Abstract
Uncertainties pervade our health choices, particularly in the context of a novel pandemic. Despite this, rather little is known about when and how to effectively communicate these uncertainties. The focus in the medical literature so far has been on how patients respond to mentions of uncertainty relating to diagnosis or treatment, showing that these can have detrimental effects on trust and satisfaction. On the other hand, how patients are affected by these communications over time, particularly in the face of conflicting information, has received little attention. This is particularly important in the context a novel pandemic where uncertainty is rife and information changes over time. To fill this gap, we conducted an online study with UK participants on hypothetical communications relating to COVID-19 vaccines. Participants first read a vaccine announcement, which either communicated with certainty or uncertainty, and then received information which conflicted with the announcement. Those who were exposed to the certain announcement reported a greater loss of trust and vaccination intention than those who were exposed to the uncertain announcement. This shows that communicating with unwarranted certainty can backfire in the long-term, whereas communicating uncertainties can protect people from the negative impact of exposure to conflicting information.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Protocols
Funding Statement
This research has been supported by the Think Forward Initiative (a partnership between ING Bank, Deloitte, Dell Technologies, Amazon Web Services, IBM, and the Center for Economic Policy Research). The views and opinions expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Think Forward Initiative or any of its partners.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
UCL Research Ethics Committee
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
