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
4More
Did Jesus Save the Klingons? - Scientific American - 0 views
3More
Can Brain Science Be Dangerous? - NYTimes.com - 2 views
1More
Will You Ever Be Able to Upload Your Brain? - The New York Times - 1 views
1More
When Philosophy Lost Its Way - The New York Times - 0 views
« First
‹ Previous
81 - 100 of 111
Next ›
Showing 20▼ items per page