I Guess You Twisted My Arm: Effects of Elaboration, Reactance and Politics on Responses to Covid-19 Vaccination Advocacy Messages

Despite more than a million deaths and counting from the COVID-19 virus, fewer than 23% of U.S. adults have received the most recent bivalent booster vaccines, dramatizing the challenge of developing effective health promotion strategies in an era of broad distrust of science and authoritative expertise. This study compares the effects of directive and non-directive versions of a novel vaccination advocacy approach that combines the strategies of inoculation theory and narrative persuasion. The study also examines two critical underlying factors that can influence the effects of such advocacy efforts—message elaboration and psychological reactance—while also accounting for the effects of political identity. Using a survey-based pre-test/post-test experimental design, participants ( N = 496) were randomly assigned to see either a non-directive or directive advocacy message delivered in either a static/print or video format. Participants were assessed for attitude and intention toward COVID-19 vaccination before and after message exposure and also provided demographic information including political identity. Results showed strong effects for political identity on attitude toward vaccination, message elaboration and reactance, but not on attitude change. Although the directive message produced greater levels of psychological reactance—which was negatively correlated with attitude change—than the non-directive message, it also produced greater levels of positive attitude change than the non-directive message. Results provide support for further application of narrative inoculation approaches for health promotion and persuasion strategies in general.