Correction to: Minimal effects from injunctive norm and contentiousness treatments on COVID-19 vaccine intentions: evidence from 3 countries
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy · COVID-19 and Mental Health
This is a correction to: John M Carey, Tracy Keirns, Peter John Loewen, Eric Merkley, Brendan Nyhan, Joseph B Phillips, Judy R Rees, Jason Reifler, Minimal effects from injunctive norm and contentiousness treatments on COVID-19 vaccine intentions: evidence from 3 countries, PNAS Nexus, Volume 1, Issue 2, May 2022, pgac031, https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac031
During a retroactive audit conducted by PNAS Nexus, it was discovered that this paper was missing a statement acknowledging compliance with the PNAS Nexus Human and Animal Participants and Clinical Trials policy:
The study was approved by the Dartmouth IRB (CPHS#STUDY00032068), University of New Hampshire Research Integrity Services (#IRB-FY2021-53), University of Toronto Social Sciences, Humanities and Education Research Ethics Board (HPR-00025662), and the University of Exeter SSIS Ethics Committee (#201920-148). All participants gave informed consent.
This error has been corrected in the original article.