IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jinfst/v74y2023i7p846-865.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the impacts of quantity and trustworthiness of information on COVID‐19 vaccination intent

Author

Listed:
  • Min Sook Park
  • JungHo Park
  • Hyejin Kim
  • Jin Hui Lee
  • Hyejin Park

Abstract

The COVID‐19 crisis provided an opportunity for information professionals to rethink the role of information in individuals' decision making such as vaccine uptake. Unlike previous studies, which often considered information as a single factor among others, this study examined the impact of the quantity and trustworthiness of information on people's adoption of information for vaccination decisions based on the information adoption model. We analyzed COVID‐19 Preventive Behavior Survey data collected by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology from Facebook users (N = 82,213) in 15 countries between October 2020 and March 2021. The results of logistic regression analyses indicate that reasonable quantity and trustworthiness of information were positively related to COVID‐19 vaccination intent. But excessive and less than the desired amount of information was more likely to have negative impacts on vaccination intent. The degrees of trust in the mediums and in the sources were associated with the level of vaccine acceptance. But the effects of trustworthiness accorded to information sources showed variations across sources and mediums. Implications for information professionals and suggestions for policies are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Min Sook Park & JungHo Park & Hyejin Kim & Jin Hui Lee & Hyejin Park, 2023. "Measuring the impacts of quantity and trustworthiness of information on COVID‐19 vaccination intent," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(7), pages 846-865, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:74:y:2023:i:7:p:846-865
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.24760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24760
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.24760?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. Soo Young Rieh, 2002. "Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 53(2), pages 145-161.
    2. Simpson, C.W. & Prusak, L., 1995. "Troubles with information overload—Moving from quantity to quality in information provision," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 413-425.
    3. Stephanie Watts Sussman & Wendy Schneier Siegal, 2003. "Informational Influence in Organizations: An Integrated Approach to Knowledge Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 47-65, March.
    4. Ozanne, Julie L & Brucks, Merrie & Grewal, Dhruv, 1992. "A Study of Information Search Behavior during the Categorization of New Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(4), pages 452-463, March.
    5. Besiki Stvilia & Lorri Mon & Yong Jeong Yi, 2009. "A model for online consumer health information quality," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(9), pages 1781-1791, September.
    6. Jay R. Galbraith, 1974. "Organization Design: An Information Processing View," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 28-36, May.
    7. Pan, Lee-Yun & Chiou, Jyh-Shen, 2011. "How Much Can You Trust Online Information? Cues for Perceived Trustworthiness of Consumer-generated Online Information," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 67-74.
    8. Urbany, Joel E & Dickson, Peter R & Wilkie, William L, 1989. "Buyer Uncertainty and Information Search," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 208-215, September.
    9. Stephen P. Harter, 1992. "Psychological relevance and information science," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 43(9), pages 602-615, October.
    10. Gilson, Lucy, 2003. "Trust and the development of health care as a social institution," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(7), pages 1453-1468, April.
    11. Andrea P Marshall & Sandra H West & Leanne M Aitken, 2013. "Clinical credibility and trustworthiness are key characteristics used to identify colleagues from whom to seek information," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(9-10), pages 1424-1433, May.
    12. Heidi J. Larson, 2018. "Politics and public trust shape vaccine risk perceptions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(5), pages 316-316, May.
    13. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.
    14. Kari Kelton & Kenneth R. Fleischmann & William A. Wallace, 2008. "Trust in digital information," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(3), pages 363-374, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Affifa Sardar & Amir Manzoor & Khurram Adeel Shaikh & Liaqat Ali, 2021. "An Empirical Examination of the Impact of eWom Information on Young Consumers’ Online Purchase Intention: Mediating Role of eWom Information Adoption," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, October.
    2. DeSarbo, Wayne S. & Choi, Jungwhan, 1998. "A latent structure double hurdle regression model for exploring heterogeneity in consumer search patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 423-455, November.
    3. Sören Köcher & Hartmut H. Holzmüller, 2014. "Zu viel des Guten? Eine Analyse der Wirkung von Verbraucherschutzinformation," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 306-343, June.
    4. Ismagilova, Elvira & Dwivedi, Yogesh K. & Slade, Emma, 2020. "Perceived helpfulness of eWOM: Emotions, fairness and rationality," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    5. Verma, Deepak & Prakash Dewani, Prem & Behl, Abhishek & Pereira, Vijay & Dwivedi, Yogesh & Del Giudice, Manilo, 2023. "A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of eWOM credibility: Investigation of moderating role of culture and platform type," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Srivastava, Vartika & Kalro, Arti D., 2019. "Enhancing the Helpfulness of Online Consumer Reviews: The Role of Latent (Content) Factors," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 33-50.
    7. Devan Ray Donaldson & Paul Conway, 2015. "User conceptions of trustworthiness for digital archival documents," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(12), pages 2427-2444, December.
    8. Filieri, Raffaele, 2015. "What makes online reviews helpful? A diagnosticity-adoption framework to explain informational and normative influences in e-WOM," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1261-1270.
    9. Jackson, Thomas W. & Farzaneh, Pourya, 2012. "Theory-based model of factors affecting information overload," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 523-532.
    10. Jiatong Yu & Jiajue Wang & Taesoo Moon, 2022. "Influence of Digital Transformation Capability on Operational Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, June.
    11. Yan Zhang & Ciaran B. Trace, 2022. "The quality of health and wellness self‐tracking data: A consumer perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(6), pages 879-891, June.
    12. Wayne de Fremery & Michael K. Buckland, 2022. "Context, relevance, and labor," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(9), pages 1268-1278, September.
    13. Jinsoo Park & Hamirahanim Abdul Rahman & Jihae Suh & Hazami Hussin, 2019. "A Study of Integrative Bargaining Model with Argumentation-Based Negotiation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-21, December.
    14. Bo Yang & Chao Liu & Xusen Cheng & Xi Ma, 2022. "Understanding Users' Group Behavioral Decisions About Sharing Articles in Social Media: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 819-842, August.
    15. Un-Kon Lee, 2021. "The Effect of Confirmation of Nation Brand Image in International Tourism Advertisement on Travel Intention of Foreign Tourists: The Case of Korean ITA for Chinese Tourists," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    16. Ian Ruthven, 2021. "Resonance and the experience of relevance," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(5), pages 554-569, May.
    17. G. Rejikumar & Aswathy Asokan-Ajitha & Sofi Dinesh & Ajay Jose, 2022. "The role of cognitive complexity and risk aversion in online herd behavior," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 585-621, June.
    18. Jingsi Zhang & Liangqun Qi, 2021. "Crisis Preparedness of Healthcare Manufacturing Firms during the COVID-19 Outbreak: Digitalization and Servitization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-23, May.
    19. de Camargo Fiorini, Paula & Roman Pais Seles, Bruno Michel & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel Jose & Barberio Mariano, Enzo & de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz Lopes, 2018. "Management theory and big data literature: From a review to a research agenda," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 112-129.
    20. Shrestha, Yash Raj & Krishna, Vaibhav & von Krogh, Georg, 2021. "Augmenting organizational decision-making with deep learning algorithms: Principles, promises, and challenges," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 588-603.

    More about this item

    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:bla:jinfst:v:74:y:2023:i:7:p:846-865. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    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.