“Sounds like a Cheesy Radio Ad”: Using User Perspectives for Enhancing Digital COVID Vaccine Communication Strategies for Public Health Agencies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The World Health Organization (WHO) and other public health agencies have identified vaccine hesitancy as a critical challenge in reducing future cases and deaths from COVID-19. The current study has investigated ways to improve a widely circulated vaccine infographic video by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. After gathering qualitative feedback on properties of the message that could be improved (from online crowdworkers), we conducted a randomized experiment to investigate different combinations of these attributes. Our results suggest participants were more likely to share the video which was: (1) played more slowly; (2) had a female speaker; (3) did not have background music. The study demonstrates potential of user studies for improving existing communication strategies for encouraging vaccinations and alleviating vaccine hesitancy on social media platforms. Our contribution also includes a repository of messages to encourage vaccination, generated by online crowdworkers, which could be utilized by future studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it