Abstract
Boomerang effects in influenza vaccination campaigns can undermine immunization efforts by increasing vaccine refusal. To effectively reduce these counterproductive outcomes, practitioners should not only communicate the risks and benefits of influenza vaccination but also consider whether their communication strategies could inadvertently trigger boomerang effects. Understanding why and how these effects occur is therefore crucial. This study investigates the mechanisms and boundary conditions underlying boomerang effects in influenza vaccine communication. Specifically, we examined psychological reactance as the key mechanism, focusing on immediate threats to freedom induced by persuasive messages and message fatigue resulting from prolonged exposure. Additionally, we explored how normative perceptions act as boundary conditions. An online experiment with U.S. adults (N = 648) analyzed via multigroup structural equation modeling revealed that both perceived threat to freedom and message fatigue were significant antecedents of psychological reactance, which was associated with increased vaccine refusal. Furthermore, perceived descriptive norms amplified these associations, whereas injunctive norms did not moderate them. These findings underscore the practical importance of carefully crafting vaccination messages that minimize perceived threats and avoid overexposure while considering social norms to reduce psychological reactance and enhance vaccination uptake.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Data will be made available upon request. Please contact the corresponding author of this study, Dr. Jingyuan Shi (jolieshi@hkbu.edu.hk ), to request the data.
References
World Health Organization. The burden of influenza. https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-burden-of-influenza (2024).
Gatwood, J. et al. Social determinants of health and adult influenza vaccination: A nationwide claims analysis. J. Manag. Care Spec. Pharm. 28, 196–205 (2022).
Trombetta, C. M., Kistner, O., Montomoli, E., Viviani, S. & Marchi, S. Influenza viruses and vaccines: The role of vaccine effectiveness studies for evaluation of the benefits of influenza vaccines. Vaccines 10, 714 (2022).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Flu vaccination coverage, United States, 2024–25 influenza season. https://www.cdc.gov/fluvaxview/coverage-by-season/2024-2025.html (2026).
Holford, D. L., Fasce, A., Costello, T. H. & Lewandowsky, S. Psychological profiles of anti-vaccination argument endorsement. Sci. Rep. 13, 11219 (2023).
Rhodes, N. & Ewoldsen, D. R. Outcomes of persuasion. In The SAGE handbook of persuasion (eds Dillard, J. P. & Shen, L.) 53–69 (Sage, 2013).
World Health Organization. Behavioural and social drivers of influenza vaccination. https://www.who.int/publications/b/74439 (2025).
Albarracin, D., Jung, H., Song, W., Tan, A. & Fishman, J. Rather than inducing psychological reactance, requiring vaccination strengthens intentions to vaccinate in US populations. Sci. Rep. 11, 20796 (2021).
Cho, H. & Salmon, C. T. Unintended effects of health communication campaigns. J. Commun. 57, 293–317 (2007).
Brehm, J. W. A theory of psychological reactance (Academic Press, 1966).
Brehm, S. S. & Brehm, J. W. Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control (Academic Press, 1981).
Reynolds-Tylus, T. Psychological reactance and persuasive health communication: A review of the literature. Front. Commun. 4, 56 (2019).
So, J., Kim, S. & Cohen, H. Message fatigue: Conceptual definition, operationalization, and correlates. Commun. Monogr. 84, 5–29 (2017).
Dillard, J. P. & Shen, L. On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Commun. Monogr. 72, 144–168 (2005).
Rains, S. A. The nature of psychological reactance revisited: A meta-analytic review. Hum. Commun. Res. 39, 47–73 (2013).
Quick, B. L. What is the best measure of psychological reactance? An empirical test of two measures. Health Commun. 27, 1–9 (2012).
Clayton, R. B., Reynolds-Tylus, T., Martinez Gonzalez, A. & Park, J. Beyond counterarguing? comparing multiple measures of cognitive resistance for psychological reactance using the avoidance, contesting, and empowering (ACE) resistance typology. Motiv. Sci. 11, 168–178 (2025).
Dillard, J. P., Tian, X., Cruz, S. M., Smith, R. A. & Shen, L. Persuasive messages, social norms, and reactance: A study of masking behavior during a COVID-19 campus health campaign. Health Commun. 38, 1338–1348 (2023).
Byrne, S. & Hart, P. S. The boomerang effect a synthesis of findings and a preliminary theoretical framework. Ann. Int. Commun. Assoc. 33, 3–37 (2009).
Quick, B. L. & Stephenson, M. T. The reactance restoration scale (RRS): A measure of direct and indirect restoration. Commun. Res. Rep. 24, 131–138 (2007).
Li, R. & Shen, L. The impact of behavioral topic on psychological reactance: Arousal and freedom restoration. J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 66, 47–67 (2022).
Bessarabova, E., Miller, C. H. & Russell, J. A further exploration of the effects of restoration postscripts on reactance. West. J. Commun. 81, 385–403 (2017).
Bessarabova, E. & Massey, Z. B. Testing terror management health model and integrating its predictions with the theory of psychological reactance. Commun. Monogr. 87, 25–46 (2020).
Kim, S. & So, J. How message fatigue toward health messages leads to ineffective persuasive outcomes: Examining the mediating roles of reactance and inattention. J. Health Commun. 23, 109–116 (2018).
Hechter, M. & Opp, K. D. What have we learned about the emergence of social norms. In Social norms Hechter, M. & Opp, K. D. (eds.) 394–415 (2001).
Lapinski, M. K. & Rimal, R. N. An explication of social norms. Commun. Theory 15, 127–147 (2005).
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R. & Kallgren, C. A. A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58, 1015–1026 (1990).
Lapinski, M. K., Zhuang, J., Koh, H. & Shi, J. Descriptive norms and involvement in health and environmental behaviors. Commun. Res. 44, 367–387 (2017).
Chung, A. & Rimal, R. N. Social norms: A review. Rev. Commun. Res. 4, 1–28 (2016).
Goldstein, N. J. & Cialdini, R. B. Using social norms as a lever of social influence. In The Science of Social Influence (ed. Pratkanis, A. R.) 167–191 (Psychology Press, 2011).
Geber, S. et al. Norm setting in times of crisis: A time-series analysis of the dynamics between media reporting and perceived norms in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination roll-out. Mass Commun. Soc. 28, 983–1007 (2025).
Kang, G. W., Piao, Z. & Ko, J. Y. Descriptive or injunctive: How do restaurant customers react to the guidelines of COVID-19 prevention measures? The role of psychological reactance. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 95, 102934 (2021).
Kavvouris, C., Chrysochou, P. & Thøgersen, J. ‘Be careful what you say’: The role of psychological reactance on the impact of pro-environmental normative appeals. J. Bus. Res. 113, 257–265 (2020).
Holbert, R. L. & Park, E. Conceptualizing, organizing, and positing moderation in communication research. Commun. Theory 30, 227–246 (2020).
Yoon, H. et al. The role of collective group orientation and social norms on physical distancing behaviors for disease prevention. Health Commun. 39, 3108–3121 (2024).
Legros, S. & Cislaghi, B. Mapping the social-norms literature: An overview of reviews. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 15, 62–80 (2020).
Rimal, R. N. & Lapinski, M. K. A re-explication of social norms, ten years later. Commun. Theory 25, 393–409 (2015).
Geber, S. & Hefner, D. Social norms as communicative phenomena: A communication perspective on the theory of normative social behavior. Stud Commun | Media 8, 6–28 (2019).
Li, Z., Shi, J., Zhao, Y., Zhang, B. & Zhong, B. Indirect media effects on the adoption of artificial intelligence: The roles of perceived and actual knowledge in the influence of presumed media influence model. J. Broadcast. Electron. Media. 68, 581–600 (2024).
Harmon-Jones, E. & Harmon-Jones, C. Cognitive dissonance theory after 50 years of development. Z. Sozialpsychol. 38, 7–16 (2007).
Geber, S. Unraveling the dark side of social norms: Toward a research agenda on the challenges of social norms in health communication. Health Commun. 39, 2955–2962 (2024).
Chaiken, S. & Ledgerwood, A. A theory of heuristic and systematic information processing. In Handbook of theories of social psychology (eds Van Lange, P. A. et al.) 246–266 (Sage, 2012).
Schweizer, K. Some guidelines concerning the modeling of traits and abilities in test construction. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 26, 1–2 (2010).
Wang, J. & Wang, X. Structural equation modeling: applications using mplus (Wiley, 2020).
Funding
This work was supported by Hong Kong Baptist University Rising Star Research Grant 2023–24
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Zixi Li: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Methodology, Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Visualization, Data curation; Huijun Zhuang: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Methodology; Xiaoyu Xia: Writing – original draft, Conceptualization, Methodology; Jingyuan Shi: Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Conceptualization, Funding acquisition and Supervision
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Li, Z., Zhuang, H., Xia, X. et al. Boomerang effects of vaccination promotion and the roles of psychological reactance, message fatigue, and social norms. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-49592-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-49592-y
