Business Marketing: Bridging the Gap

Overcoming Vaccine Hesitancy Through Semantic Framing

In a hospital, a friend of mine is responsible for vaccine administration. She faces a significant challenge as more than half, precisely 58%, of individuals express a reluctance to receive vaccinations when asked. Despite the importance of vaccination, people seem hesitant. How can this dilemma be addressed?

To tackle this issue, we must first understand the root cause lies in the method of questioning. The framing of the question, “Want to get vaccinated?” versus “Do Not want to get vaccinated,” triggers the psychological phenomenon of “loss aversion.” The perception is that getting vaccinated involves a significant loss—both in terms of money and pain—leading most people to choose not to get vaccinated.

how can we combat the psychological resistance caused by “loss aversion”? In the “Practical Applications” there is a powerful technique for overcoming “loss aversion”: the semantic effect.

Semantic Effect

What is the semantic effect? Let’s consider an example.

A Christian asks his priest, “Father, can I smoke while praying?” The priest rebukes him, stating that smoking during prayer is inappropriate, as one should be devout during prayer. Reflecting on this, the Christian rephrases the question: “Is it okay to pray while smoking?” The priest replies, “Of course, my child. You can pray at any time.”

The same action, different phrasing, entirely different answers. Why? Because the different phrasing expresses different “meanings” or “semantics.”

Praying is a good thing, while smoking is considered bad. When combined, praying during smoking turns the bad into a fact, making it impossible to do something bad while intending to do something good. Conversely, smoking during prayer turns the good into a fact, forcing one to consider doing something good while intending to do something bad. The “semantic” of “praying while smoking” is a “loss,” while “smoking while praying” is a “gain.” Influenced by “loss aversion,” the priest accepts the “gain” but rejects the “loss.”

What is the semantic effect? Loss aversion makes people detest “loss” while anticipating “gain.” By adjusting the narrative in terms of “gain and loss,” the impact on semantics can influence decision-making significantly. This is the semantic effect—commonly known as “wording.”

So, what should my friend do? She can utilize the semantic effect by adjusting the way questions are posed. The two options can be rephrased as:

A: Want to get vaccinated because I want to reduce the risk of getting sick and save $50.

B: Don’t want to get vaccinated even if it means an increased risk of getting sick and losing $50.

Here, the $50 represents the discount on vaccination. After the modification, the semantics of option A become a “gain”: reducing the risk of illness and receiving a discount. In contrast, the semantics of option B become a “loss”: possibly getting sick and losing the discount. Surprisingly, with the new wording, the number of people choosing to get vaccinated increased from 42% to 75%. This is the power of the semantic effect.

Application

How can this “semantic effect” be applied to solve various “what to do” issues in the business world?

Suppose I am an e-commerce seller, and my products are already very affordable. However, users are always hesitant about the $6 shipping fee. What can I do?

Raise the price and offer free shipping! Not offering free shipping is considered a “loss” on top of the low price, while offering free shipping is a “gain” on top of the high price. “Dear, free shipping,” is the epitome of the “semantic effect.”

Suppose I run a convenience store, and the cost of eggs has risen significantly recently. Still, I am afraid users will have objections if I raise the price. What can I do? If a price increase is inevitable, use the “semantic effect” to change the language. Instead of framing it as “raising prices,” frame it as “canceling the original discount” and see if user acceptance improves.

Suppose I sell melon seeds and want users to feel like they’re getting a good deal. What can I do? Place slightly less on the scale initially, and then add a little bit more each time. Users will consistently feel a “gain.” If you put more initially and take some away, users will feel a “loss.” There was actually someone who successfully sold melon seeds using the “add a little bit” method, eventually becoming known as the “idiot melon seed” seller.

Conversely, some phrases such as “Limited Time Offer,” “Only 2 Sets Left,” and “Global Limited Quantity” all leverage the “loss” in the semantic effect to stimulate users to take immediate action.

Conclusion

In conclusion, let’s summarize. What is the “semantic effect”? The semantic effect is a technique specifically used to combat or leverage the psychological phenomenon of “loss aversion.” Loss aversion makes people detest “loss” while anticipating “gain.” The semantic effect, by adjusting the narrative in terms of “gain and loss,” can significantly influence decision-making.

Speaking is an art, but before being an art, it is essentially a technology, a technology about semantics.