IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aiw/wpaper/26.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Beliefs about social norms and (the polarization of) COVID-19 vaccination readiness

Author

Listed:
  • Silvia Angerer

    (UMIT - Private University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology,Hall in Tirol)

  • Daniela Glätzle-Rützler

    (University of Innsbruck)

  • Philipp Lergetporer

    (Technical University of Munich and CESifo)

  • Thomas Rittmannsberger

    (University of Innsbruck)

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, 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:aiw:wpaper:26
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cms.mgt.tum.de/fileadmin/mgt.tum.de/faculty_and_research/mppe/26_Beliefs_about_social_norms_and__the_polarization_of__COVID-19_vaccination_readiness.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Konstantin Chatziathanasiou & Svenja Hippel & Michael Kurschilgen, 2020. "Property, Redistribution, and the Status Quo," Munich Papers in Political Economy 02, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    2. 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.
    3. 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. Yenny Guzman-Ruiz & Joshua Choe & Gerard F. Anderson & Antonio J. Trujillo, 2025. "Trust in Government and COVID-19 Preventive Behaviors," Journal of Economic Analysis, Anser Press, vol. 4(1), pages 150-169, 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. Silvia Angerer & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Thomas Rittmannsberger, 2022. "Beliefs about social norms and (the polarization of) COVID-19 vaccination readiness," Working Papers 2022-20, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    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. Nail Kashaev & Natalia Lazzati & Ruli Xiao, 2023. "Peer Effects in Consideration and Preferences," Papers 2310.12272, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Hermes, Henning & Krauß, Marina & Lergetporer, Philipp & Peter, Frauke & Wiederhold, Simon, 2022. "Early child care and labor supply of lower-SES mothers: A randomized controlled trial," DICE Discussion Papers 394, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. 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).
    11. Bittschi, Benjamin & Dwenger, Nadja & Rincke, Johannes, 2021. "Water the flowers you want to grow? Evidence on private recognition and donor loyalty," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Nikolaj Harmon & Raymond Fisman & Emir Kamenica, 2019. "Peer Effects in Legislative Voting," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 156-180, October.
    14. Agranov, M. & Elliott, M. & Ortoleva, P., 2024. "I know best: Scepticism about the Knowledge of Experts and Peers on Economics Predictions," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2423, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    15. Elisa Macchi, 2022. "Worth your weight: experimental evidence on the benefits of obesity in low-income countries," ECON - Working Papers 401, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    16. Saia, Alessandro, 2018. "Random interactions in the Chamber: Legislators' behavior and political distance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 225-240.
    17. 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.
    18. Afridi, Farzana & Basistha, Ahana & Dhillon, Amrita & Serra, Danila, 2023. "Activating Change: The Role of Information and Beliefs in Social Activism," IZA Discussion Papers 16358, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. 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.
    20. Konstantin Chatziathanasiou & Svenja Hippel & Michael Kurschilgen, 2022. "Does the Threat of Overthrow Discipline the Elites? Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(2), pages 289-320.

    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:aiw:wpaper:26. 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: MPPE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwtumde.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.