본 연구는 코로나19 관련 수리 정보의 제시방식(빈도, 백분율, 비율, 추가정보 제시 조건)을 달리했을 때 사람들의 위험지각과 접종의향이 달라지는지 알아보았다. 또한 인구통계학적 변인, 백신 접종 관련 변인, 수리 이해능력이나 정치적 입장과 같은 개인 특성이 영향을 미치는지 함께 알아보았다. 연구 1에서는 백신이상반응과 관련된 기사를 제시하였고, 연구 2에서는 재감염 관련 기사를 제시하였다. 결과를 보면, 연구1에서는 수리 정보 제시방식에 따른 위험지각과 접종의향의 차이가 전혀 나타나지 않았다. 연구 2에서는 위험지각의 측정 문항 중 하나인 재감염 가능성에 대한 측정을 연구 1과 다르게 하였다. 그 결과 단순빈도로 제시할 때 백분율이나 비율 보다 위험지각이 더 높게 나타났고, 확진자에 대한 기저빈도를 추가로 제시한 빈도 조건은 단순빈도 조건보다 위험지각이 낮아졌다. 그러나 접종의향에서는 차이가 전혀 나타나지 않았다. 추가분석 결과를 보면, 연구 1에서는 이상반응에 대한 위험지각이 백신 접종 부작용에 대한 두려움을 매개로 접종의향에 정적인 영향을 미치며 위험지각이 접종의향에 미치는 부적 영향을 정치적 입장이 조절하는 것으로 나타났다. 연구 2에서는 코로나 감염 시 증상이나 백신 부작용과 같은 과거 경험의 심각성이 재감염 위험지각과 코로나에 대한 두려움을 매개로 접종의향에 정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 수리 이해능력이 높을수록 위험지각이나 코로나나 접종에 대한 두려움이 낮아지는 것을 볼 수 있었다. 마지막으로 수리 정보 메시지 효과가 코로나19 관련 헬스 커뮤니케이션에 미치는 시사점을 중심으로 논의했다.
The current study investigated whether people’s risk perception and vaccination intention differed when the format (frequency, percentage, rate, and presentation of additional information such as base frequency and narrative) of COVID-19 related numerical information news was changed. In addition, we examined whether demographic variables, vaccination-related variables, and personal traits such as numeracy and political positions had any impact on the effect of numerical information format on risk perception and vaccination intention. In Study 1, news articles about the adverse effects of vaccinations were presented, and base frequency and narrative were added to the percentage in addition to the two frequencies, percentage, and rate. In Study 2, reinfection-related news articles were presented, and base frequency was added to frequency and percentage, and narrative was added to frequency. As a result, in Study 1, there was no difference in risk perception and vaccination intention according to the information format. To address no difference in Study 1, in Study 2, one of the risk perception measures, the likelihood of reinfection, was measured differently from Study 1. In Study 1, the likelihood of side effect was measured using the 11-point scale with 10% interval, whereas in Study 2, participants were asked to write down the likelihood directly down to two decimal places. The scale employed in Study 1 may have an interval that is too wide to accurately capture minute variations in risk likelihood elicited by various number representations. When using the new measurement, the risk perception was lower when adding the base frequency of COVID-19 patients than it was when using percentage or rate, and it was greater when using frequency than it was when using percentage or rate. However, there was no difference in the vaccination intention. According to the results of the additional analysis, in Study 1, it was found that the risk perception of side effects had a positive effect on the vaccination intention through fear of side effects as a mediator. In addition, the political position moderated the negative effect of risk perception on the vaccination intention. That is, the more progressive the political position, the lower the fear and risk perception of vaccination and the higher the vaccination intention. In Study 2, it was found that the severity of past experiences, such as COVID-19 symptoms and vaccine side effects, had a positive effect on the vaccination intention through risk perception of reinfection and fear of COVID. And it was found that the higher the numeracy, the lower the risk perception, fear of COVID and vaccination. Finally, the implications of this study for health communication related to COVID-19 were discussed.