Dataset Information

Rather than inducing psychological reactance, requiring vaccination strengthens intentions to vaccinate in US populations.

ABSTRACT: In a survey and three experiments (one preregistered with a nationally representative sample), we examined if vaccination requirements are likely to backfire, as commonly feared. We investigated if relative to encouraging free choice in vaccination, requiring a vaccine weakens or strengthens vaccination intentions, both in general and among individuals with a predisposition to experience psychological reactance. In the four studies, compared to free choice, requirements strengthened vaccination intentions across racial and ethnic groups, across studies, and across levels of trait psychological reactance. The results consistently suggest that fears of a backlash against vaccine mandates may be unfounded and that requirements will promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the United States.

SUBMITTER: Albarracin D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8531364 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Rather than inducing psychological reactance, requiring vaccination strengthens intentions to vaccinate in US populations.

Albarracin Dolores D Jung Haesung H Song Wen W Tan Andy A Fishman Jessica J

Scientific reports 20211021 1

In a survey and three experiments (one preregistered with a nationally representative sample), we examined if vaccination requirements are likely to backfire, as commonly feared. We investigated if relative to encouraging free choice in vaccination, requiring a vaccine weakens or strengthens vaccination intentions, both in general and among individuals with a predisposition to experience psychological reactance. In the four studies, compared to free choice, requirements strengthened vaccination ...[more]

PMID: 34675256

Similar Datasets

Project description:Psychological reactance is defined as the drive to re-establish autonomy after it has been threatened or constrained. People living with HIV may have high levels of psychological reactance due to the restrictions that they may perceive as a result of living with HIV. People living with HIV may also exhibit levels of HIV-related stigma. The relationship between psychological reactance and HIV-related stigma is complex yet understudied. Therefore, the main aim of this study was to examine the association between psychological reactance and HIV-related stigma among women living with HIV. Data were obtained from one time-point (a cross-sectional assessment) of a longitudinal HIV disclosure study. Psychological reactance was measured using the 18-item Questionnaire for the Measurement of Psychological Reactance. HIV-related stigma was measured using the HIV Stigma Scale, which has four domains: personalized, disclosure concerns, negative self-image, and concerns with public attitudes. Principal component analysis was used to derive components of psychological reactance. Linear regression models were used to determine the association between overall psychological reactance and its components, and stigma and its four domains, and depressive and anxiety symptoms. The associations between stigma and mental health were also examined. Three components of psychological reactance were derived: Opposition, Irritability, and Independence. Overall psychological reactance and irritability were associated with all forms of stigma. Opposition was linked to overall and negative self-image stigma. Overall psychological reactance, opposition, and irritability were positively associated with anxiety symptoms while opposition was also associated with Centers for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression depressive symptoms. There were also positive associations between all forms of stigma, and depressive and anxiety symptoms. Health-care providers and counselors for women living with HIV addressing feelings of irritability and opposition toward others may reduce HIV-related stigma. Future research should examine the link between psychological reactance, mental health, and HIV-related stigma among other populations living with HIV.

Project description:BackgroundBy mid 2023, European countries reached 75% of vaccine coverage for COVID-19 and although vaccination rates are quite high, many people are still hesitant. A plethora of studies have investigated factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, however, insufficient attention has been paid to the reasons why people get vaccinated against COVID-19. Our work aims to investigate the role of reasons in the decision to get vaccinated against COVID-19 in a representative sample of 1,689 adult Italians (March-April 2021) balanced in terms of age, gender, educational level and area of residence.MethodsThrough an online questionnaire, we asked participants to freely report up to three reasons for and against COVID-19 vaccination, and the weight each had in the decision to get vaccinated. We first investigated the role of emotional competence and COVID-19 risk perception in the generation of both reasons using regression models. Next, we studied the role that the different reasons had in the vaccination decision, considering both the intention to vaccinate (using a beta regression model) and the decision made by the participants who already had the opportunity to get vaccinated (using a logistic regression model). Finally, two different classification tree analyses were carried out to characterize profiles with a low or high willingness to get vaccinated or with a low or high probability to accept/book the vaccine.ResultsHigh emotional competence positively influences the generation of both reasons (ORs > 1.5), whereas high risk perception increases the generation of positive reasons (ORs > 1.4) while decreasing reasons against vaccination (OR = 0.64). As pro-reasons increase, vaccination acceptance increases, while the opposite happens as against-reasons increase (all p < 0.001). One strong reason in favor of vaccines is enough to unbalance the decision toward acceptance of vaccination, even when reasons against it are also present (p < 0.001). Protection and absence of distrust are the reasons that mostly drive willingness to be vaccinated and acceptance of an offered vaccine.ConclusionsKnowing the reasons that drive people's decision about such an important choice can suggest new communication insights to reduce possible negative reactions toward vaccination and people's hesitancy. Results are discussed considering results of other national and international studies.

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted on cancer patients' psychological well-being and clinical status. We assessed the levels of anxiety, depression, and distress and the attitude towards COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients, accepting vaccination at the Verona University Hospital and Camposampiero Hospital in the Veneto region. Self-reported questionnaires were administered to patients undergoing COVID-19 vaccination between March and May 2021 (first and second dose). Twenty-seven items were investigated: i) demographics/clinical characteristics; ii) anxiety, depression, and distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-HADS-and Distress Thermometer-DT); iii) four specific items regarding awareness about infection risks, interference with anticancer treatments, and vaccine side effects. Sixty-two and 57% of the patients who accepted to be vaccinated responded to the survey in the two participating Hospitals, respectively. Mean age was 63 years (SD: 12 years; range 19-94 years), women were slightly more prevalent (57.6%), most participants were married (70%), and either worker or retired (60%). Borderline and clinical levels of anxiety were recorded in 14% and 10% of respondents; borderline and clinical levels of depression in 14% and 8%; and moderate and severe distress levels in 33% and 9%. Overall, there was high confidence that vaccination would reduce the risk of contracting COVID-19 (70%), which would make patients feel less worried about contracting the infection (60%). Fear that vaccine-related side effects would interfere with anticancer treatment and/or global health status was low (10% and 9% for items 3 and 4, respectively) and significantly associated with baseline levels of anxiety, depression, and distress at multivariate analysis. Results did not differ between the Verona and Camposampiero cohorts. During the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, adult cancer patients demonstrated high levels of confidence towards vaccination; baseline levels of anxiety, depression, and distress were the only significant predictors of reduced confidence.

Dataset Information

Rather than inducing psychological reactance, requiring vaccination strengthens intentions to vaccinate in US populations.

Publications

Rather than inducing psychological reactance, requiring vaccination strengthens intentions to vaccinate in US populations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets