summary: A new study reveals a multifaceted public reaction to the death of an anti-vaccine activist from COVID-19.
The study found that few people celebrated these deaths, but some people, mostly those who were vaccinated, thought the anti-vaxxers who contracted COVID-19 deserved their fate. However, the majority of participants in both parties hoped for a full recovery of the unvaccinated.
But only a fraction of the study population thought that anti-vaxxers deserved to die from COVID-19.
Important facts:
- The study found that party affiliation and vaccination status influenced individual reactions when anti-vaxxers contracted and potentially died from COVID-19, with Democrats and vaccinated people more likely to perceive these cases as normal.
- Despite the differences in perceptions, the majority of participants across political lines expressed hope that anti-vaccines would fully recover from the disease.
- Participants demonstrated moral judgment toward those who resisted vaccination, but generally did not express happiness over their deaths.
sauce: Ohio State University
A new study suggests that when people who publicly refuse the COVID-19 vaccine subsequently die from the disease, observers have mixed reactions to their fate.
Few people rejoice over the death of an anti-vaccine, but others think that dogmatic anti-vaccine people deserve a worse end. And that response is related to the political affiliation and vaccination status of those who rate anti-vaxxers.
Democrats and vaccinated were more likely than Republicans and unvaccinated to think that anti-vaccine deaths were justified, but even 63% of Democrats who took the survey thought anti-vaxxers deserved full recovery from the disease (compared with 80% of Republicans).
Only 4.6% of study participants thought anti-vaxxers infected with the new coronavirus deserved to die.
In this study, participants read simulated social media posts of anti-vaxxers and responded to different scenarios of how the anti-vaxxers would have reacted when they fell ill and later died.
“Our findings suggest that people may view people on social media as characters in a morality play,” said study co-author Matthew Grizard, associate professor of communications at Ohio State University.
“Our results show that people, especially those who have been vaccinated themselves, are likely to judge those who share false information about the COVID-19 vaccine to be immoral and deserve some degree of retaliation.”
The study was published in a journal dated July 22, 2023. new media and society.
The research was inspired by the “Herman Cain Award” forum (called a subreddit) on the social media site reddit. Herman Kane was a Republican politician who died of COVID-19 and continued to spread misinformation about COVID-19 on his social media accounts even after his death. On reddit forums, people share stories of people who have died from anti-vaccine and coronavirus-denier illnesses.
The Herman Kane Awards site and other similar sites have resulted in news reports labeling the site as cruel and heartless.
But study co-author Rebecca Fraser, who recently received a Ph.D. in communications from Ohio State University, said the study suggests a more nuanced interpretation of those who decided who got sick or died in anti-vaccine campaigns.
“There are people who criticize anti-vaccine people and assume that they deserve some suffering, but on the other hand there is little positive emotion when you see them suffer,” Fraser said.
“Those two things seem tense, but they are both in our findings.”
The researchers recruited an adult sample matched to the US population in terms of age, gender, race/ethnicity, and geography using a specialized panel firm. The final sample included 932 individuals with political affiliations and vaccination status similar to the US population.
All participants were shown a series of mock Facebook status updates mimicking real posts found on the Herman Cain Awards subreddit. The status update was from a person named Terry Adams, whose gender was intentionally unspecified.
In his first post, Terry expressed uncertainty about, or dogmatically opposed, a COVID-19 vaccine.
In this case, all participants, including Republicans and Democrats, liked Terry better when he was less dogmatic and only expressed uncertainty about the vaccine.
But in subsequent posts, people reacted differently to Terry, depending on whether they regretted not getting the vaccine when he contracted the coronavirus and became critically ill.
Democrats rated Terry less than Republicans. In addition, positive ratings of vaccination participants regardless of political party were also lower when Terry doubled as not receiving the vaccine.
“Republicans liked Terry’s continued skepticism about vaccines, but they weren’t as supportive of Terry’s regret that he didn’t get the vaccine,” Grizard said.
In a final Facebook post, Terry’s brother announced that Terry had died from the novel coronavirus. Study participants were asked how “satisfied” they were with Terry’s death. Overall, participants were more satisfied with their death if Terry maintained an anti-vaccine view right up to his death.
Vaccinated participants were more satisfied with Terry’s death than unvaccinated participants, and Democrats were more satisfied than Republicans.
However, the results showed that none of the groups showed high levels of satisfaction. Participants rated their satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 7, with 7 being the most satisfied. The average score was 2.93 for Democrats and 2.51 for Republicans.
The researchers also asked participants to rate how satisfied they were with Terry’s death. This question aims to understand the German concept of “schadenfreude”, which is defined as “a feeling of joy experienced by a person at the failures and misfortunes of others”.
Participants rated their happiness on a scale of 0 to 6, with 6 being the happiest. The results showed that even among participants who thought Terry deserved to die, her mean happiness score was only 1.6, while among those who thought she deserved a full recovery, she scored 0.54.
“We witnessed a moral judgment by those who thought Terry deserved some degree of suffering and death, and they wanted justice to be served, or at least served what they thought was justice,” Fraser said.
“But even they weren’t very happy about Terry’s death.”
Overall, the results suggest that most people aren’t happy that anti-vaxxers die, even if they believe they deserve to die, Grizard said.
“Rather, the impression is that anti-vaxxers act immorally and put other people at risk, and for that reason they deserve some suffering. But even those who criticize these anti-vaxxers most harshly aren’t usually happy about their suffering and death,” Grizard said.
About this empathy and psychology research news
author: Jeff Grabmeyer
sauce: Ohio State University
contact: Jeff Grabmeyer – Ohio State University
image: Image credited to Neuroscience News
Original research: closed access.
“Solving the Schadenfreude Mystery: How Temperament Theory Explains Reactions to Social Media Articles About Unvaccinated COVID-19 DeathsBy Matthew Grizzard et al. new media and society
overview
Solving the Schadenfreude Mystery: How Temperament Theory Explains Reactions to Social Media Articles About Unvaccinated COVID-19 Deaths
The Herman Cain Award will be awarded at reddit.com/r/hermancainaward to individuals who shared false information about COVID-19 on social media (SM) and subsequently died from the disease.
We apply the Moral Judgment Predictions of the Emotional Disposition Theory and the Schadenfreude Theory of Message and Audience Factors to explain responses to similar SM posts.
In an experiment with a large census-matched sample, participants viewed a series of SM posts similar to those featured in. reddit.com/r/hermancainaward.
We manipulated two message elements: whether the poster’s opposition to COVID-19 vaccination was dogmatic or uncertain, and whether he expressed regret before his death.
Dogmatic posts led to the perception that posters were more immoral and deserved worse health hazards, but regret mitigated these effects.
Notably, two audience factors moderated these processes, political party and vaccination status.
Our findings indicate that SM posting is a morally appropriate act and that narrative moral judgment theory may explain reader responses.
