Scholarlink

<p>Optimizing vaccine uptake is a public health challenge that requires the implementation of effective strategies. The asymmetric dominance (or decoy) effect describes the increasing likelihood of selecting an option when a clearly inferior alternative is offered. Therefore, we aimed to test the impact of offering decoy alternatives—less convenient vaccination appointments—on vaccination intentions. Participants aged 18–33 years, residing in England, and initially not intending to get vaccinated, completed three online experiments. Participants were randomly assigned to either a control or an experimental condition in each experiment. The asymmetrically dominated options were: an appointment in two weeks at a distant location (experiment 1); a later time at the participant’s local GP, pharmacy, or community centre (experiment 2); and a later time at a distant location (experiment 3). The primary outcome was vaccination intention, while secondary outcomes included an active interest in reading additional information about the vaccination procedure, perceived difficulty and cognitive effort. Initial analysis revealed no evidence of an asymmetric dominance effect. However, further subgroup analysis, supported by formative research, indicated that ensuring decoy alternatives are clearly perceived as inferior could enhance the effectiveness of this approach for certain individuals.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Using an inferior decoy alternative to nudge COVID-19 vaccination

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月11日

查看全文
  • Aikaterini Grimani,
  • Sandro T. Stoffel,
  • Christian von Wagner,
  • Falko F. Sniehotta,
  • Ivo Vlaev

摘要

Optimizing vaccine uptake is a public health challenge that requires the implementation of effective strategies. The asymmetric dominance (or decoy) effect describes the increasing likelihood of selecting an option when a clearly inferior alternative is offered. Therefore, we aimed to test the impact of offering decoy alternatives—less convenient vaccination appointments—on vaccination intentions. Participants aged 18–33 years, residing in England, and initially not intending to get vaccinated, completed three online experiments. Participants were randomly assigned to either a control or an experimental condition in each experiment. The asymmetrically dominated options were: an appointment in two weeks at a distant location (experiment 1); a later time at the participant’s local GP, pharmacy, or community centre (experiment 2); and a later time at a distant location (experiment 3). The primary outcome was vaccination intention, while secondary outcomes included an active interest in reading additional information about the vaccination procedure, perceived difficulty and cognitive effort. Initial analysis revealed no evidence of an asymmetric dominance effect. However, further subgroup analysis, supported by formative research, indicated that ensuring decoy alternatives are clearly perceived as inferior could enhance the effectiveness of this approach for certain individuals.