, increase COVID‐19 vaccine uptake, or decrease COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy, and to map the evidence according to addressed populations and intervention categories. Search methods We searched Cochrane COVID‐19 Study Register, Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index), WHO COVID‐19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, PsycINFO, and CINAHL to 11 October 2021. Selection criteria We included studies that assess the impact of interventions implemented to enhance the willingness of different populations to be vaccinated against COVID‐19, increase vaccine uptake, or decrease COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non‐randomised studies of intervention (NRSIs), observational studies and case studies with more than 100 participants. Furthermore, we included systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. We did not limit the scope of the review to a specific population or to specific outcomes assessed. We excluded interventions addressing hesitancy towards vaccines for diseases other than COVID‐19. Data collection and analysis Data were analysed according to a protocol uploaded to the Open Science Framework. We used an interactive scoping map to visualise the results of our scoping review. We mapped the identified interventions according to pre‐specified intervention categories, that were adapted to better fit the evidence. The intervention categories were: communication interventions, policy interventions, educational interventions, incentives (both financial and non‐financial), interventions to improve access, and multidimensional interventions. The study outcomes were also included in the mapping. Furthermore, we mapped the country in which the study was conducted, the addressed population, and whether the design was randomised‐controlled or not. Main results We included 96 studies in the scoping review, 35 of which are ongoing and 61 studies with published results. We did not identify any relevant systematic reviews. For an overview, please see the interactive scoping map (https://tinyurl.com/2p9jmx24). Studies with published results Of the 61 studies with published results, 46 studies were RCTs and 15 NRSIs. The interventions investigated in the studies were heterogeneous with most studies testing communication strategies to enhance COVID‐19 vaccine uptake. Most studies assessed the willingness to get vaccinated as an outcome. The majority of studies were conducted in English‐speaking high‐income countries. Moreover, most studies investigated digital interventions in an online setting. Populations that were addressed were diverse. For example, studies targeted healthcare workers, ethnic minorities in the USA, students, soldiers, at‐risk patients, or the general population. Ongoing studies Of the 35 ongoing studies, 29 studies are RCTs and six NRSIs. Educational and communication interventions were the most used types of interventions. The majority of ongoing studies plan to assess vaccine uptake as an outcome. Again, the majority of studies are being conducted in English‐speaking high‐income countries. In contrast to the studies with published results, most ongoing studies will not be conducted online. Addressed populations range from minority populations in the USA to healthcare workers or students. Eleven ongoing studies have estimated completion dates in 2022. Authors' conclusions We were able to identify and map a variety of heterogeneous interventions for increasing COVID‐19 vaccine uptake or decreasing vaccine hesitancy. Our results demonstrate that this is an active field of research with 61 published studies and 35 studies still ongoing. This review gives a comprehensive overview of interventions to increase COVID‐19 vaccine uptake and can be the foundation for subsequent systematic reviews on the effectiveness of interventions to increase COVID‐19 vaccine uptake. A research gap was shown for studies conducted in low and middle‐income countries and studies investigating policy interventions and improved access, as well as for interventions addressing children and adolescents. As COVID‐19 vaccines become more widely available, these populations and interventions should not be neglected in research.

7 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of quantitative studies was conducted to estimate the strength of the associations of loneliness and social support with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the general population.
Abstract: Background: Research suggests that changes in social support and loneliness have affected mental disorder symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are a lack of studies comparing the robustness of these associations. Aims: The aims were to estimate the strength of the associations of loneliness and social support with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022) in the general population. Method: The method entailed a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of quantitative studies. Results: Seventy-three studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled correlations of the effect size of the association of loneliness with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress were 0.49, 0.40, and 0.38, respectively. The corresponding figures for social support were 0.29, 0.19, and 0.18, respectively. Subgroup analyses revealed that the strength of some associations could be influenced by the sociodemographic characteristics of the study samples, such as age, gender, region, and COVID-19 stringency index, and by methodological moderators, such as sample size, collection date, methodological quality, and the measurement scales. Conclusions: Social support had a weak association with mental disorder symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic while the association with loneliness was moderate. Strategies to address loneliness could be highly effective in reducing the impact of the pandemic on social relationships and mental health.

4 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Through in-depth interviews with 55 Chinese young adults and thematic analysis guided by the health belief model, social benefits and worry reduction emerged as significant positive factors in young adults' intention to vaccinate, and two modifying factors appeared to be indirectly associated with vaccination intention by augmenting the perceived barriers.
Abstract: Survey-based research has provided us with breadth regarding perceived benefits and barriers to COVID-19 vaccination among Chinese people. Most such research has been conducted within hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine contexts, and few studies are specific to young adults aged 18–40, a pivotal target population for COVID-19 vaccination. Now that the Sinopharm and Sinovac COVID-19 vaccines have been conditionally approved in China, qualitative investigation of young adults' perceptions of benefits and barriers to taking them is warranted. Such research may suggest potential candidate themes in the COVID-19 vaccination promotional messages targeting this population. Through in-depth interviews with 55 Chinese young adults and thematic analysis guided by the health belief model, social benefits and worry reduction emerged as significant positive factors in young adults' intention to vaccinate. Several novel barriers emerged as well, including perceptions that the vaccines' advantages are weak relative to non-medical preventions and beliefs regarding Ti Zhi (the individual human constitution), which confused some participants about their suitability for vaccination. The study also identified two modifying factors, trust in the government and perceived vaccine information insufficiency, both of which appeared to be indirectly associated with vaccination intention by augmenting the perceived barriers. The results suggest that more attention could be paid to young adults' cultural background when developing relevant health communications.

4 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science (WoS), and SCOPUS from 2020 until October 10, 2021, was conducted on experimental studies evaluating the effects of incentives including cash, lottery voucher, and persuasive messages on COVID-19 vaccination intention and uptake as mentioned in this paper .
Abstract: Introduction Although vaccination is the most effective way to limit and overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, a considerable fraction of them are not intended to get vaccinated. This study aims to investigate the existing research evidence and evaluate the effectiveness and consequences of all incentives provided for increasing the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination. Methods A systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science (WoS), and SCOPUS from 2020 until October 10, 2021, was conducted on experimental studies evaluating the effects of incentives including cash, lottery voucher, and persuasive messages on COVID-19 vaccination intention and uptake. The study selection process, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted independently by two investigators using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT 2010) checklist. Results Twenty-four records were included in the qualitative analysis. Most of the included studies assessed the effect of financial incentives. In 14 studies (58%) the assessed outcome was vaccination uptake and in nine (37.5%) others it was vaccination intention. One study considered self-reported vaccination status as the outcome. This study shows that high financial incentives and the Vax-a-million lottery are attributed to a higher vaccination rate, while the low amount of financial incentives, other lotteries, and persuasive messages have small or non-significant effects. Conclusion Paying a considerable amount of cash and Vax-a-million lottery are attributed to a higher vaccination. Nevertheless, there is a controversy over the effect of other incentives including other lotteries, low amount of cash, and messages on vaccination. It is noteworthy that, inconsistency and imprecision of included studies should be considered.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors conducted an online self-administered survey experiment with three groups: control group (non-framed group), gain-frameed groups, and loss-frame groups to assess whether message framing can moderate the impacts of WSE on the willingness to vaccinate.
Abstract: ABSTRACT Vaccination is an effective strategy for controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, worrying about side effects (WSE) from the COVID-19 vaccine is the leading concern making people hesitant to get vaccinated. Regrettably, there are few studies on alleviating the negative impacts of WSE on COVID-19 vaccination. This study aimed to assess whether message framing (gain- and loss-framed) can moderate the impacts of WSE on the willingness to vaccinate. We conducted an online self-administered survey experiment with three groups: control group (non-framed group), gain-framed groups, and loss-framed groups. In total, 981 participants were randomly assigned to one of the three groups, and their willingness to vaccinate themselves, their children, and elderly members was recorded. People with a higher level of WSE exhibited a lower willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19. However, the gain- and loss-framed messages increased people’s willingness to vaccinate themselves, their children, and the elderly. Compared to the gain-framed messages, the loss-framed messages had a greater impact on enhancing people’s willingness to self-vaccinate, but not on vaccinating their children and the elderly. Although the gain- and loss-framed messages weakened the negative impacts of WSE on the willingness to be vaccinated, their buffer effect was non-significantly different. The findings in this study suggest that a loss-framed messaging strategy could be a valuable tool in disseminating information on vaccination against COVID-19.

2 citations