IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_10196.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Beliefs about Social Norms and (the Polarization of) Covid-19 Vaccination Readiness

Author

Listed:
  • Silvia Angerer
  • Daniela Glätzle-Rützler
  • Philipp Lergetporer
  • Thomas Rittmannsberger

Abstract

Social norms affect a wide range of behaviors in society. We conducted a representative experiment to study how beliefs about the existing social norm regarding COVID-19 vaccination affect vaccination readiness. Beliefs about the norm are on average downward biased, and widely dispersed. Randomly providing information about the existing descriptive norm succeeds in correcting biased beliefs, thereby reducing belief dispersion. The information has no effect on vaccination readiness on average, which is due to opposite effects among women (positive) and men (negative). Fundamental differences in how women and men process the same information are likely the cause for these contrasting information effects. Control-group vaccination intentions are lower among women than men, so the information reduces polarization by gender. Additionally, the information reduces gendered polarization in policy preferences related to COVID-19 vaccination.

Suggested Citation

  • Silvia Angerer & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Thomas Rittmannsberger, 2022. "Beliefs about Social Norms and (the Polarization of) Covid-19 Vaccination Readiness," CESifo Working Paper Series 10196, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_10196
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp10196.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ricardo Perez-Truglia & Guillermo Cruces, 2017. "Partisan Interactions: Evidence from a Field Experiment in the United States," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1208-1243.
    2. Agranov, Marina & Elliott, Matt & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2021. "The importance of Social Norms against Strategic Effects: The case of Covid-19 vaccine uptake," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    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. Angerer, Silvia & Glätzle-Rützler, Daniela & Lergetporer, Philipp & Rittmannsberger, Thomas, 2023. "How does the vaccine approval procedure affect COVID-19 vaccination intentions?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Hermes, Henning & Lergetporer, Philipp & Peter, Frauke & Wiederhold, Simon, 2021. "Behavioral Barriers and the Socioeconomic Gap in Child Care Enrollment," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 16/2021, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    3. Kaba, Mustafa & Koyuncu, Murat & Schneider, Sebastian O. & Sutter, Matthias, 2024. "Social norms, political polarization, and vaccination attitudes: Evidence from a survey experiment in Turkey," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    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. Silvia Angerer & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Thomas Rittmannsberger, 2023. "Beliefs about social norms and (the polarization of) COVID-19 vaccination readiness," Munich Papers in Political Economy 26, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    2. Angerer, Silvia & Glätzle-Rützler, Daniela & Lergetporer, Philipp & Rittmannsberger, Thomas, 2024. "Beliefs about social norms and gender-based polarization of COVID-19 vaccination readiness," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    3. Hungerman, Daniel & Rinz, Kevin & Weninger, Tim & Yoon, Chungeun, 2018. "Political campaigns and church contributions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 403-426.
    4. Alan Gerber & Mitchell Hoffman & John Morgan & Collin Raymond, 2020. "One in a Million: Field Experiments on Perceived Closeness of the Election and Voter Turnout," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 287-325, July.
    5. Anna M. Wilke & Donald P. Green & Jasper Cooper, 2020. "A placebo design to detect spillovers from an education–entertainment experiment in Uganda," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(3), pages 1075-1096, June.
    6. Friedrichsen, Jana & König, Tobias & Schmacker, Renke, 2018. "Social image concerns and welfare take-up," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 168, pages 174-192.
    7. Leonardo Bursztyn & Ingar K. Haaland & Aakaash Rao & Christopher P. Roth, 2020. "Disguising Prejudice: Popular Rationales as Excuses for Intolerant Expression," NBER Working Papers 27288, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Leonardo Bursztyn & Georgy Egorov & Ingar Haaland & Aakaash Rao & Christopher Roth, 2023. "Justifying Dissent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(3), pages 1403-1451.
    9. Leonardo Bursztyn & Davide Cantoni & Patricia Funk & Felix Schönenberger & Noam Yuchtman, 2024. "Identifying the Effect of Election Closeness on Voter Turnout: Evidence from Swiss Referenda," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 876-914.
    10. Biljana Meiske, 2022. "Queen Bee Immigrant: The effects of status perceptions on immigration attitudes," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2022-12, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    11. Monika Pompeo & Nina Serdarevic, 2021. "Is information enough? The case of Republicans and climate change," Discussion Papers 2021-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    12. Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2020. "The Effects of Income Transparency on Well-Being: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1019-1054, April.
    13. Arbatli, Cemal Eren & Gomtsyan, David, 2019. "Voting retrospectively: Critical junctures and party identification," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 356-390.
    14. González, Felipe, 2020. "Collective action in networks: Evidence from the Chilean student movement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    15. Emilio Esguerra & Leonhard Vollmer & Johannes Wimmer, 2023. "Influence Motives in Social Signaling: Evidence from COVID-19 Vaccinations in Germany," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 275-291, June.
    16. Juan S. Morales, Margaret Samahita, 2023. "Can Social Pressure Stifle Free Speech," LCERPA Working Papers bm0140, Laurier Centre for Economic Research and Policy Analysis.
    17. Di Bu & Yin Liao, 2022. "Shaming Microloan Delinquents: Evidence from a Field Experiment in China," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3768-3790, May.
    18. Michele Battisti & Ilpo Kauppinen & Britta Rude, 2022. "Twitter and Crime: The Effect of Social Movements on GenderBased Violence," ifo Working Paper Series 381, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    19. Boris Ginzburg & José-Alberto Guerra, 2021. "Guns, pets, and strikes: an experiment on identity and political action," Documentos CEDE 19932, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    20. Philipp Ager & Leonardo Bursztyn & Lukas Leucht & Hans-Joachim Voth, 2022. "Killer Incentives: Rivalry, Performance and Risk-Taking among German Fighter Pilots, 1939–45," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(5), pages 2257-2292.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social norms; vaccination; Covid-19;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_10196. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.