Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Feb;24(1):141-158.
doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12344. Epub 2018 Oct 21.

'What if I'm not dead?' - Myth-busting and organ donation

Affiliations

'What if I'm not dead?' - Myth-busting and organ donation

Jordan Miller et al. Br J Health Psychol. 2019 Feb.

Abstract

Objectives: In the United Kingdom, three people die every day awaiting an organ transplant. To address this, Scotland and England plan to follow Wales and introduce opt-out donor consent. However, emotional barriers, myths, and misconceptions may deter potential registrants. Our objectives were to estimate the number of people who plan to opt-out of the donor register and to test whether emotional barriers (e.g., medical mistrust) differentiated participants within this group. Finally, in an experimental manipulation, we tested whether intention to donate decreased by making emotional barriers more salient and increased following a widely used myth-busting intervention.

Design: Mixed between-within design.

Methods: UK residents (n = 1,202) were asked whether they would choose opt-in, deemed consent, or opt-out/not sure if legislation changes to opt-out. Participants also completed measures of donor intentions at baseline, following a 12-item emotional barriers questionnaire and again, following a 9-item myth-busting intervention.

Results: Findings indicate that 66.1% of participants selected to opt-in to the donor register, 24.3% selected deemed consent, and 9.4% selected opt-out/not sure. Emotional barriers, notably fears surrounding bodily integrity, were significantly elevated in participants who selected opt-out/not sure. Increasing the salience of emotional barriers reduced donor intentions in the opt-out/not sure group. However, dispelling organ donation myths did not increase intention within this group.

Conclusions: If opt-out legislation is introduced in Scotland and England, approximately 10% of participants plan to opt-out or are not sure. Dispelling organ donation myths with facts may not be the best method of overcoming emotional barriers and increasing donor intentions for those planning to opt-out. Statement of contribution What is already known about this subject? In the United Kingdom, three people die every day waiting for an organ transplant. Although 90% of the UK population support organ donation, only 38% are registered donors. To address this, Scotland and England have recently proposed to introduce an opt-out system of donor consent. To date, limited research has investigated public attitudes and intentions regarding opt-out consent laws in Scotland and England. Emotional barriers (e.g., medical mistrust) are key factors that may deter potential registrants. However, no research has examined these barriers in relation to proposed opt-out consent laws. Myth-busting is widely used around the world as part of campaigns promoting organ donation. The NHS currently use a myth-busting feature on their webpage to dispel harmful myths about organ donation; however, there is limited evidence of the impact this has on intentions to become an organ donor. What does this study add? Approximately 10% of UK participants plan to opt-out or are unsure of their decision, if the law changes to opt-out. Emotional barriers, notably, bodily integrity fears, are significantly elevated in people who plan to opt-out. Increasing the salience of emotional barriers reduced donor intentions for people who plan to opt-out. A myth-busting intervention had no effect on donor intentions for people who plan to opt-out of the donor register.

Keywords: emotions; myths; opt-out consent; organ donation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Example myth and corrective information presented during the myth‐correcting intervention.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Study procedure diagram. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 3
Figure 3
Bar graph showing mean emotional barriers scores of the three participant groups. Error bars are SDs. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 4
Figure 4
Line graph showing the mean intention to donate organs (7‐point scale) over baseline, post‐myth busting, and post‐emotional barriers time points, across the three participant groups. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

References

    1. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    1. Domínguez, J. , & Rojas, J. (2013). Presumed consent legislation failed to improve organ donation in Chile. Transplantation Proceedings, 45(4), 1316–1317. 10.1016/j.transproceed.2013.01.008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Feeley, T. H. (2007). College students’ knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding organ donation: An integrated review of the literature. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(2), 243–271. 10.1111/j.0021-9029.2007.00159.x - DOI
    1. Henkel, L. A. , & Mattson, M. E. (2011). Reading is believing: The truth effect and source credibility. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(4), 1705–1721. 10.1016/j.concog.2011.08.018 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hornsey, M. J. , Harris, E. A. , & Fielding, K. S. (2018). The psychological roots of anti‐vaccination attitudes: A 24‐nation investigation. Health Psychology, 37(4), 307 http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/hea0000586 - DOI - PubMed