Law and Human Behavior

, Volume 34, Issue 6, pp 501–516 | Cite as

Who Fears the HPV Vaccine, Who Doesn’t, and Why? An Experimental Study of the Mechanisms of Cultural Cognition

  • Dan M. Kahan
  • Donald Braman
  • Geoffrey L. Cohen
  • John Gastil
  • Paul Slovic
Original Article

Abstract

The cultural cognition thesis holds that individuals form risk perceptions that reflect their commitments to contested views of the good society. We conducted a study that used the dispute over mandatory HPV vaccination to test the cultural cognition thesis. Although public health officials have recommended that all girls aged 11 or 12 be vaccinated for HPV—a sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer—political controversy has blocked adoption of mandatory school-enrollment vaccination programs in all but one state. An experimental study of a large sample of American adults (N = 1,538) found that cultural cognition generates disagreement about the risks and benefits of the vaccine through two mechanisms: biased assimilation, and the credibility heuristic. We discuss theoretical and practical implications.

Keywords

Cultural cognition Risk perception HIV Biased assimilation Source credibility 

References

  1. Ackerman, B. A., & Fishkin, J. S. (2004). Deliberation day. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  3. Alliance for Human Research Protection (2007, Feb. 8). More re: Merck’s “help pay for vioxx” mandatory vaccine campaign. Retrieved from http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/463/29/.
  4. Blumenthal, R. (2007, Feb. 2). Texas is first to require cancer shots for schoolgirls, New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/us/03texas.html.
  5. Breyer, S. G. (1993). Breaking the vicious circle: Toward effective risk regulation. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Brody, J. E. (2007, May 15). HPV vaccine: Few risks, many benefits. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/15/health/15brod.html.
  7. Carreyrou, J. (2006, Apr. 16). Viral marketing: Questions on efficacy cloud a cancer vaccine. Wall Street Journal, p. 1.Google Scholar
  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Office of Enterprise Communications. (2006, June 29). CDC’s advisory committee recommends human papillomavirus virus vaccination. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/pressrel/r060629.htm.).
  9. Clark, R. D., & Maass, A. (1988). The role of social categorization and perceived source credibility in minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(5), 381–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  11. Dake, K. (1991). Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk—An analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 22(1), 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and danger; an analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. New York: Praeger.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Douglas, M. (1970). Natural symbols: Explorations in cosmology. London: Barrie & Rockliff, Cresset Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Douglas, M. (1986). How institutions think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Douglas, M. (1997). The depoliticization of risk. In R. J. Ellis & M. Thompson (Eds.), Culture matters: Essays in honor of Aaron Wildavsky (pp. 121–132). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  17. Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. B. (1982). Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dunne, E. F., Unger, E. R., Sternberg, M., McQuillan, G., Swan, D. C., Patel, S. S., et al. (2007). Prevalence of HPV infection among females in the United States. Journal of American Medical Association, 297(8), 813–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elliot, J. (2007, Mar. 9). Perry won’t veto bill blocking HPV order. Houston Chronicle. Retrieved from: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4785851.html.
  20. Ellis, R. J., & Thompson, F. (1997). Culture and the environment in the Pacific northwest. American Political Science Review, 91(4), 885–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fishkin, J. S. (1991). Democracy and deliberation: New directions for democratic reform. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Fishkin, J. S. (1995). The voice of the people: Public opinion and democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Focus on the Family. (2007). Focus on the family’s position statement: Human papillomavirus vaccines. Retrieved from http://www.family.org/sharedassets/correspondence/pdfs/PublicPolicy/Position_Statement-Human_Papillomavirus_Vaccine.pdf.
  24. Gastil, J. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Gastil, J., Black, L., & Moscovitz, K. (2008). Ideology, attitude change, and deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Political Communication, 25, 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gerber, A., & Green, D. (1999). Misperceptions about perceptual bias. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gibbs, N. (2006, June 21). Defusing the war over the “promiscuity vaccine.” Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1206813,00.html.
  29. Gutierrez, R., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2007). Anger, disgust, and presumption of harm as reactions to taboo-breaking behaviors. Emotion, 7(4), 853–868.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Haidt, J., & Hersh, M. A. (2001). Sexual morality: The cultures and emotions of conservatives and liberals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(1), 191–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harris, G. (2006, June 9). U.S. approves use of vaccine for cervical cancer. New York Times, p. A1.Google Scholar
  32. Horvath, M. A. H., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2007). Below the age of consent: Influences on moral and legal judgments of adult–adolescent sexual relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(12), 2980–3009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951–1952). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15(4), 635-650.Google Scholar
  34. Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003). Interaction effects in multiple regression (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  35. Jenkins-Smith, H. (2001). Modeling stigma: An empirical analysis of nuclear waste images of Nevada. In J. Flynn, P. Slovic, & H. Kunreuther (Eds.), Risk, media, and stigma: Understanding public challenges to modern science and technology (pp. 107–132). London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  36. Judd, C. M. (2000). Everyday data analysis in social psychology: Comparisons of linear models. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 370–392). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Kahan, D. M. (2007). The cognitively illiberal state. Stanford Law Review, 60, 115–154.Google Scholar
  38. Kahan, D. M. (2008). Two conceptions of emotion in risk regulation. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 156, 741–766.Google Scholar
  39. Kahan, D. M., & Braman, D. (2006). Cultural cognition and public policy. Yale Law & Policy Review, 24, 147.Google Scholar
  40. Kahan, D., & Braman, D. (2008). The self-defensive cognition of self-defense. American Criminal Law Review, 45(1), 1–65.Google Scholar
  41. Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (2007). Culture and identity-protective cognition: Explaining the white-male effect in risk perception. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4(3), 465–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kahan, D., Braman, D., Monahan, J., Callahan, L. & Peters, E. (in press). Cultural cognition and public policy: The case of outpatient commitment laws, Law & Human Behavior. Advanced publication at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9174-4.
  43. Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., & Cohen, G. (2009a). Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 87–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Kahan, D. M., Hoffman, D. A., & Braman, D. (2009b). Whose eyes are you going to believe? Scott v. Harris and the perils of cognitive illiberalism. Harvard Law Review, 122, 837–906.Google Scholar
  45. Kahan, D. M., Slovic, P., Braman, D., & Gastil, J. (2006). Fear of democracy: A cultural critique of Sunstein on risk. Harvard Law Review, 119, 1071–1109.Google Scholar
  46. Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449–1475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Kasperson, R. E., & Kasperson, J. X. (1996). The social amplification and attenuation of risk. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 545, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kaufman, M. (2006, June 9). FDA approves vaccine that should prevent most cervical cancers. Washington Post, p. A1.Google Scholar
  50. Kuran, T., & Sunstein, C. R. (1998). Availability cascades and risk regulation. Stanford Law Review, 51, 683–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lessig, L. (1995). The regulation of social meaning. University of Chicago Law Review, 62, 943–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization—Effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lupia, A. (2002). Who can persuade whom? Implications from the nexus of psychology and rational choice theory. In J. H. Kuklinski (Ed.), Thinking about Political Psychology (pp. 51–88). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. MacCoun, R. J. (1998). Biases in the interpretation and use of research results. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 259–287.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Mackie, D. M., & Quellar, S. (2000). The impact of group membership on persuasion: Revisiting “who says what to whom with what effect? In D. J. Terry & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Attitudes, behavior, and social context: The role of norms and group membership (pp. 135–155). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate Publishers.Google Scholar
  56. Margolis, H. (1996). Dealing with risk: Why the public and the experts disagree on environmental issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  57. Marris, C., Langford, I. H., & O’Riordan, T. (1998). A quantitative test of the cultural theory of risk perceptions: Comparison with the psychometric paradigm. Risk Analysis, 18(5), 635–647.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (1993). Bivariate median splits and spurious statistical significance. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. McCrocsky, J. C., & Young, T. J. (1981). Ethos and credibility: The construct and its measurement after three decades. Central States Speech Journal, 32, 24–34.Google Scholar
  60. National Conference of State Legislatures. (2009). HPV vaccine: state legislation. Available at http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/HPVvaccine.htm.
  61. National Organization of Women (2006, June 8). NOW applauds the FDA for approving the first vaccine for cervical cancer. Retrieved from http://www.now.org/press/06-06/06-08a.
  62. Peters, E. M., Burraston, B., & Mertz, C. K. (2004). An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: Cognitive appraisals of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma. Risk Analysis, 24(5), 1349–1367.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (1996). The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(16), 1427–1453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Philipson, T. J., & Posner, R. A. (1993). Private choices and public health: The AIDS epidemic in an economic perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Pidgeon, N. F., Kasperson, R. E., & Slovic, P. (2003). The social amplification of risk. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pollock, A. (2005). Same-sex marriage would harm children. In K. Burns & H. Conrath (Eds.), Gay marriage (pp. 45–53). Detroit: Greenhaven Press.Google Scholar
  67. Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades’ evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rayner, S. (1992). Cultural theory and risk analysis. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Social theories of risk (pp. 83–115). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  69. Rosenthal, E. (2008, August 20). Drug makers’ push leads to vaccines’ fast rise. New York Times (Late Edition), p. A1.Google Scholar
  70. Saul, S., & Pollack, A. (2007, Feb. 17). Furor on rush to require cervical cancer vaccine. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/17/health/17vaccine.html.
  71. Schkade, D., Sunstein, C. R., & Hastie, R. (2007). What happened on deliberation day? California Law Review, 95(3), 915–940.Google Scholar
  72. Siegel, R. B. (2007). The new politics of abortion: An equality analysis of woman-protective abortion restrictions. Illinois Law Review, 3, 991–1029.Google Scholar
  73. Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, C., & Roth, C. (2000). Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis, 20(3), 353–362.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  75. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24(2), 311–322.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Slovic, P., Flynn, J. H., & Layman, M. (1991). Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science, 254(5038), 1603–1607.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Starr, C. (1969). Social benefit versus technological risk. Science, 165(3899), 1232–1238.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Sunstein, C. R. (2005). Laws of fear: Beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge, UK; NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sunstein, C. R. (2006). Misfearing: A reply. Harvard Law Review, 119(4), 1110–1125.Google Scholar
  80. Thompson, M., Ellis, R., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  81. Viscusi, W. K. (1983). Risk by choice: Regulating health and safety in the workplace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Wildavsky, A., & Dake, K. (1990). Theories of risk perception: Who fears what and why? Daedalus, 114, 41–60.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dan M. Kahan
    • 1
  • Donald Braman
    • 2
  • Geoffrey L. Cohen
    • 3
  • John Gastil
    • 4
  • Paul Slovic
    • 5
  1. 1.Yale Law SchoolNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.George Washington Law SchoolWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Stanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  4. 4.University of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  5. 5.Decision ResearchEugeneUSA

Personalised recommendations