IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v317y2023ics0277953622008978.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Futile or fertile? The effect of persuasive strategies on citizen engagement in COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets across six national health departments

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Di
  • Lu, Jiahui
  • Zhong, Ying

Abstract

National health departments across the globe have utilized persuasive strategies to promote COVID-19 vaccines through Twitter. However, the effectiveness of those strategies is unclear. This study thereby examined how national health departments deployed persuasive strategies to promote citizen engagement in COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets in six countries, including the UK, the US, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and India. Guided by the heuristic-systematic model and the health belief model, we found that national health departments differed significantly in the use of systematic-heuristic cues and health belief constructs in COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets. Generally, the provision of scientific information and appeals to anecdotes and fear positively, while appeals to bandwagon negatively, predicted citizen engagement. Messages about overcoming barriers and promoting vaccine benefits and self-efficacy positively affected engagement. Emphases of COVID-19 threats and cues to vaccinate demonstrated negative impacts. Importantly, health departments across countries often used futile or detrimental strategies in tweets. A locally adapted evidence-based approach for COVID-19 vaccination persuasion was discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Di & Lu, Jiahui & Zhong, Ying, 2023. "Futile or fertile? The effect of persuasive strategies on citizen engagement in COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets across six national health departments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 317(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:317:y:2023:i:c:s0277953622008978
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115591
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622008978
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115591?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Son, Jaebong & Lee, Jintae & Oh, Onook & Lee, Hyung Koo & Woo, Jiyoung, 2020. "Using a Heuristic-Systematic Model to assess the Twitter user profile’s impact on disaster tweet credibility," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    2. Áron Kiss & Gábor Simonovits, 2014. "Identifying the bandwagon effect in two-round elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(3), pages 327-344, September.
    3. Di Wang & Jiahui Lu, 2022. "How News Agencies’ Twitter Posts on COVID-19 Vaccines Attract Audiences’ Twitter Engagement: A Content Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-20, February.
    4. Heidi Ledford & David Cyranoski & Richard Van Noorden, 2020. "The UK has approved a COVID vaccine — here’s what scientists now want to know," Nature, Nature, vol. 588(7837), pages 205-206, December.
    5. Deborah Agostino & Michela Arnaboldi, 2016. "A Measurement Framework for Assessing the Contribution of Social Media to Public Engagement: An empirical analysis on Facebook," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(9), pages 1289-1307, October.
    6. Hyun Kyung Park & Ji Hye Ham & Deok Hyun Jang & Jin Yong Lee & Won Mo Jang, 2021. "Political Ideologies, Government Trust, and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in South Korea: A Cross-Sectional Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-9, October.
    7. Jeffrey V. Lazarus & Katarzyna Wyka & Trenton M. White & Camila A. Picchio & Kenneth Rabin & Scott C. Ratzan & Jeanna Parsons Leigh & Jia Hu & Ayman El-Mohandes, 2022. "Revisiting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy around the world using data from 23 countries in 2021," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Harris, J.K. & Mueller, N.L. & Snider, D., 2013. "Social media adoption in local health departments nationwide," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(9), pages 1700-1707.
    9. Welf H. Weiger & Maik Hammerschmidt & Hauke A. Wetzel, 2018. "Don’t You Dare Push Me: How Persuasive Social Media Tactics Shape Customer Engagement," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(3), pages 364-378.
    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. Kadić-Maglajlić, Selma & Lages, Cristiana R. & Pantano, Eleonora, 2024. "No time to lie: Examining the identity of pro-vaccination and anti-vaccination supporters through user-generated content," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 347(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. Brittany Ryder & Tingting Zhang & Nan Hua, 2021. "The Social Media “Magic”: Virtually Engaging Visitors during COVID-19 Temporary Closures," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, May.
    2. Cécile Aubert & Huihui Ding, 2022. "Voter conformism and inefficient policies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 207-249, July.
    3. Alberto Grillo & Eva Raiber, 2024. "Exit Polls and Voter Turnout in the 2017 French Elections," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 75(2), pages 353-369.
    4. Nathalie Nunes & Emma Björner & Knud Erik Hilding-Hamann, 2021. "Guidelines for Citizen Engagement and the Co-Creation of Nature-Based Solutions: Living Knowledge in the URBiNAT Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-37, December.
    5. Wen Jiao & Peter Johannes Schulz & Angela Chang, 2024. "Addressing the role of eHealth literacy in shaping popular attitudes towards post-COVID-19 vaccination among Chinese adults," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Josh Bullock & Justin E. Lane & F. LeRon Shults, 2022. "What causes COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy? Ignorance and the lack of bliss in the United Kingdom," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, December.
    7. Bhimani, Hardik & Mention, Anne-Laure & Barlatier, Pierre-Jean, 2019. "Social media and innovation: A systematic literature review and future research directions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 251-269.
    8. Furst, Rodrigo & Goldszmidt, Rafael & Andrade, Eduardo B. & Vieites, Yan & Andretti, Bernardo & Ramos, Guilherme A., 2024. "Longitudinal attenuation in political polarization: Evidence from COVID-19 vaccination adherence in Brazil," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    9. Fulian Yin & Meiqi Ji & Zhongliang Yang & Zhaoliang Wu & Xinyu Xia & Tongtong Xing & Yuwei She & Zhiwen Hu, 2022. "Exploring the determinants of global vaccination campaigns to combat COVID-19," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Kim, Jikyung (Jeanne) & Dong, Hang & Choi, Jeonghye & Chang, Sue Ryung, 2022. "Sentiment change and negative herding: Evidence from microblogging and news," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 364-376.
    11. Alberto Grillo, 2017. "Risk aversion and bandwagon effect in the pivotal voter model," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 465-482, September.
    12. Dorit Zimand-Sheiner & Ofrit Kol & Smadar Frydman & Shalom Levy, 2021. "To Be (Vaccinated) or Not to Be: The Effect of Media Exposure, Institutional Trust, and Incentives on Attitudes toward COVID-19 Vaccination," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Amelia Blamey & Ilan Noy, 2024. "Mistrust and Missed Shots: Trust and Covid-19 Vaccination Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 11134, CESifo.
    14. Sarah C. Vos & Jeannette Sutton & Yue Yu & Scott Leo Renshaw & Michele K. Olson & C. Ben Gibson & Carter T. Butts, 2018. "Retweeting Risk Communication: The Role of Threat and Efficacy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2580-2598, December.
    15. Jiehu Yuan & Yucan Xu & Irene Oi Ling Wong & Wendy Wing Tak Lam & Michael Y. Ni & Benjamin J. Cowling & Qiuyan Liao, 2024. "Dynamic predictors of COVID-19 vaccination uptake and their interconnections over two years in Hong Kong," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    16. Alessandro Sapienza & Rino Falcone, 2022. "The Role of Trust in COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: Considerations from a Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-17, December.
    17. Wolf, Tobias & Jahn, Steffen & Hammerschmidt, Maik & Weiger, Welf H., 2021. "Competition versus cooperation: How technology-facilitated social interdependence initiates the self-improvement chain," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 472-491.
    18. Andranik Tumasjan, 2024. "The many faces of social media in business and economics research: Taking stock of the literature and looking into the future," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 389-426, April.
    19. Wichmann, Bruno & Wichmann, Roberta, 2022. "COVID-19 and Indigenous health in the Brazilian Amazon," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. Dobre Florin & Popescu Maria Loredana & Pargaru Ion & Vatase Florin, 2024. "Use of Digital Media in the Public Sector," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 779-789.

    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:eee:socmed:v:317:y:2023:i:c:s0277953622008978. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.