Preprints in COVID-19 news coverage: Comparing student and general population perceptions of preliminary science about booster vaccination

News framing of preprint research during the COVID-19 pandemic varied widely, with some articles reporting the findings of preprint studies with high degrees of certainty, despite their preliminary nature, and others highlighting the unpublished nature of the work. As publicly available research papers that have not yet been peer reviewed, preprints represent a unique form of scientific uncertainty in risk communication contexts. Science journalists were encouraged to report on COVID-19 preprint science with cautious language and appropriate disclosure of its preprint status, yet we lack a complete picture of how public audiences respond to transparency about this uncertainty. We examined how preprint disclosures and hedged claims influenced COVID-19 booster vaccine attitudes and behavior in a sample of college students (N = 837) and a sample of general adults (N = 431). Participants in both groups perceived the disclosure of preprint status. However, neither preprint disclosure nor hedging had a direct effect on perceived trustworthiness of the news article or the scientist, nor on attitudes toward the booster or intention to receive it. As preprints have begun to receive widespread attention in the media, it is important to make sure the public is properly educated about their tentative nature. Our results indicated that transparent news reporting about preprint research did not have significant negative consequences on public attitudes or precautionary behaviors in the context of COVID-19 boosters, suggesting that science communicators should not shy away from disclosing preprint status.