Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects

Anna Borgmann; Keith J Petrie; Anna Seewald; Meike Shedden-Mora

doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111616

Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects

Standard

Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects. / Borgmann, Anna; Petrie, Keith J; Seewald, Anna; Shedden-Mora, Meike.

In: J PSYCHOSOM RES, Vol. 179, 04.2024, p. 111616.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Borgmann, A, Petrie, KJ, Seewald, A & Shedden-Mora, M 2024, 'Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects', J PSYCHOSOM RES, vol. 179, pp. 111616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111616

APA

Borgmann, A., Petrie, K. J., Seewald, A., & Shedden-Mora, M. (2024). Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects. J PSYCHOSOM RES, 179, 111616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111616

Vancouver

Borgmann A, Petrie KJ, Seewald A, Shedden-Mora M. Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects. J PSYCHOSOM RES. 2024 Apr;179:111616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111616

Bibtex

@article{7ae26847827d482f9f5c5960077c6f56,

title = "Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Treatment expectations alter the probability of experiencing unpleasant side effects from an intervention, including vaccinations. To date, expectations have mostly been assessed explicitly bearing the risk of bias. This study aims to compare implicit expectations of side effects from COVID-19 and flu vaccinations and to examine their relationships with vaccine attitudes and intentions.METHODS: N = 248 participants took part in a cross-sectional online survey assessing explicit and implicit expectations, as well as vaccine-related attitudes and personal characteristics. A Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) was developed to assess implicit side effect expectations. Explicit side effect expectations were measured with the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q).RESULTS: Whereas explicit and implicit expectations regarding COVID-19 vaccine were significantly correlated (r = -0.325, p < .001), those correlations could not be found regarding flu vaccine (r = -0.072, p = .32). Explicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.576, p < .001; flu: β = -0.301, p < .001) predicted the intention to receive further vaccinations more than implicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.005, p = .93; flu: β = 0.004, p = .96). Explicit measures (COVID-19: OR = 0.360, p < .001; flu: OR = 0.819, p = .03) predicted vaccination status, while implicit measures did not (COVID- 19: OR = 2.643, p = .35; flu: OR = 0.829, p = .61).CONCLUSION: Expectations to experience side effects from vaccinations can be measured implicitly, in addition to explicit measures. Further investigation needs to determine the relative contribution and additive value of using implicit measures to assess treatment expectations.",

keywords = "Humans, Motivation, Cross-Sectional Studies, COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects, Vaccination/adverse effects, COVID-19/prevention & control",

author = "Anna Borgmann and Petrie, {Keith J} and Anna Seewald and Meike Shedden-Mora",

year = "2024",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111616",

language = "English",

volume = "179",

pages = "111616",

journal = "J PSYCHOSOM RES",

issn = "0022-3999",

publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects

AU - Borgmann, Anna

AU - Petrie, Keith J

AU - Seewald, Anna

AU - Shedden-Mora, Meike

PY - 2024/4

Y1 - 2024/4

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Treatment expectations alter the probability of experiencing unpleasant side effects from an intervention, including vaccinations. To date, expectations have mostly been assessed explicitly bearing the risk of bias. This study aims to compare implicit expectations of side effects from COVID-19 and flu vaccinations and to examine their relationships with vaccine attitudes and intentions.METHODS: N = 248 participants took part in a cross-sectional online survey assessing explicit and implicit expectations, as well as vaccine-related attitudes and personal characteristics. A Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) was developed to assess implicit side effect expectations. Explicit side effect expectations were measured with the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q).RESULTS: Whereas explicit and implicit expectations regarding COVID-19 vaccine were significantly correlated (r = -0.325, p < .001), those correlations could not be found regarding flu vaccine (r = -0.072, p = .32). Explicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.576, p < .001; flu: β = -0.301, p < .001) predicted the intention to receive further vaccinations more than implicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.005, p = .93; flu: β = 0.004, p = .96). Explicit measures (COVID-19: OR = 0.360, p < .001; flu: OR = 0.819, p = .03) predicted vaccination status, while implicit measures did not (COVID- 19: OR = 2.643, p = .35; flu: OR = 0.829, p = .61).CONCLUSION: Expectations to experience side effects from vaccinations can be measured implicitly, in addition to explicit measures. Further investigation needs to determine the relative contribution and additive value of using implicit measures to assess treatment expectations.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Treatment expectations alter the probability of experiencing unpleasant side effects from an intervention, including vaccinations. To date, expectations have mostly been assessed explicitly bearing the risk of bias. This study aims to compare implicit expectations of side effects from COVID-19 and flu vaccinations and to examine their relationships with vaccine attitudes and intentions.METHODS: N = 248 participants took part in a cross-sectional online survey assessing explicit and implicit expectations, as well as vaccine-related attitudes and personal characteristics. A Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) was developed to assess implicit side effect expectations. Explicit side effect expectations were measured with the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q).RESULTS: Whereas explicit and implicit expectations regarding COVID-19 vaccine were significantly correlated (r = -0.325, p < .001), those correlations could not be found regarding flu vaccine (r = -0.072, p = .32). Explicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.576, p < .001; flu: β = -0.301, p < .001) predicted the intention to receive further vaccinations more than implicit measures (COVID-19: β = -0.005, p = .93; flu: β = 0.004, p = .96). Explicit measures (COVID-19: OR = 0.360, p < .001; flu: OR = 0.819, p = .03) predicted vaccination status, while implicit measures did not (COVID- 19: OR = 2.643, p = .35; flu: OR = 0.829, p = .61).CONCLUSION: Expectations to experience side effects from vaccinations can be measured implicitly, in addition to explicit measures. Further investigation needs to determine the relative contribution and additive value of using implicit measures to assess treatment expectations.

KW - Humans

KW - Motivation

KW - Cross-Sectional Studies

KW - COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects

KW - Vaccination/adverse effects

KW - COVID-19/prevention & control

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111616

DO - 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111616

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 38401222

VL - 179

SP - 111616

JO - J PSYCHOSOM RES

JF - J PSYCHOSOM RES

SN - 0022-3999

ER -