Omission Bias and Pertussis Vaccination

David A. Asch, Jonathan Baron, John C. Hershey, Howard Kunreuther, Jacqueline Meszaros, Ilana Ritov and Mark Spranca

Medical Decision Making, 1994, vol. 14, issue 2, 118-123

Abstract: Background: Several laboratory studies have suggested that many people favor potentially harmful omissions over less harmful acts. The authors studied the role of this omission bias in parents' decisions whether to vaccinate their children against pertussis. Methods: Two hundred mail surveys were sent to subscribers to a magazine that had published articles favoring and opposing pertussis vaccination. Subjects were asked about their beliefs about the vaccine and the disease, and whether they had vaccinated their own children or planned to, and they were given test items to identify omission bias in their reasoning. Results: One hundred and three subjects (52%) responded to the survey. Respondents who reported they did not or would not allow their children to be vaccinated (n = 43; 41 %) were more likely to believe that vaccinating was more dangerous than not vaccinating (p

Date: 1994
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (16)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9401400204 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:14:y:1994:i:2:p:118-123

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9401400204

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().