Last month, Brendan Nyhan, a professor of political science at Dartmouth, published the results of a study that he and a team of pediatricians and political scientists had been working on for three years. They had followed a group of almost two thousand parents, all of whom had at least one child under the age of seventeen, to test a simple relationship: Could various pro-vaccination campaigns change parental attitudes toward vaccines?
Each household received one of four messages: a leaflet from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stating that there had been no evidence linking the measles, mumps, and rubella (M.M.R.) vaccine and autism; a leaflet from the Vaccine Information Statement on the dangers of the diseases that the M.M.R. vaccine prevents; photographs of children who had suffered from the diseases; and a dramatic story from a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about an infant who almost died of measles. A control group did not receive any information at all. The goal was to test whether facts, science, emotions, or stories could make people change their minds.
The result was dramatic: a whole lot of nothing. None of the interventions worked.
Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or url
3More
Why Do People Persist in Believing Things That Just Aren't True? : The New Yorker - 1 views
2More
What If We Lost the Sky? - NYTimes.com - 0 views
2More
Fighting Whitewashed History With MIT's Diversity Hackers | Atlas Obscura - 0 views
5More
How a Gay-Marriage Study Went Wrong - The New Yorker - 1 views
4More
Biology's Holy Grail: The Species And Its Controversial Recent History | IFLScience - 1 views
3More
Watching Them Turn Off the Rothkos - The New Yorker - 4 views
2More
The Ethical Quandaries You Should Think About The Next Time You Look At Your Phone | Fa... - 3 views
« First
‹ Previous
61 - 74 of 74
Showing 20▼ items per page