IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v35y2015i1p37-45.html

Getting Ahead of Illness

Author

Listed:
  • Aaron M. Scherer
  • Laura D. Scherer
  • Angela Fagerlin

Abstract

Background. Metaphors influence judgments and decisions in nonmedical contexts. Objective. First, to investigate whether describing the flu metaphorically increases an individual’s willingness and interest in getting a flu vaccination, and second, to explore possible mediators and moderators of the effect that metaphors might have on vaccination intentions. Materials and Methods. Three studies, each using a between-subjects manipulation in which the flu was described literally (as a virus) or metaphorically (as a beast, riot, army, or weed), were conducted. A total of 167 psychology undergraduates (study 1) and 300 and 301 online participants (studies 2 and 3, respectively) were included. Studies 1 through 3 examined vaccination behavioral intentions, absolute risk, comparative risk, perceived flu severity, and recent flu and flu vaccination experience. Studies 2 and 3 assessed vaccination e-mail reminder requests and global affect. Study 3 evaluated affective reactions, personal control, and understanding of the flu. Results. Describing the flu metaphorically increased individuals’ willingness to get vaccinated (studies 1–3), while the impact of metaphors on requests to receive an e-mail reminder to get vaccinated was unclear (studies 2 and 3). These results were moderated by vaccination frequency in study 2, such that the effects were found among individuals who occasionally receive flu vaccinations but not among individuals who never or always receive flu vaccinations. Metaphor use did not significantly impact any of the hypothesized mediators: perceived absolute risk, comparative risk, flu severity, affect, personal control, or understanding of the flu. Limitations include convenience samples and measuring behavioral intentions but not actual vaccination behavior. Conclusions. Describing the flu virus metaphorically in decision aids or information campaigns could be a simple, cost-effective way to increase vaccinations against the flu.

Suggested Citation

  • Aaron M. Scherer & Laura D. Scherer & Angela Fagerlin, 2015. "Getting Ahead of Illness," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(1), pages 37-45, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:35:y:2015:i:1:p:37-45
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14522547
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X14522547
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X14522547?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul H Thibodeau & Lera Boroditsky, 2011. "Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, February.
    2. Gabriele Paolacci & Jesse Chandler & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2010. "Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(5), pages 411-419, August.
    3. Morris, Michael W. & Sheldon, Oliver J. & Ames, Daniel R. & Young, Maia J, 2007. "Metaphors and the market: Consequences and preconditions of agent and object metaphors in stock market commentary," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 174-192, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lynsey K. Romo & Noah Czajkowski, 2022. "An Examination of Redditors’ Metaphorical Sensemaking of Prenuptial Agreements," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-14, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    2. Kenneth D. Nguyen & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2017. "Valuing Equal Protection in Aviation Security Screening," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2405-2419, December.
    3. Graupe, Silja & Steffestun, Theresa, 2018. ""The market deals out profit and losses": Wie ökonomische Standardlehrbücher das unreflektierte Denken in Metaphern fördern," Working Paper Serie des Instituts für Ökonomie Ök-38, Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung (HfGG), Institut für Ökonomie.
    4. Varun Dutt & Cleotilde Gonzalez, 2013. "Enabling Eco-Friendly Choices by Relying on the Proportional-Thinking Heuristic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Sweldens, Steven & Puntoni, Stefano & Paolacci, Gabriele & Vissers, Maarten, 2014. "The bias in the bias: Comparative optimism as a function of event social undesirability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 229-244.
    6. S. Venus Jin & Aziz Muqaddam, 2019. "Product placement 2.0: “Do Brands Need Influencers, or Do Influencers Need Brands?”," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(5), pages 522-537, September.
    7. Enrico Rubaltelli & Lorella Lotto & Ilana Ritov & Rino Rumiati, 2015. "Moral investing: Psychological motivations and implications," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(1), pages 64-75, January.
    8. Hsu, Dan K. & Burmeister-Lamp, Katrin & Simmons, Sharon A. & Foo, Maw-Der & Hong, Michelle C. & Pipes, Jesse D., 2019. "“I know I can, but I don't fit”: Perceived fit, self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial intention," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 311-326.
    9. Lutz, Christoph & Newlands, Gemma, 2018. "Consumer segmentation within the sharing economy: The case of Airbnb," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 187-196.
    10. Nir Halevy & Sora Jun & Eileen Y. Chou, 2020. "Intergroup Conflict is Our Business: CEOs’ Ethical Intergroup Leadership Fuels Stakeholder Support for Corporate Intergroup Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 229-246, February.
    11. Mariconda, Simone & Lurati, Francesco, 2015. "Does familiarity breed stability? The role of familiarity in moderating the effects of new information on reputation judgments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 957-964.
    12. Tarcia Camily Cavalcante Quezado & Nuno Fortes & William Quezado Figueiredo Cavalcante, 2022. "The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics on Brand Fidelity: The Importance of Brand Love and Brand Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Gandullia, Luca & Lezzi, Emanuela, 2018. "The price elasticity of charitable giving: New experimental evidence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 88-91.
    14. Pam A. Mueller & Lawrence M. Solan & John M. Darley, 2012. "When Does Knowledge Become Intent? Perceiving the Minds of Wrongdoers," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 859-892, December.
    15. Masha Shunko & Julie Niederhoff & Yaroslav Rosokha, 2018. "Humans Are Not Machines: The Behavioral Impact of Queueing Design on Service Time," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 453-473, January.
    16. Prast, Henriette & Sanders, José & Boggio, C., 2017. "Seven ways to knit your portfolio: Is the language of investor communication gender neutral?," Other publications TiSEM b477bb2d-f71c-4b9b-ab9e-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Tobias Schlager & Ashley V. Whillans, 2022. "People underestimate the probability of contracting the coronavirus from friends," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    18. Hou, Chenxuan & Li, Tingting & Gu, Yanzhang, 2026. "Artificial intelligence versus human providers for personalized solutions? The influence of expected group size and perceived uniqueness on adoption intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    19. Giorgia Ponsi & Maria Serena Panasiti & Salvatore Maria Aglioti & Marco Tullio Liuzza, 2017. "Right-wing authoritarianism and stereotype-driven expectations interact in shaping intergroup trust in one-shot vs multiple-round social interactions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, December.
    20. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2013. "Experimental methods: Extra-laboratory experiments-extending the reach of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 93-100.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:35:y:2015:i:1:p:37-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.