Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40282145›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Health Decisions Under Uncertainty: The Roles of Conspiracy Beliefs and Institutional Trust.

Erga Atad

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Erga AtadLauder School of Government, Reichman University, Herzliya 4610101, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on vaccination hesitancy has been extensive, but the role of information processing in decision making still needs to be explored. The study examines the alignment between parents' COVID-19 vaccination intentions and actual behavior, focusing on the impact of different kinds of information processing on the consistency or inconsistency of these behaviors. It analyzes parents' reliance on health information sources, and education levels, with institutional trust, ability to critically evaluate conspiracy theories and scientific knowledge as moderators. A total of 1118 Israeli parents participated in digital surveys and were classified into the following 4 groups based on their initial vaccination intentions and actual behaviors: (1) consistent-pro-vaccine and vaccinated; (2) inconsistent-pro-vaccine but unvaccinated; (3) inconsistent-anti-vaccine but vaccinated; and (4) consistent-anti-vaccine and unvaccinated). The results show that consistent parents process information using system 1, i.e., heuristic information processing, reliance on health information sources, moderated by institutional trust and education. However, inconsistent parents used systems 1 and 2, namely heuristic-systematic information processing, influenced by knowledge of COVID-19 and the ability to assess conspiracy theories critically.

Indexed as

conspiracy theorieshealth behavior changeinformation processinginstitutional trustvaccination hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID40282145
PMCPMC12023932

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.