No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Intentions to be Vaccinated Against COVID-19: The Role of Prosociality and Conspiracy Beliefs across 20 Countries
Abstract
Understanding the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake is important to inform policy decisions and plan vaccination campaigns. The aims of this research were to: (1) explore the individual- and country-level determinants of intentions to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, and (2) examine worldwide variation in vaccination intentions. This cross-sectional online survey was conducted during the first wave of the pandemic, involving 6697 respondents across 20 countries. Results showed that 72.9% of participants reported positive intentions to be vaccinated against COVID-19, whereas 16.8% were undecided, and 10.3% reported they would not be vaccinated. At the individual level, prosociality was a significant positive predictor of vaccination intentions, whereas generic beliefs in conspiracy theories and religiosity were negative predictors. Country-level determinants, including cultural dimensions of individualism/collectivism and power distance, were not significant predictors of vaccination intentions. Altogether, this study identifies individual-level predictors that are common across multiple countries, provides further evidence on the importance of combating conspiracy theories, involving religious
institutions in vaccination campaigns, and stimulating prosocial motives to encourage vaccine uptake.
... Convenience for its part has been less of an issue (in Western countries at least) as many governments ordered more than enough vaccine doses for their population. Research has also identified specific effects of other factors such as conspiracy beliefs, social media use, and exposure to misinformation (Allington et al., 2021;Chadwick et al., 2021;Enea et al., 2022;Freeman et al., 2020;Loomba et al., 2021). ...
... Health studies also generally find health concern to predict the adoption of health behavior intended to detect or prevent the potential disease (see also Tamers et al., 2014). Similar results arise when considering vaccination intentions specifically (as per the complacency dimension of the 5C model described above; Betsch et al., 2018;Enea et al., 2022;Ryan & Malinga, 2021;Taylor-Clark et al., 2005). Some have distinguished between objective and subjective risk level and concern. ...
... Identity fusion is related to greater empathic concern (Landabur et al., 2022) and, in turn, to greater willingness to self-sacrifice and greater prosocial behavior for the benefit of the community (Segal et al., 2018). In the present context of the COVID-19 pandemic, it could then be expected that self-concern and other-concern align and together drive the adoption of protective behavior for the sake of both the self and the community (see e.g., Kleitman et al., 2021), including taking the vaccine (Enea et al., 2022). ...
We test the hypothesis that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is attributable to distrustful complacency—an interactive combination of low concern and low trust. Across two studies, 9,695 respondents from different parts of Britain reported their level of concern about COVID-19, trust in the UK government, and intention to accept or refuse the vaccine. Multilevel regression analysis, controlling for geographic area and relevant demographics, confirmed the predicted interactive effect of concern and trust. Across studies, respondents with both low trust and low concern were 10%–22% more vaccine hesitant than respondents with either high trust or high concern, and 26%–29% more hesitant than respondents with both high trust and high concern. Results hold equally among White, Black, and Muslim respondents, consistent with the view that regardless of mean-level differences, a common process underlies vaccine hesitancy, underlining the importance of tackling distrustful complacency both generally and specifically among unvaccinated individuals and populations.
... Beyond trust towards other people and politicians/government, vaccine uptakes were also positively predicted by trust towards institutions and organizations, such as the World Health Organization, worldwide (Chen et al., 2022;De Freitas et al., 2021), as well as trust towards health professionals (Hara et al., 2021), scientists and the health system generally (Bajos et al., 2022). While the aforementioned types of trust positively predict vaccine uptakes, conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 and vaccines negatively predicted vaccine behavior and uptakes (Enea et al., 2022;Eshel et al., 2022;Han et al., 2022). Additionally, Enea et al. (2022) also showed that both generic and COVID-19 vaccine-related conspiracy beliefs negatively predicted vaccine uptakes. ...
... While the aforementioned types of trust positively predict vaccine uptakes, conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 and vaccines negatively predicted vaccine behavior and uptakes (Enea et al., 2022;Eshel et al., 2022;Han et al., 2022). Additionally, Enea et al. (2022) also showed that both generic and COVID-19 vaccine-related conspiracy beliefs negatively predicted vaccine uptakes. COVID-19 and vaccine conspiracy beliefs was found to remain a robust predictor when accounting also for demographics, such as religiosity or political ideology (Han et al., 2022;Jennings et al., 2021). ...
A plethora of research has highlighted that trust in science, political trust, and conspiracy theories are all important contributors to vaccine uptake behavior. In the current investigation, relying on data from 17 countries (N = 30,096) from the European Social Survey we examined how those who received (and wanted to receive the COVID-19 vaccine) compared to those who did not differ in their trust in: science, politicians and political parties, international organizations and towards people in general. We also examined whether they differed in how much they believed in conspiracy theories. Those who received (or wanted to receive) the COVID vaccine scored significantly higher in all forms of trust, and lower in conspiracy theory beliefs. A logistic regression suggested that trust in science, politicians, international organizations, as well as belief in conspiracy theories were significant predictors, even after accounting for key demographic characteristics. K E Y W O R D S conspiracy theories, European social survey, multilevel modelling , political ideology, political trust, trust in science, vaccination behavior E M P I R I C A L
... In connection with COVID-19 vaccination, research has shown that hesitation/refusing is associated, for example, with female gender, younger age, lower education (11,(17)(18)(19)(20), living in a partnership (19), rural housing (11,20), lower household income (11,(18)(19)(20), better health condition (17,21), spirituality (22), religiosity (23,24), belief in conspiracy theories (19,25,26) and poorer knowledge about COVID-19 (27). But to the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first studies that assesses the relationship between knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines with a tendency to refuse a COVID-19 vaccine, and in this relationship to compare the declared knowledge against the real knowledge. ...
... Consequently, we also found that people with higher education were less likely to refuse a COVID-19 vaccine which is in line with other studies (11,(17)(18)(19)23). Furthermore, similar to other studies that have found religious people to be less willing to be vaccinated (23,24), our study also shows that religiosity had an influence on vaccine refusal but only in case of believers outside the church. It is possible that believers are more influenced by the official position of the Roman-Catholic Church (the most widespread church in the Czech Republic), which recommended vaccination (43). ...
Objective: This study examined the willingness to get vaccinated and the factors influencing this attitude in extreme settings—in the Czech Republic (at the time of the survey, the third-worst affected country in the world).
Methods: We used national data from the general adult Czech population (N = 1,401) and measured attitudes towards vaccination, sociodemographic characteristics, government trust, knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines, personal characteristics, depression and anxiety.
Results: Respondents who were more likely to refuse the vaccine were: female, younger, living without a partner, self-employed or unemployed, living in a town, believers outside the church, and did not trust the government, obtained information about the vaccine from social media, were extroverts and depressed. Conversely, respondents who were less likely to refuse the vaccine were: pensioners, people with higher education, respondents with better real knowledge about the COVID-19 vaccines, those who obtained information about the vaccine from an expert and those who had higher scores in neuroticism.
Conclusion: This study thus offers a deeper understanding of the factors that might influence vaccine intention and subsequently the course of the COVID-19 pandemic.
... As revealed in our best-fitting model, state empathy positively predicted, and cognitive load negatively predicted, vaccination likelihood, the former finding similar to Pfattheicher 47 . Past research has also revealed that prosociality increased the intention to vaccinate against COVID-19, whereas religiosity and belief in conspiracy theories reduced vaccination intention 48 . The current results combined with prior literature highlight the www.nature.com/scientificreports/ ...
... Second, we did not measure some potentially relevant individual difference characteristics. For example, the effects of trait empathy may depend on cognitive load too 15,66 , and other individual-and group-level differences including but not limited to political belief, community identification, employment status and conspiracist belief may have accounted for changes in state empathy, support for public health measures or vaccination 39,48,61,76,78 . Indeed, a cross-sectional psychometric analysis of the Pandemic Fatigue Scale found that pandemic fatigue was highest among those who believed they were unlikely to be infected, believed the disease was mild and had low www.nature.com/scientificreports/ ...
Cognitive load reduces both empathy and prosocial behaviour. However, studies demonstrating these effects have induced cognitive load in a temporally limited, artificial manner that fails to capture real-world cognitive load. Drawing from cognitive load theory, we investigated whether naturally occurring cognitive load from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic moderated the relationship between empathy and prosocial behaviour (operationalised as support for public health measures). This large study in an Australian sample (N = 600) identified negative relationships between pandemic fatigue, empathy for people vulnerable to COVID-19, and prosocial behaviour, and a positive relationship between empathy and prosocial behaviour. Additionally, we found that the negative effect of the pandemic on prosocial behaviour depended on empathy for vulnerable others, with pandemic fatigue’s effects lowest for those with the highest empathy. These findings highlight the interrelationships of cognitive load and empathy, and the potential value of eliciting empathy to ease the impact of real-world cognitive load on prosocial behaviour.
... The scientific literature has consistently shown associations between conspiracy beliefs and negative attitudes toward vaccines. Studies have found that individuals who believe in conspiracy theories, such as the idea that vaccines are designed to harm people rather than protect them [48,49], were less likely to vaccinate and trust the safety and effectiveness of vaccines [72]. It is important to note, however, that these studies were cross-sectional and did not allow for the establishment of causal relationships. ...
The embrace of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine conspiracies has been linked to vaccine hesitancy. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy theories and perceived vaccine effectiveness. The study utilized a longitudinal follow-up study in which adults in Chile completed surveys in December 2020 (T1) and May 2021 (T2). The psychometric properties of the five-item instrument on conspiracy theories for the COVID-19 vaccine were evaluated using data from T1 (n = 578). A confirmatory one-factor structure with suitable indicators of reliability was found. The longitudinal analysis (n = 292) revealed that conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 vaccine in T1 were associated with lower beliefs in its effectiveness in T2. However, no significant association was found between beliefs in effectiveness in T1 and conspiracy theories in T2. The study suggests that beliefs in conspiracy theories may temporally precede beliefs in vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19. The results have implications for strategies to address vaccine conspiracy beliefs and their implementation at the public policy level.
... Most studies emphasize the importance of stakeholders educating and raising the level of awareness among the general public about COVID-19 vaccines with consideration of cultural orientations e.g., collectivism, to foster social responsibility for COVID-19 prevention, including vaccination prosociality, which has been found to be a significant positive predictor of COVID-19 vaccination intention [87]. Therefore, efforts are necessary to combat the effects of misinformation by providing easily accessible information to the general public through multiple platforms, including mainstream and social media. ...
The COVID-19 pandemic is a severe concern worldwide, particularly in Africa. Vaccines are crucial in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping review examined existing literature from 2020 to 2022 on individual, interpersonal, and structural barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination within Africa to facilitate more informed health promotion interventions to improve vaccine uptake. This review was conducted using Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage methodological framework. A comprehensive search was undertaken from 2021 to 2022 using six electronic databases: EBSCOhost, PubMed, Web of Science, ProQuest, WorldCat Discovery, and Google Scholar. Data was collected, charted into themes, and summarized using a standard data extraction sheet in Microsoft Excel. A total of forty (n = 40) published academic articles were reviewed, with many conducted in Nigeria (n = 10), followed by Ethiopia (n = 5) and Ghana (n = 4) and the rest elsewhere in Africa. Thematic narratives were used to report data into six themes: attitudes and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccines, intention to uptake COVID-19 vaccines; factors and barriers associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake; socio-demographic determinants affecting the intention and uptake; and information sources for COVID-19 vaccines. The intention for uptake ranged from 25% to 80.9%, resulting in a suboptimal uptake intention rate (54.2%) on the African continent. Factors that promoted vaccine acceptance included confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines and the desire to protect people. Age, education, and gender were the most common factors significantly associated with vaccine acceptance. Most studies revealed that considerable barriers to vaccine uptake exist in Africa. Concerns about potential side effects, vaccine ineffectiveness, a perceived lack of information, and inaccessibility were among the individual, interpersonal, and structural barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The unwillingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was strongly correlated with being female. Mass and social media were the main sources of information regarding COVID-19 vaccines. To encourage vaccine uptake, governments should pay attention to refuting misinformation through integrated community-based approaches, such as creating messages that convey more than just information.
... Există foarte multe studii care măsoară factorii contextuali care influențează intenția de vaccinare pentru alte vaccinuri, însă pentru vaccinarea împotriva Covid-19 astfel de studii sunt deocamdată puține. Un astfel de studiu arată că factori contextuali măsurați la nivel de țară, precum dimensiunile culturale de individualism și colectivism sau distanța față de putere, nu sunt predictori semnificativi pentru intenția de vaccinare (Enea et al. 2022). ...
Acest studiu analizează factorii asociați vaccinării propriu-zise și intenției de vaccinare împotriva Covid-19 în România.
... Studies showed that individuals who supported COVID-19-related conspiracy theories were less likely to trust experts' recommendations intended to reduce infection rates and were, therefore, less prone to adhere to prescribed public health measures and to undergo the medical procedures intended to control the contagion (Biddlestone et al., 2020;Juanchich et al., 2021;Enea et al., 2022). ...
Introduction:
In times of great uncertainty and hardship, calls for a strong leader tend to arise. The present study delved into this issue by examining possible sociopsychological antecedents of the wish for a strong leader during the COVID-19 crisis.
Methods:
We examined the role of social identification, belief in conspiracy theories related to COVID-19, and trust in various relevant social actors in a sample of 350 Italian citizens.
Results:
Structural equation modeling analyses showed that identification with Italians was related to a lower wish for a strong leader through the mediation of trust. Identification with Europeans had a direct and negative association with the wish for a strong leader. Finally, greater endorsement of conspiracy beliefs was related to a greater wish for a strong leader, directly and through diminished trust.
Discussion:
These findings suggest that belief in conspiracy theories might drive individuals to depart from democratic principles, whereas relying on meaningful social identities can effectively contrast possible authoritarian turns brought about by a global societal crisis, such as the coronavirus outbreak.
... Anti-vaccination advocates spread conspiracy theories about the development, safety, and effectiveness of vaccines (e.g., vaccines can alter your genes), which are inconsistent with scientific evidence (Enea et al., 2022;Jolley & Douglas, 2014). There is a great deal of evidence that people's beliefs in conspiracy theories are associated with vaccine hesitancy. ...
It is puzzling that a sizeable percentage of people refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19. This study aimed to examine social psychological factors influencing their vaccine hesitancy. This longitudinal study traced a cohort of 2663 individuals in 25 countries from the time before COVID-19 vaccines became available (March 2020) to July 2021, when vaccination was widely available. Multilevel logistic regressions were used to examine determinants of actual COVID-19 vaccination behavior by July 2021, with country-level intercept as random effect. Of the 2663 participants, 2186 (82.1%) had been vaccinated by July 2021. Participants' attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines was the strongest predictor of both vaccination intention and subsequent vaccination behavior (p < .001). Perceived risk of getting infected and perceived personal disturbance of infection were also associated with higher likelihood of getting vaccinated (p < .001). However, religiosity, right-wing political orientation, conspiracy beliefs, and low trust in government regarding COVID-19 were negative predictors of vaccination intention and behavior (p < .05). Our findings highlight the importance of attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines and also suggest that certain life-long held convictions that predate the pandemic make people distrustful of their government and likely to accept conspiracy beliefs and therefore less likely to adopt the vaccination behavior.
... Following this line of reasoning, a focus on the risks of others could lead to more accurate appraisal of the pandemic risks, and therefore in turn to more caution in handling one's own role during the pandemic. These considerations and further consistent evidence obtained recently in a COVID-19 context (e.g., Christner et al., 2020;Enea et al., 2022;van Hulsen et al., 2021;Jung & Albarracín, 2021) emphasize the potential of prosocial messages, that is, focusing on the pandemic risks of others, to motivate protective behaviors. ...
Although most protective behaviors related to the COVID-19 pandemic come with personal costs, they will produce the largest benefit if everybody cooperates. This study explores two interacting factors that drive cooperation in this tension between private and collective interests. A preregistered experiment (N = 299) examined (a) how the quality of the relation among interacting partners (social proximity), and (b) how focusing on the risk of self-infection versus onward transmission affected intentions to engage in protective behaviors. The results suggested that risk focus was an important moderator of the relation between social proximity and protection intentions. Specifically, participants were more willing to accept the risk of self-infection from close others than from strangers, resulting in less caution toward a friend than toward a distant other. However, when onward transmission was the primary concern, participants were more reluctant to effect transmission to close others, resulting in more caution toward friends than strangers. These findings inform the debate about effective nonclinical measures against the pandemic. Practical implications for risk communication are discussed.
... Previous studies suggested a number of factors that influence the degree to which people in different societies supported or rejected COVID-19 pandemic-related health behaviors, including selfinterest, pro-sociality, religiosity, conspiracy beliefs, trust, national identification, perceived effectiveness, and quality of institutions (7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14). In this paper, we argue that in order to understand why people support or oppose certain measures, it is crucial to understand (I) which individuals, groups, social movements, or organizations (referred to as 'protagonists' in the following) people identify as relevant and (II) how they are evaluated. ...
It is crucial to understand why people comply with measures to contain viruses and their effects during pandemics. We provide evidence from 35 countries (Ntotal = 12,553) from six continents during the COVID-19 pandemic that the social perception of key protagonists on two basic dimensions of social perception – warmth and competence – played a crucial role in shaping pandemic-related behaviors. Firstly, heads of state, physicians, and protest movements were universally identified as key protagonists across countries. Secondly, the social perception of these and other protagonists differed significantly within and between countries across warmth and competence. Thirdly, warmth and competence perceptions of heads of state, physicians, and protest movements translated into support and opposition intentions, containment and prevention behaviors, as well as vaccination uptake. Our results have important implications for designing effective interventions to motivate desirable health outcomes and coping with future health crises and other global challenges.
... The diversity of predictive psychosocial factors of the acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19 has been pointed out, such as political opinions, attitudes towards science, antisocial tendencies [7], or prosociality [8]. An international study that included 24 countries and more than 5000 participants found that anti-vaccine attitudes were more frequent in people who had a high level of conspiratorial thinking. ...
Citation: Espejo, B.; Martín-Carbonell, M.; Romero-Acosta, K.C.; Fernández-Daza, M.; Paternina, Y. (2022). Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11(16), 4682; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164682
Having a valid tool to assess attitudes toward vaccination and identify the concerns that drive vaccine refusal can facilitate population studies and help guide public health interventions. The objective of this study has been to adapt the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) scale in Colombian university students and to study its psychometric properties in a non-probabilistic sample of 1074 Colombian university students. Methods: A confirmatory factor analysis was used to study the factorial structure. A structural equation model was tested to study concurrent validity and to check whether the factors predicted having received the coronavirus vaccine. Gender-based measurement invariance was also studied for the best model. Results: The results support the structure of four related factors. The composite reliability index was good for all the factors, but the average variance extracted was not as good for the second factor. There was strong measurement invariance by gender, and two factors are good predictors of being vaccinated or not. Conclusions: The VAX has shown construct and concurrent validity and is a reliable tool for evaluating attitudes towards vaccines in university students in Colombia. It may help guide the implementation of actions for the National Vaccination Plan and institutional policies.
... The diversity of predictive psychosocial factors of the acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19 has been pointed out, such as political opinions, attitudes towards science, antisocial tendencies [7], or prosociality [8]. An international study that included 24 countries and more than 5000 participants found that anti-vaccine attitudes were more frequent in people who had a high level of conspiratorial thinking. ...
Background:
Having a valid tool to assess attitudes toward vaccination and identify the concerns that drive vaccine refusal can facilitate population studies and help guide public health interventions. The objective of this study has been to adapt the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) scale in Colombian university students and to study its psychometric properties in a non-probabilistic sample of 1074 Colombian university students.
Methods:
A confirmatory factor analysis was used to study the factorial structure. A structural equation model was tested to study concurrent validity and to check whether the factors predicted having received the coronavirus vaccine. Gender-based measurement invariance was also studied for the best model.
Results:
The results support the structure of four related factors. The composite reliability index was good for all the factors, but the average variance extracted was not as good for the second factor. There was strong measurement invariance by gender, and two factors are good predictors of being vaccinated or not.
Conclusions:
The VAX has shown construct and concurrent validity and is a reliable tool for evaluating attitudes towards vaccines in university students in Colombia. It may help guide the implementation of actions for the National Vaccination Plan and institutional policies.
... Conspiratorial theories seem to play an important role in shaping the pandemic-related behaviors, especially less adherence to the restrictions (e.g. Freeman et al., 2020;Jolley & Douglas, 2014;Kowalski et al., 2020;Swami & Barron, 2021;Venea et al., 2022). ...
Because conspiracy theories have many negative consequences, understanding the psychological factors underlying their endorsement is an important task for researchers. We examined whether people's time perspective (TP) – the tendency to focus on the certain aspects of the past, present, or future – is associated with conspiracy beliefs. In two studies we investigated general (Study 1; N = 263) and COVID-19 related (Study 2; N = 570) conspiracy theories. The most consistent finding was the positive correlation between two present TPs: hedonism and fatalism and the endorsement of conspiracy ideations. Moreover, we found that hostility and a tendency toward irrational thinking mediated these associations. Additionally, but only in Study 2, conspiracy beliefs were associated with higher levels of the Past Negative TP and less balanced TP. We conclude that conspiracy theories provide simple and immediate answers of important events and that is why they are attractive to present oriented people who look for immediate explanations of complex and difficult situations.
... Appeals to individuals' prosocial sentiments and inclinations toward generosity, in fact, can be effective in the vaccination context, 4,5 with emerging evidence also supporting their effectiveness with COVID-19 vaccines. 6,7 To further facilitate a transition from self-interest to solidarity in COVID-19 vaccine messaging, 3 potential strategies stand out. First, it needs to be clearer that COVID-19 vaccines resulted from collective investment. ...
... This means that people's general tendency to adhere to a variety of conspiracy beliefs regarding COVID-19 may shape their motivations to get vaccinated. Unsurprisingly, endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs emerged as a strong negative predictor of vaccination intentions (Bertin et al., 2020;Enea et al., 2022) and actual behavior (van Prooijen et al., 2021). ...
Rationale
Vaccination willingness is a critical step in the effort to reach herd immunity and control the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, many people remain reluctant to be vaccinated.
Objective
Integrating the literature on Self-Determination Theory, trust in authorities, and conspiracy theories, this research examines (a) the direct and indirect effect of government trust and conspiracism via underlying forms of motivations for (not) getting vaccinated against COVID-19 and (b) whether these associations differ across the two largely politically independent Belgian linguistic groups.
Methods
Using Structural Equation Modeling, we tested our models in two independent samples, in February 2021 (T1) and April 2021 (T2) (Total N = 8264).
Results
At T1 and T2, Government trust and conspiracism both predict COVID-19 vaccination intention, respectively positively and negatively. These relations are fully mediated by motivational factors, with identified motivations having a larger positive contribution. Looking at linguistic context, differences emerge at T2, with French-speaking Belgians showing lower levels of government trust and higher levels of conspiracism than Dutch speakers.
Conclusions
Results highlight the importance of integrating distal (trust in government, conspiracism) and proximal (motivational) variables to understand vaccination intentions.
... Therefore, it is necessary to help the patients strengthen or extend their social support networks, by increasing support from family, providing peer support, creating special help lines for people with diabetes, and patients' communities. Emphasizing the importance of preventive measures (Enea et al., 2022) and the vaccine's efficacy in protecting people with diabetes against COVID-19 could prove beneficial for mitigating their death concern and fear of COVID-19. ...
Patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes were included among high-risk groups for more severe manifestations in case of COVID-19 infection and higher risk of mortality. The current study aims to (1) examine the relationship between death obsession, religiosity, and fear of COVID-19 among type 2 diabetes patients, and (2) assess if religiosity moderates the relationship between death obsession and fear of COVID-19. This cross-sectional online survey involved 306 type 2 diabetes patients. We found that 35.6 % of the participants were overweight and 14.6 % were suffering from obesity. Results showed that death obsession was positively associated with fear of COVID-19 and more religious individuals experience higher levels of fear. The overall level of religiosity did not moderate the relationship between death obsession and fear of COVID-19 but only the preoccupation with God dimension of the religiosity scale. The practical implications of these findings are discussed.
Introduction:
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy studies, most of which were completed prior to the release of the vaccine, speculated on factors that might influence inoculation intention when a vaccine was introduced. This paper examines actual vaccination decisions among US residents after COVID-19 vaccines were approved, with a focus on trust in vaccine effectiveness, increased trust in government pandemic response, and individual-versus-collective value orientation.
Method:
The data set was from the Kaiser Family Foundation COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor, a nationally representative sample reflecting the opinions of 1519 American adults aged 18 and above. Data were collected in September 2021-approximately nine months after the first COVID-19 vaccines were approved for distribution. Indicators of trust in vaccine effectiveness included individual opinions regarding breakthrough infections and vaccine boosters. Increased trust in government indicated approval of official COVID-19 responses, and value orientation denoted respondent emphasis on personal choice versus protecting the health of others. We established three categories of a vaccine hesitancy dependent variable: none, some, and full rejection. A multinomial regression analysis was employed to compare vaccine hesitancy in three pairs of contrasting groups.
Results:
While we noted distinct patterns in decision-making factors for each of the contrasting pairs, we also observed strong effects for trust in vaccine effectiveness and value orientation on vaccine decisions across all three. Both effects were more substantial than those associated with three control variables-social-demographic characteristics, political party affiliation, and health risk.
Conclusion:
Our findings suggest that in order to increase vaccination rates, policymakers and influencers should focus on reducing individual scepticism over breakthrough infections and vaccine boosters, and on influencing a value orientation shift from personal choice to social responsibility.
Despite evidence of the safety and effectiveness of COVID‐19 vaccines and their wide availability, many in the U.S. are not vaccinated. Research demonstrates that prosocial orientations predict COVID‐19 health behaviors (e.g., social distancing) and vaccination intentions, however, little work has examined COVID‐19 vaccination willingness in the U.S. since vaccines were approved. Findings from two U.S. samples show that, in contrast to other COVID‐19 health behaviors, vaccine willingness in unvaccinated people is unrelated to prosocial orientation. Study 2 demonstrates that the lack of association between vaccine willingness and prosocial orientation in unvaccinated participants was specific to those with stronger beliefs that COVID‐19 vaccines are ineffective. Thus, in prosocial people, perceptions of vaccines' ineffectiveness may undermine COVID‐19 vaccine willingness.
Background
Identifying common factors that affect public adherence to COVID-19 containment measures can directly inform the development of official public health communication strategies. The present international longitudinal study aimed to examine whether prosociality, together with other theoretically derived motivating factors (self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19, perceived social support) predict the change in adherence to COVID-19 containment strategies.
Method
In wave 1 of data collection, adults from eight geographical regions completed online surveys beginning in April 2020, and wave 2 began in June and ended in September 2020. Hypothesized predictors included prosociality, self-efficacy in following COVID-19 containment measures, perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, perceived severity of COVID-19 and perceived social support. Baseline covariates included age, sex, history of COVID-19 infection and geographical regions. Participants who reported adhering to specific containment measures, including physical distancing, avoidance of non-essential travel and hand hygiene, were classified as adherence. The dependent variable was the category of adherence, which was constructed based on changes in adherence across the survey period and included four categories: non-adherence, less adherence, greater adherence and sustained adherence (which was designated as the reference category).
Results
In total, 2189 adult participants (82% female, 57.2% aged 31–59 years) from East Asia (217 [9.7%]), West Asia (246 [11.2%]), North and South America (131 [6.0%]), Northern Europe (600 [27.4%]), Western Europe (322 [14.7%]), Southern Europe (433 [19.8%]), Eastern Europe (148 [6.8%]) and other regions (96 [4.4%]) were analyzed. Adjusted multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that prosociality, self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19 were significant factors affecting adherence. Participants with greater self-efficacy at wave 1 were less likely to become non-adherence at wave 2 by 26% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.77; P < .001), while those with greater prosociality at wave 1 were less likely to become less adherence at wave 2 by 23% (aOR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.79; P = .04).
Conclusions
This study provides evidence that in addition to emphasizing the potential severity of COVID-19 and the potential susceptibility to contact with the virus, fostering self-efficacy in following containment strategies and prosociality appears to be a viable public health education or communication strategy to combat COVID-19.
This systematic review synthesizes the findings of quantitative studies examining the relationships between Health Belief Model (HBM) constructs and COVID-19 vaccination intention. We searched PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and identified 109 eligible studies. The overall vaccination intention rate was 68.19%. Perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and cues to action were the three most frequently demonstrated predictors of vaccination intention for both primary series and booster vaccines. For booster doses, the influence of susceptibility slightly increased, but the impact of severity, self-efficacy, and cues to action on vaccination intention declined. The impact of susceptibility increased, but severity's effect declined sharply from 2020 to 2022. The influence of barriers slightly declined from 2020 to 2021, but it skyrocketed in 2022. Conversely, the role of self-efficacy dipped in 2022. Susceptibility, severity, and barriers were dominant predictors in Saudi Arabia, but self-efficacy and cues to action had weaker effects in the USA. Susceptibility and severity had a lower impact on students, especially in North America, and barriers had a lower impact on health care workers. However, cues to action and self-efficacy had a dominant influence among parents. The most prevalent modifying variables were age, gender, education, income, and occupation. The results show that HBM is useful in predicting vaccine intention.
ภาวะการระบาดระดับโลกของโรคโควิด-19 เป็นปรากฏการณ์ที่ส่งผลกระทบต่อผู้คนทั่วโลกหลาย ๆ ด้าน ในขณะเดียวกันมนุษย์พยายามเสาะแสวงหาข้อมูลต่างๆที่เกี่ยวกับการระบาด แต่กลับพบ “ความเชื่อหรือทฤษฎีสมคบคิด” ที่เกี่ยวกับโรคโควิด-19 ที่ดูไม่น่าเชื่อถือและสมเหตุสมผล ซึ่งมีบางคนกลับปักใจเชื่อและส่งผลกระทบต่อความคิดและพฤติกรรมมนุษย์ บทความนี้นำเสนอมุมมองทางจิตวิทยาของความเชื่อสมคบคิดเพื่ออธิบายที่มาผลกระทบของความเชื่อสมคบคิดที่มีต่อผลลัพธ์ทางสังคมทั้งพฤติกรรมป้องกันการติดเชื้อ การแพร่ระบาด และการช่วยเหลือกันลดลง อคติ การซื้อด้วยความตื่นตระหนก การกักตุน และความรุนแรง และเสนอแนวทางการรับมือความเชื่อสมคบคิด
The COVID-19 pandemic is a phenomenon which has affected people all over the world. At the same time, when people have tried to seek for pandemic-related information, they found COVID-19-related“conspiracy beliefs or theories” which some people believed and this affected their thoughts and behaviors. This article proposes a psychological perspective of conspiracy beliefs to explain the origin and the effects of conspiracy beliefs and their social consequences including less preventive and helping behaviors, prejudice, panic buying, hoarding and violence, and suggests the guidelines on dealing with conspiracy beliefs.
It is crucial to understand why people comply with measures to contain viruses and their effects during pandemics. We provide evidence from 35 countries ( N total = 12,553) from 6 continents during the COVID-19 pandemic (between 2021 and 2022) obtained via cross-sectional surveys that the social perception of key protagonists on two basic dimensions—warmth and competence—plays a crucial role in shaping pandemic-related behaviors. Firstly, when asked in an open question format, heads of state, physicians, and protest movements were universally identified as key protagonists across countries. Secondly, multiple-group confirmatory factor analyses revealed that warmth and competence perceptions of these and other protagonists differed significantly within and between countries. Thirdly, internal meta-analyses showed that warmth and competence perceptions of heads of state, physicians, and protest movements were associated with support and opposition intentions, containment and prevention behaviors, as well as vaccination uptake. Our results have important implications for designing effective interventions to motivate desirable health outcomes and coping with future health crises and other global challenges.
Although many virtuous leaders are guided by the ideal of prioritizing the needs and welfare of their subordinates, others advance their self-interest at the expense of the people they purport to serve. In this article, we discuss conspiracy theories as a tool that leaders use to advance their personal interests. We propose that leaders spread conspiracy theories in service of four primary goals: 1) to attack opponents; 2) to increase support from their ingroup members; 3) to shift blame and responsibility; and 4) to undermine institution that threaten their power. We argue that authoritarian, populist, and conservative leaders are most likely to spread conspiracy theories during periods of instability.
Some people feel they are invincible to the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). They believe that being infected with COVID-19 would not be a serious threat to their health. While these people may or may not be correct in their personal risk assessment, we find that such perceived invincibility may undermine community efforts to achieve herd immunity. Multi-level analysis of survey respondents across 51 countries finds that perceived invincibility from COVID-19 is negatively associated with believing there is a need to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in one’s community ( n = 218,956) and one’s willingness to inoculate against the disease ( n = 71,148). These effects are most pronounced among individuals from countries lower in cultural collectivism (e.g., USA, UK, Canada) and highlight the need to consider the interplay of individual and cultural factors in our efforts to understand, predict, and promote preventative health behavior during a pandemic.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a global health crisis. Consequently, many countries have adopted restrictive measures that caused a substantial change in society. Within this framework, it is reasonable to suppose that a sentiment of societal discontent, defined as generalized concern about the precarious state of society, has arisen. Literature shows that collectively experienced situations can motivate people to help each other. Since societal discontent is conceptualized as a collective phenomenon, we argue that it could influence intention to help others, particularly those who suffer from coronavirus. Thus, in the present study, we aimed (a) to explore the relationship between societal discontent and intention to help at the individual level and (b) to investigate a possible moderating effect of societal discontent at the country level on this relationship. To fulfil our purposes, we used data collected in 42 countries(N = 61,734) from the PsyCorona Survey, a cross-national longitudinal study. Results of multilevel analysis showed that, when societal discontent is experienced by the entire com-munity, individuals dissatisfied with society are more prone to help others. Testing the model with longitudinal data (N = 3,817) confirmed our results. Implications for those findings are discussed in relation to crisis management.
The current research examined the role of values in guiding people’s responses to COVID-19. Results from an international study involving 115 countries (N = 61,490) suggest that health and economic threats of COVID-19 evoke different values, with implications for controlling and coping with the pandemic. Specifically, health threats evoked prioritization of communal values related to caring for others and belonging, whereas economic threats predicted prioritization of agentic values focused on competition and achievement. Concurrently and over time, prioritizing communal values over agentic values was associated with enactment of prevention behaviors that reduce virus transmission, motivations to help others suffering from the pandemic, and positive attitudes toward outgroup members. These results, which were generally consistent across individual and national levels of analysis, suggest that COVID-19 threats may indirectly shape important responses to the pandemic through their influence on people’s prioritization of communion and agency. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
While there is an increasing body of research on the individual predispositions affecting conspiracy beliefs, little research has to date analysed potential effects on the context level. In this research note, we develop the argument that socialization and communication factors on the context level may directly affect aggregate levels of generic conspiracy beliefs. Second, we analyse whether these context level factors also interact with specific characteristics of the conspiracy theory – in our case, the actors involved in the CT. Running survey experiments in Germany, Poland, and Jordan (total N = 4,113), we find evidence for aggregate level differences between countries and for interactions between country-specific heuristics and characteristics of the CT. These findings are in line with expectations based on context level socialization and communication mechanisms. In closing, we discuss remaining limitations and outline promising avenues for future research.
Widespread acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines is crucial for achieving sufficient immunization coverage to end the global pandemic, yet few studies have investigated COVID-19 vaccination attitudes in lower-income countries, where large-scale vaccination is just beginning. We analyze COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across 15 survey samples covering 10 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Asia, Africa and South America, Russia (an upper-middle-income country) and the United States, including a total of 44,260 individuals. We find considerably higher willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine in our LMIC samples (mean 80.3%; median 78%; range 30.1 percentage points) compared with the United States (mean 64.6%) and Russia (mean 30.4%). Vaccine acceptance in LMICs is primarily explained by an interest in personal protection against COVID-19, while concern about side effects is the most common reason for hesitancy. Health workers are the most trusted sources of guidance about COVID-19 vaccines. Evidence from this sample of LMICs suggests that prioritizing vaccine distribution to the Global South should yield high returns in advancing global immunization coverage. Vaccination campaigns should focus on translating the high levels of stated acceptance into actual uptake. Messages highlighting vaccine efficacy and safety, delivered by healthcare workers, could be effective for addressing any remaining hesitancy in the analyzed LMICs. Survey data collected across ten low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Asia, Africa and South America compared with surveys from Russia and the United States reveal heterogeneity in vaccine confidence in LMICs, with healthcare providers being trusted sources of information, as well as greater levels of vaccine acceptance in these countries than in Russia and the United States.
Background
The effective implementation of government policies and measures for controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires compliance from the public. This study aimed to examine cross-sectional and longitudinal associations of trust in government regarding COVID-19 control with the adoption of recommended health behaviours and prosocial behaviours, and potential determinants of trust in government during the pandemic.
Methods
This study analysed data from the PsyCorona Survey, an international project on COVID-19 that included 23 733 participants from 23 countries (representative in age and gender distributions by country) at baseline survey and 7785 participants who also completed follow-up surveys. Specification curve analysis was used to examine concurrent associations between trust in government and self-reported behaviours. We further used structural equation model to explore potential determinants of trust in government. Multilevel linear regressions were used to examine associations between baseline trust and longitudinal behavioural changes.
Results
Higher trust in government regarding COVID-19 control was significantly associated with higher adoption of health behaviours (handwashing, avoiding crowded space, self-quarantine) and prosocial behaviours in specification curve analyses (median standardised β = 0.173 and 0.229, p < 0.001). Government perceived as well organised, disseminating clear messages and knowledge on COVID-19, and perceived fairness were positively associated with trust in government (standardised β = 0.358, 0.230, 0.056, and 0.249, p < 0.01). Higher trust at baseline survey was significantly associated with lower rate of decline in health behaviours over time ( p for interaction = 0.001).
Conclusions
These results highlighted the importance of trust in government in the control of COVID-19.
Cross-societal differences in cooperation and trust among strangers in the provision of public goods may be key to understanding how societies are managing the COVID-19 pandemic. We report a survey conducted across 41 societies between March and May 2020 (N = 34,526), and test pre-registered hypotheses about how cross-societal differences in cooperation and trust relate to prosocial COVID-19 responses (e.g., social distancing), stringency of policies, and support for behavioral regulations (e.g., mandatory quarantine). We further tested whether cross-societal variation in institutions and ecologies theorized to impact cooperation were associated with prosocial COVID-19 responses, including institutional quality, religiosity, and historical prevalence of pathogens. We found substantial variation across societies in prosocial COVID-19
responses, stringency of policies, and support for behavioral regulation. However, we found no consistent evidence to support the idea that cross-societal variation in cooperation and trust among strangers is associated with these outcomes related to the COVID-19 pandemic. These results were replicated with another independent cross-cultural COVID-19 dataset (N = 112,136), and in both snowball and representative samples. We discuss implications of our results, including challenging the assumption that managing the COVID-19 pandemic across societies is best modelled as a public goods dilemma.
In an era of Freddie Gray and Black Lives Matter, a long history of structural racism, combined with disproportionate rates of COVID-19, the African American community has seen a lot of reasons to demand social justice, equal treatment and immediate access to solutions to health disparities. Despite the promise of COVID-19 vaccines, the community is highly distrustful of the vaccine and institutions given a history of mistreatment and many other current concerns. Trusted messengers such as Black pastors are crucial to protecting the community that faces a disproportionate amount of disease. We present a framework to build trust and acceptance including understanding history and context; listening and empathy; engaging pastors as trusted messengers; creating partnerships with shared responsibility and power; and co-creation of solutions with faith leaders and their community, governments and institutions to create sustainable, long-term change. Efforts to support vaccine acceptance must be customized to the variety of needs and realities of the African American community, not just the topic of concern to the institution. Evaluations are needed to help ensure the community is engaged and feeling heard. Pastors and other religious leaders can work with government and institutions to bring information, facilitate discussion, build trust and develop measurable improvement efforts. Although acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines may not be achieved overnight, the process of focusing on issues that are important to the community is an important step in laying the foundation for both COVID-19 vaccines and future interventions.
The COVID-19 pandemic presents threats, such as severe disease and economic hardship, to people of different ages. These threats can also be experienced asymmetrically across age groups, which could lead to generational differences in behavioral responses to reduce the spread of the disease. We report a survey conducted across 56 societies (N = 58,641), and tested pre-registered hypotheses about how age relates to (a) perceived personal costs during the pandemic, (b) prosocial COVID-19 responses (e.g., social distancing), and (c) support for behavioral regulations (e.g., mandatory quarantine, vaccination). We further tested whether the relation between age and prosocial COVID-19 responses can be explained by perceived personal costs during the pandemic. Overall, we found that older people perceived more costs of contracting the virus, but less costs in daily life due to the pandemic. However, age displayed no clear, robust associations with prosocial COVID-19 responses and support for behavioral regulations. We discuss the implications of this work for understanding the potential intergenerational conflicts of interest that could occur during the COVID-19 pandemic.
During a crisis, the degree of solidarity is the basis of endurance of any society. The COVID-19 crisis is one of the unprecedented challenges that the world is contending presently. This article views that ‘social distancing’ and other public health measures which state agencies prescribe during this period can be effectively practiced when ‘social distance’ between people is minimum. Social solidarity is the cementing force that helps in reducing the social distance that is increasing between people during this pandemic. We explore Emile Durkheim’s theory of social solidarity in context of the COVID-19 crisis demonstrating cases from the Indian scenario. After more than a century, we are rediscovering the operational dimensions of Durkheim’s ideas under the social transition that the COVID-19 pandemic has created. Though Durkheim initially believed that in the course of social evolution, mechanical solidarity in traditional societies would pave its way to organic solidarity in modern societies but traces of mechanical solidarity is discernible in this pandemic phase. Collective actions stimulate social solidarity, whereas severe inequalities in society undermine solidarity. The article concludes that social solidarity plays a pivotal role in bridging the social distance and reducing public health risk by developing a collective consciousness in society during a pandemic.
The 2019 COVID-19 pandemic has amplified inequalities and human rights challenges; in some states, COVID-19 policies have been introduced that further curtail human rights. Although some limits may be justified in the time of a public health emergency, other rights are vital to secure precisely because of pandemic conditions. Following a discussion of the concept of political solidarity, we examine how COVID-19 has underscored democratic “deficits” and human rights failures within the United States and India. Emergency “stay-at-home” orders and social distancing measures make political dissent challenging, yet this extreme moment has created opportunities for solidarity, initially in restrained ways via the internet or local forms of collective support and protest, and later through mass mobilizations to end racial injustice (in the United States). Our assessment of the challenges and promises of solidarist action in two of the largest democracies offers reasons for guarded optimism.
Rumors and conspiracy theories thrive in environments of low confidence and low trust. Consequently, it is not surprising that ones related to the COVID-19 pandemic are proliferating given the lack of scientific consensus on the virus’s spread and containment, or on the long-term social and economic ramifications of the pandemic. Among the stories currently circulating in US-focused social media forums are ones suggesting that the 5G telecommunication network activates the virus, that the pandemic is a hoax perpetrated by a global cabal, that the virus is a bio-weapon released deliberately by the Chinese, or that Bill Gates is using it as cover to launch a broad vaccination program to facilitate a global surveillance regime. While some may be quick to dismiss these stories as having little impact on real-world behavior, recent events including the destruction of cell phone towers, racially fueled attacks against Asian Americans, demonstrations espousing resistance to public health orders, and wide-scale defiance of scientifically sound public mandates such as those to wear masks and practice social distancing, countermand such conclusions. Inspired by narrative theory, we crawl social media sites and news reports and, through the application of automated machine-learning methods, discover the underlying narrative frameworks supporting the generation of rumors and conspiracy theories. We show how the various narrative frameworks fueling these stories rely on the alignment of otherwise disparate domains of knowledge, and consider how they attach to the broader reporting on the pandemic. These alignments and attachments, which can be monitored in near real time, may be useful for identifying areas in the news that are particularly vulnerable to reinterpretation by conspiracy theorists. Understanding the dynamics of storytelling on social media and the narrative frameworks that provide the generative basis for these stories may also be helpful for devising methods to disrupt their spread.
Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 61.4% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer’s advice to do so.
Rationale:
The COVID-19 pandemic poses extraordinary challenges to public health.
Objective:
Because the novel coronavirus is highly contagious, the widespread use of preventive measures such as masking, physical distancing, and eventually vaccination is needed to bring it under control. We hypothesized that accepting conspiracy theories that were circulating in mainstream and social media early in the COVID-19 pandemic in the US would be negatively related to the uptake of preventive behaviors and also of vaccination when a vaccine becomes available.
Method:
A national probability survey of US adults (N = 1050) was conducted in the latter half of March 2020 and a follow-up with 840 of the same individuals in July 2020. The surveys assessed adoption of preventive measures recommended by public health authorities, vaccination intentions, conspiracy beliefs, perceptions of threat, belief about the safety of vaccines, political ideology, and media exposure patterns.
Results:
Belief in three COVID-19-related conspiracy theories was highly stable across the two periods and inversely related to the (a) perceived threat of the pandemic, (b) taking of preventive actions, including wearing a face mask, (c) perceived safety of vaccination, and (d) intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Conspiracy beliefs in March predicted subsequent mask-wearing and vaccination intentions in July even after controlling for action taken and intentions in March. Although adopting preventive behaviors was predicted by political ideology and conservative media reliance, vaccination intentions were less related to political ideology. Mainstream television news use predicted adopting both preventive actions and vaccination.
Conclusions:
Because belief in COVID-related conspiracy theories predicts resistance to both preventive behaviors and future vaccination for the virus, it will be critical to confront both conspiracy theories and vaccination misinformation to prevent further spread of the virus in the US. Reducing those barriers will require continued messaging by public health authorities on mainstream media and in particular on politically conservative outlets that have supported COVID-related conspiracy theories.
Most vaccines protect both the vaccinated individual and the society by reducing the transmission of infectious diseases. In order to eliminate infectious diseases, individuals need to consider social welfare beyond mere self-interest—regardless of ethnic, religious, or national group borders. It has therefore been proposed that vaccination poses a social contract in which individuals are morally obliged to get vaccinated. However, little is known about whether individuals indeed act upon this social contract. If so, vaccinated individuals should reciprocate by being more generous to a vaccinated other. On the contrary, if the other doesn’t vaccinate and violates the social contract, generosity should decline. Three preregistered experiments investigated how a person’s own vaccination behavior, others’ vaccination behavior, and others’ group membership influenced a person’s generosity toward respective others. The experiments consistently showed that especially compliant (i.e., vaccinated) individuals showed less generosity toward nonvaccinated individuals. This effect was independent of the others’ group membership, suggesting an unconditional moral principle. An internal metaanalysis (n = 1,032) confirmed the overall social contract effect. In a fourth experiment (n = 1,212), this pattern was especially pronounced among vaccinated individuals who perceived vaccination as a moral obligation. It is concluded that vaccination is a social contract in which cooperation is the morally right choice. Individuals act upon the social contract, and more so the stronger they perceive it as a moral obligation. Emphasizing the social contract could be a promising intervention to increase vaccine uptake, prevent free riding, and, eventually, support the elimination of infectious diseases.
SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is thought to be transmitted mainly by person-to-person contact (1). Implementation of nationwide public health orders to limit person-to-person interaction and of guidance on personal protective practices can slow transmission (2,3). Such strategies can include stay-at-home orders, business closures, prohibitions against mass gatherings, use of cloth face coverings, and maintenance of a physical distance between persons (2,3). To assess and understand public attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs related to this guidance and COVID-19, representative panel surveys were conducted among adults aged ≥18 years in New York City (NYC) and Los Angeles, and broadly across the United States during May 5-12, 2020. Most respondents in the three cohorts supported stay-at-home orders and nonessential business closures* (United States, 79.5%; New York City, 86.7%; and Los Angeles, 81.5%), reported always or often wearing cloth face coverings in public areas (United States, 74.1%, New York City, 89.6%; and Los Angeles 89.8%), and believed that their state's restrictions were the right balance or not restrictive enough (United States, 84.3%; New York City, 89.7%; and Los Angeles, 79.7%). Periodic assessments of public attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs can guide evidence-based public health decision-making and related prevention messaging about mitigation strategies needed as the COVID-19 pandemic evolves.
The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.
Scholarly efforts to understand conspiracy theories have grown significantly in recent years, and there is now a broad and interdisciplinary literature. In reviewing this body of work, we ask three specific questions. First, what factors are associated with conspiracy beliefs? Our review of the literature shows that conspiracy beliefs result from a range of psychological, political, and social factors. Next, how are conspiracy theories communicated? Here, we explain how conspiracy theories are shared among individuals and spread through traditional and social media platforms. Next, what are the societal risks and rewards associated with conspiracy theories? By focusing on politics and science, we argue that conspiracy theories do more harm than good. We conclude by suggesting several promising avenues for future research.
Vaccination provides direct protection for the vaccinating individual and indirect protection for other, unvaccinated individuals via herd immunity. Still, some people do not get vaccinated – either because they cannot (e.g., due to health conditions) or they don’t want to (e.g., due to vaccine hesitancy). We investigate whether non-vaccinators’ level of responsibility for not being vaccinated affects individuals’ motivation to vaccinate and, thus, to indirectly protect non-vaccinators. In Study 1 (N = 101), the intention to vaccinate increased (Cohen’s d = 0.99) when non-vaccinators were described as willing but unable to get vaccinated (low responsibility) compared to when they were able but unwilling to get vaccinated (high responsibility). Study 2 (N = 297) replicated this finding with regard to vaccination behavior in an interactive vaccination (I-Vax) game (OR = 2.38). Additionally, knowing about non-vaccinators’ low responsibility also increased the willingness to vaccinate compared to when there was no information on non-vaccinators’ level of responsibility. Amplified levels of social welfare concerns in the case of non-vaccinators’ low responsibility mediated the latter effect. This finding informs effective communication strategies for improving the vaccination rates.
Background:
Vaccination protects individuals directly and communities indirectly by reducing transmission. We aimed to determine whether information about herd immunity and local vaccination coverage could change an individual's vaccination plans and concern about influenza.
Methods:
We surveyed Minnesota residents ≥18 years during the 2016 Minnesota State Fair. Participants were asked to identify the definition of herd immunity, to report their history of and plans to receive influenza vaccine, to report their concern about influenza, and to estimate the reported influenza vaccination coverage in their county. After providing educational information about herd immunity and local vaccination rates, we reassessed vaccination plans and concerns. We used logistic regression to estimate predicted percentages for those willing to be vaccinated, for concern about influenza, and for changes in these outcomes after the intervention. We then compared those individuals with and without prior knowledge of herd immunity, accounting for other characteristics.
Results:
Among 554 participants, the median age was 57 years; most were female (65.9%), white (91.0%), and non-Hispanic/Latino (93.9%). Overall, 37.2% of participants did not know about herd immunity and 75.6% thought that the influenza vaccination coverage in their county was higher than it was reported. Those not knowledgeable about herd immunity were significantly less likely than those knowledgeable about the concept to report plans to be vaccinated at baseline (67.8% versus 78.9%; p = 0.004). After learning about herd immunity and influenza vaccination coverage, the proportion of those not knowledgeable about herd immunity who were willing to be vaccinated increased significantly by 7.3 percentage points (p = 0.001). Educating participants eliminated the significant difference in the proportion planning to be vaccinated between these two groups (80.1% of those knowledgeable and 75.1% of those who were not initially knowledgeable became willing; p = 0.148).
Conclusions:
Education about herd immunity and local vaccination coverage could be a useful tool for increasing willingness to vaccinate, generating benefits both to individuals and communities.
In order to gather a global picture of vaccine hesitancy and whether/how it is changing, an analysis was undertaken to review three years of data available as of June 2017 from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Report Form (JRF) to determine the reported rate of vaccine hesitancy across the globe, the cited reasons for hesitancy, if these varied by country income level and/or by WHO region and whether these reasons were based upon an assessment. The reported reasons were classified using the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on Immunization matrix of hesitancy determinants (www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2014/october/SAGE_working_group_revised_report_vaccine_hesitancy.pdf). Hesitancy was common, reported by >90% of countries. The list of cited reasons was long and covered 22 of 23 WHO determinants matrix categories. Even the most frequently cited category, risk- benefit (scientific evidence e.g. vaccine safety concerns), accounted for less than one quarter of all reasons cited. The reasons varied by country income level, by WHO region and over time and within a country. Thus based upon this JRF data, across the globe countries appear to understand the SAGE vaccine hesitancy definition and use it to report reasons for hesitancy. However, the rigour of the cited reasons could be improved as only just over 1/3 of countries reported that their reasons were assessment based, the rest were opinion based. With respect to any assessment in the previous five years, upper middle income countries were the least likely to have done an assessment. These analyses provided some of the evidence for the 2017 Assessment Report of the Global Vaccine Action Plan recommendation that each country develop a strategy to increase acceptance and demand for vaccination, which should include ongoing community engagement and trust-building, active hesitancy prevention, regular national assessment of vaccine concerns, and crisis response planning (www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/october/1_GVAP_Assessment_report_web_version.pdf).
Background:
The national guideline for use of the vaccine targeting oncogenic strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV) is an evidence-based practice that is poorly implemented in primary care. Recommendations include completion of the vaccine series before the 13th birthday for girls and boys, giving the first dose at the 11- to 12-year-old check-up visit, concurrent with other recommended vaccines. Interventions to increase implementation of this guideline have had little impact, and opportunities to prevent cancer continue to be missed.
Methods:
We used a theory-informed approach to develop a pragmatic intervention for use in primary care settings to increase implementation of the HPV vaccine guideline recommendation. Using a concurrent mixed methods design in 10 primary care practices, we applied the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to systematically investigate and characterize factors strongly influencing vaccine use. We then used the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to analyze provider behavior and identify behaviors to target for change and behavioral change strategies to include in the intervention.
Results:
We identified facilitators and barriers to guideline use across the five CFIR domains: most distinguishing factors related to provider characteristics, their perception of the intervention, and their process to deliver the vaccine. Targeted behaviors were for the provider to recommend the HPV vaccine the same way and at the same time as the other adolescent vaccines, to answer parents' questions with confidence, and to implement a vaccine delivery system. To this end, the intervention targeted improving provider's capability (knowledge, communication skills) and motivation (action planning, belief about consequences, social influences) regarding implementing guideline recommendations, and increasing their opportunity to do so (vaccine delivery system). Behavior change strategies included providing information and communication skill training with graded tasks and modeling, feedback of coverage rates, goal setting, and social support. These strategies were combined in an implementation intervention to be delivered using practice facilitation, educational outreach visits, and cyclical small tests of change.
Conclusions:
Using CFIR, the BCW and the TDF facilitated the development of a pragmatic, multi-component implementation intervention to increase use of the HPV vaccine in the primary care setting.
In the present contribution, we examine the link between societal crisis situations and belief in conspiracy theories. Contrary to common assumptions, belief in conspiracy theories has been prevalent throughout human history. We first illustrate historical incidents suggesting that societal crisis situations—defined as impactful and rapid societal change that calls established power structures, norms of conduct, or even the existence of specific people or groups into question—have stimulated belief in conspiracy theories. We then review the psychological literature to explain why this is the case. Evidence suggests that the aversive feelings that people experience when in crisis—fear, uncertainty, and the feeling of being out of control—stimulate a motivation to make sense of the situation, increasing the likelihood of perceiving conspiracies in social situations. We then explain that after being formed, conspiracy theories can become historical narratives that may spread through cultural transmission. We conclude that conspiracy theories originate particularly in crisis situations and may form the basis for how people subsequently remember and mentally represent a historical event.
What psychological factors drive the popularity of conspiracy theories that explain important events as secret plots by powerful and malevolent groups? What are the psychological consequences of adopting these theories? We review the current research, and find that it answers the first of these questions more thoroughly than the second. Belief in conspiracy theories appears to be driven by motives that can be characterized as epistemic (understanding one’s environment), existential (being safe and in control of one’s environment) and social (maintaining a positive image of the self and the social group). However, little research has investigated the consequences of conspiracy belief, and to date, this research does not indicate that conspiracy belief fulfills people’s motivations. Instead, for many people conspiracy belief may be more appealing than satisfying. Further research is needed to determine for whom, and under what conditions, conspiracy theories may satisfy key psychological motives.
Vaccine hesitancy has become the focus of growing attention and concern globally despite overwhelming evidence of the value of vaccines in preventing disease and saving the lives of millions of individuals every year.
Measuring vaccine hesitancy and its determinants worldwide is important in order to understand the scope of the problem and for the development of evidence-based targeted strategies to reduce hesitancy.
Two indicators to assess vaccine hesitancy were developed to capture its nature and scope at the national and subnational level to collect data in 2014: 1) The top 3 reasons for not accepting vaccines according to the national schedule in the past year and whether the response was opinion- or assessment-based and 2) Whether an assessment (or measurement) of the level of confidence in vaccination had taken place at national or subnational level in the previous 5 years.
The most frequently cited reasons for vaccine hesitancy globally related to (1) the risk-benefit of vaccines, (2) knowledge and awareness issues, (3) religious, cultural, gender or socio-economic factors. Major issues were fear of side effects, distrust in vaccination and lack of information on immunization or immunization services. The analysis revealed that 29% of all countries had done an assessment of the level of confidence in their country, suggesting that vaccine confidence was an issue of importance.
Monitoring vaccine hesitancy is critical because of its influence on the success of immunization programs. To our knowledge, the proposed indicators provide the first global snapshot of reasons driving vaccine hesitancy and depicting its widespread nature, as well as the extent of assessments conducted by countries.
Background:
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination targets high-risk HPV16/18 that cause 70% of all cancers of the cervix. In Australia there is a fully-funded, school-based National HPV Vaccination Program which has achieved vaccine initiation rate of 82% among age-eligible females. Improving HPV vaccination rates is important in the prevention of morbidity and mortality associated with HPV-related disease. This study aimed to identify factors and barriers associated with uptake of the HPV vaccine in the Australian Program.
Methods:
Between 2011 and 2014, females aged 18-25 years, living in Victoria, Australia who were offered HPV vaccination between 2007 and 2009 as part of the National HPV Vaccination Program, living in Victoria, Australia were recruited into a a young women's study examining effectiveness of the Australian National HPV Vaccination Program. Overall, 668 participants completed the recruitment survey, which collected data of participants' demographics and HPV knowledge. In 2015 these participants were invited to complete an additional supplementary survey on parental demographics and attitudes towards vaccinations.
Results:
In 2015, 417 participants completed the supplementary survey (62% response rate). Overall, 19% of participants were unvaccinated. In multivariate analyses, HPV vaccination was significantly associated with their being born in Australia (p<0.001), having completed childhood vaccinations (p<0.001) and their parents being main decision-makers for participants' HPV vaccination (p<0.001). The main reason reported for HPV non-vaccination was parental concern about vaccine safety (43%). Compared with HPV-vaccinated participants, those unvaccinated were significantly more likely to be opposed to all vaccines, including HPV vaccines (p<0.001) and were less likely to consider vaccinating their own children with all vaccines (p = 0.033), including HPV vaccines (p<0.001). Overall, 61% of unvaccinated participants reported that a recommendation from GPs would increase HPV vaccine acceptance.
Conclusions:
Attitudes towards general health, vaccinations in general, as well as HPV vaccines are important in HPV vaccine uptake. Long-term monitoring of the knowledge, attitude and beliefs towards HPV vaccination in the community is critical to ensure a continued high uptake of the vaccine and success of the program.
Influenza vaccination for health care personnel (HCP) is recommended particularly because it indirectly protects patients to contract the disease. Vaccinating can therefore be interpreted as a pro-social act. However, HCP vaccination rates are often far too low to prevent nosocomial infections. Effective interventions are needed to increase HCP’s influenza vaccine uptake. Here we devise a novel tool to experimentally test interventions that aim at increasing pro-socially motivated vaccine uptake under controlled conditions. We conducted a large-scale and cross-cultural experiment with participants from countries with either a collectivistic (South Korea) or individualistic (USA) cultural background. Results showed that pro-socially motivated vaccination was more likely in South Korea compared to the US, mediated by a greater perception of vaccination as a social act. However, changing the default of vaccination, such that participants had to opt-out rather than to opt-in, increased vaccine uptake in the US and therefore compensated for the lower level of pro-social vaccination. In sum, the present study provides both a novel method to investigate HCP influenza vaccination behavior as well as interventions to increase their vaccine uptake.
Objective:
Americans do not vaccinate nearly enough against Influenza (flu) infection, despite severe health and economic burden of influenza. Younger people are disproportionately responsible for transmission, but do not suffer severely from the flu. Thus, to achieve herd immunity, prosocial motivation needs to be a partial driver of vaccination decisions. Past research has not established the causal role of prosociality in flu vaccination, and the current research evaluates such causal relationship by experimentally eliciting prosociality through messages about flu victims.
Methods:
In an experimental study, we described potential flu victims who would suffer from the decision of others to not vaccinate to 3952 Internet participants across eight countries. We measured sympathy, general prosociality, and vaccination intentions. The study included two identifiable victim conditions (one with an elderly victim and another with a young victim), an unidentified victim condition, and a no message condition.
Results:
We found that any of the three messages increased flu vaccination intentions. Moreover, this effect was mediated by enhanced prosocial motives, and was stronger among people who were historical non-vaccinators. In addition, younger victim elicited greater sympathy, and describing identifiable victims increased general sympathy and prosocial motives.
Conclusions:
These findings provide direct experimental evidence on the causal role of prosocial motives in flu vaccination, by showing that people can be prompted to vaccinate for the sake of benefiting others.
This research examines the role of different forms of positive regard for the in-group in predicting beliefs in intergroup conspiracies. Collective narcissism reflects a belief in in-group greatness contingent on others’ recognition. We hypothesized that collective narcissism should be especially likely to foster out-group conspiracy beliefs. Positive yet non-narcissistic in-group positivity should predict a weaker tendency to believe in conspiracy theories. In Study 1 the endorsement of conspiratorial explanations of out-group actions was positively predicted by collective narcissism but negatively by non-narcissistic in-group positivity. Study 2 showed that the opposite effects of collective narcissism and non-narcissistic in-group positivity on conspiracy beliefs were mediated via differential perceptions of threat. Study 3 manipulated whether conspiracy theories implicated in-group or out-group members. Collective narcissism predicted belief in out-group conspiracies but not in-group conspiracies, while non-narcissistic in-group positivity predicted lower conspiracy beliefs, regardless of them being ascribed to the in-group or the out-group.
Although public endorsement of conspiracy theories is growing, the potentially negative societal consequences of widespread conspiracy ideation remain unclear. While past studies have mainly examined the personality correlates of conspiracy ideation, this study examines the conspiracy-effect; the extent to which exposure to an actual conspiracy theory influences pro-social and environmental decision-making. Participants (N = 316) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions; (a) a brief conspiracy video about global warming, (b) an inspirational pro-climate video or (c) a control group. Results indicate that those participants who were exposed to the conspiracy video were significantly less likely to think that there is widespread scientific agreement on human-caused climate change, less likely to sign a petition to help reduce global warming and less likely to donate or volunteer for a charity in the next six months. These results strongly point to the socio-cognitive potency of conspiracies and highlight that exposure to popular conspiracy theories can have negative and undesirable societal consequences.
This chapter addresses two questions; how big is the "gap" between intentions and behavior, and what psychological variables might be able to "bridge" the intention-behavior gap? A meta-analysis of meta-analyses is used to quantify the gap and a conceptual analysis of intention-behavior discrepancies is presented. Research is described on the extent to which four groups of variables-behavior type, intention type, properties of intention, and cognitive and personality variables-moderate intention-behavior relations. Finally, the scope of the intention construct is discussed in the light of recent evidence concerning the role of habits and automaticity in human behavior.
The SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy concluded that vaccine hesitancy refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. Vaccine hesitancy is complex and context specific, varying across time, place and vaccines. It is influenced by factors such as complacency, convenience and confidence. The Working Group retained the term 'vaccine' rather than 'vaccination' hesitancy, although the latter more correctly implies the broader range of immunization concerns, as vaccine hesitancy is the more commonly used term. While high levels of hesitancy lead to low vaccine demand, low levels of hesitancy do not necessarily mean high vaccine demand. The Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix displays the factors influencing the behavioral decision to accept, delay or reject some or all vaccines under three categories: contextual, individual and group, and vaccine/vaccination-specific influences.
Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Research dealing with various aspects of* the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1985,
1987) is reviewed, and some unresolved issues are discussed. In broad terms, the theory is
found to be well supported by empirical evidence. Intentions to perform behaviors of different
kinds can be predicted with high accuracy from attitudes toward the behavior, subjective
norms, and perceived behavioral control; and these intentions, together with perceptions of
behavioral control, account for considerable variance in actual behavior. Attitudes, subjective
norms, and perceived behavioral control are shown to be related to appropriate sets of salient
behavioral, normative, and control beliefs about the behavior, but the exact nature of these
relations is still uncertain. Expectancy value formulations are found to be only partly
successful in dealing with these relations. Optimal rescaling of expectancy and value
measures is offered as a means of dealing with measurement limitations. Finally, inclusion of
past behavior in the prediction equation is shown to provide a means of testing the theory*s
sufficiency, another issue that remains unresolved. The limited available evidence concerning
this question shows that the theory is predicting behavior quite well in comparison to the
ceiling imposed by behavioral reliability.
The current studies investigated the potential impact of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs, and exposure to anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, on vaccination intentions. In Study 1, British parents completed a questionnaire measuring beliefs in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories and the likelihood that they would have a fictitious child vaccinated. Results revealed a significant negative relationship between anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions. This effect was mediated by the perceived dangers of vaccines, and feelings of powerlessness, disillusionment and mistrust in authorities. In Study 2, participants were exposed to information that either supported or refuted anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, or a control condition. Results revealed that participants who had been exposed to material supporting anti-vaccine conspiracy theories showed less intention to vaccinate than those in the anti-conspiracy condition or controls. This effect was mediated by the same variables as in Study 1. These findings point to the potentially detrimental consequences of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, and highlight their potential role in shaping health-related behaviors.
The widespread prevalence and persistence of misinformation in contemporary societies, such as the false belief that there is a link between childhood vaccinations and autism, is a matter of public concern. For example, the myths surrounding vaccinations, which prompted some parents to withhold immunization from their children, have led to a marked increase in vaccine-preventable disease, as well as unnecessary public expenditure on research and public-information campaigns aimed at rectifying the situation.
We first examine the mechanisms by which such misinformation is disseminated in society, both inadvertently and purposely. Misinformation can originate from rumors but also from works of fiction, governments and politicians, and vested interests. Moreover, changes in the media landscape, including the arrival of the Internet, have fundamentally influenced the ways in which information is communicated and misinformation is spread.
We next move to misinformation at the level of the individual, and review the cognitive factors that often render misinformation resistant to correction. We consider how people assess the truth of statements and what makes people believe certain things but not others. We look at people’s memory for misinformation and answer the questions of why retractions of misinformation are so ineffective in memory updating and why efforts to retract misinformation can even backfire and, ironically, increase misbelief. Though ideology and personal worldviews can be major obstacles for debiasing, there nonetheless are a number of effective techniques for reducing the impact of misinformation, and we pay special attention to these factors that aid in debiasing.
We conclude by providing specific recommendations for the debunking of misinformation. These recommendations pertain to the ways in which corrections should be designed, structured, and applied in order to maximize their impact. Grounded in cognitive psychological theory, these recommendations may help practitioners—including journalists, health professionals, educators, and science communicators—design effective misinformation retractions, educational tools, and public-information campaigns.
• In this chapter, I describe some of my efforts during the past 30 years to accomplish this "impossible" task. I outline my general theory of basic values and the implications of this theory for the full range of prosocial behaviors. I first discuss the nature and content of the basic values that both motivate and inhibit prosocial behavior. I then explain the structure of congruent and conflicting relations among these values, analyzing how trade-offs between competing values in this structure affect prosocial behavior. I next examine the dynamic roots of this near-universal structure to clarify why particular values affect prosocial behavior as they do and follow with an exploration of the mechanisms that link values to prosocial behavior. I end the chapter with a set of studies that use values to predict a variety of prosocial behaviors and attitudes. My values theory concerns the basic values that people in all cultures are likely to recognize. It identifies 10 motivationally distinct values and specifies the conflicts (e.g., benevolence vs. power) and compatibilities (e.g., conformity, security) among them. The structure of values refers to these relations of conflict (opposition) and compatibility (congruence). Similar value structures exist across culturally diverse groups, suggesting that there is a universal organization of human motives. But even if the types of human motivation that values express and the structure of their relations are universal, individuals and groups differ substantially in the relative importance they attribute to particular values. That is, their value priorities or hierarchies differ. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)
• In this chapter, I describe some of my efforts during the past 30 years to accomplish this "impossible" task. I outline my general theory of basic values and the implications of this theory for the full range of prosocial behaviors. I first discuss the nature and content of the basic values that both motivate and inhibit prosocial behavior. I then explain the structure of congruent and conflicting relations among these values, analyzing how trade-offs between competing values in this structure affect prosocial behavior. I next examine the dynamic roots of this near-universal structure to clarify why particular values affect prosocial behavior as they do and follow with an exploration of the mechanisms that link values to prosocial behavior. I end the chapter with a set of studies that use values to predict a variety of prosocial behaviors and attitudes. My values theory concerns the basic values that people in all cultures are likely to recognize. It identifies 10 motivationally distinct values and specifies the conflicts (e.g., benevolence vs. power) and compatibilities (e.g., conformity, security) among them. The structure of values refers to these relations of conflict (opposition) and compatibility (congruence). Similar value structures exist across culturally diverse groups, suggesting that there is a universal organization of human motives. But even if the types of human motivation that values express and the structure of their relations are universal, individuals and groups differ substantially in the relative importance they attribute to particular values. That is, their value priorities or hierarchies differ. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)
This study presents the macroso- cial and macropsychological correlates of two cultural dimen- sions, Individualism-Collectivism and Hierarchy, based on a review of cross-cultural research. Correlations between the culture- level value scores provided by Hofstede, Schwartz and Trompenaars and nation-level indices confirm their criterion validity. Thus power distance and collectivism are correlated with low social development (HDI index), income differences (Gini index), the socio-political corrup- tion index, and the competitiveness index. The pre- dominantly Protestant societies are more individualist and egalitar- ian, the Confucianist societies are more collectivist; and Islamic soci- Résumé Cette étude présente les facteurs macro-sociaux et macro-psycholo- giques de deux dimensions cultu- relles, l'Individualisme-Collectivisme et la Hiérarchie ou Distance au Pouvoir, dimensions basées sur certaines révisions des recherches dans le domaine transculturel. Les corrélations entre les valeurs, au niveau culturel, fournies par Hofstede, Schwartz et Trompenaars, et des index socio-économiques confirment la validité de ces dimen- sions. La distance de pouvoir et le collectivisme sont associés au bas développement social (indice HDI), aux différences de revenus (indice Gini), à l'indice de corruption socio- politique et de compétitivité. Les sociétés majoritairement protes- tantes sont plus individualistes et égalitaires, les sociétés confucia- Mots-clés
Conspiracy theories are ubiquitous when it comes to explaining political events and societal phenomena. Individuals differ not only in the degree to which they believe in specific conspiracy theories, but also in their general susceptibility to explanations based on such theories, that is, their conspiracy mentality. We present the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire (CMQ), an instrument designed to efficiently assess differences in the generic tendency to engage in conspiracist ideation within and across cultures. The CMQ is available in English, German, and Turkish. In four studies, we examined the CMQ’s factorial structure, reliability, measurement equivalence across cultures, and its convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity. Analyses based on a cross-cultural sample (Study 1a; N = 7,766) supported the conceptualization of conspiracy mentality as a one-dimensional construct across the three language versions of the CMQ that is stable across time (Study 1b; N = 141). Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated cross-cultural measurement equivalence of the CMQ items. The instrument could therefore be used to examine differences in conspiracy mentality between European, North American, and Middle Eastern cultures. In Studies 2-4 (total N = 476), we report (re-)analyses of 3 datasets demonstrating the validity of the CMQ in student and working population samples in the UK and Germany. First, attesting to its convergent validity, the CMQ was highly correlated with another measure of generic conspiracy belief. Second, the CMQ showed patterns of meaningful associations with personality measures (e.g., Big Five dimensions, schizotypy), other generalized political attitudes (e.g., social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism), and further individual differences (e.g., paranormal belief, lack of socio-political control). Finally, the CMQ predicted beliefs in specific conspiracy theories over and above other individual difference measures.
The current research examined the role of values in guiding people’s responses to COVID-19. Results from an international study involving 115 countries (N = 61,490) suggest that health and economic threats of COVID-19 evoke different values, with implications for controlling and coping with the pandemic. Specifically, health threats predicted prioritization of communal values related to caring for others and belonging, whereas economic threats predicted prioritization of agentic values focused on competition and achievement. Concurrently and over time, prioritizing communal values over agentic values was associated with enactment of prevention behaviors that reduce virus transmission, motivations to help others suffering from the pandemic, and positive attitudes toward outgroup members. These results, which were generally consistent across individual and national levels of analysis, suggest that COVID-19 threats may indirectly shape important responses to the pandemic through their influence on people’s prioritization of communion and agency. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Background
As a neuroprogressive illness, depression is accompanied by brain structural abnormality that extends to many brain regions. However, the progressive structural alteration pattern remains unknown.
Methods
To elaborate the progressive structural alteration of depression according to illness duration, we recruited 195 never-treated first-episode patients with depression and 130 healthy controls (HCs) undergoing T1-weighted MRI scans. Voxel-based morphometry method was adopted to measure gray matter volume (GMV) for each participant. Patients were first divided into three stages according to the length of illness duration, then we explored stage-specific GMV alterations and the causal effect relationship between them using causal structural covariance network (CaSCN) analysis.
Results
Overall, patients with depression presented stage-specific GMV alterations compared with HCs. Regions including the hippocampus, the thalamus and the ventral medial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) presented GMV alteration at onset of illness. Then as the illness advanced, others regions began to present GMV alterations. These results suggested that GMV alteration originated from the hippocampus, the thalamus and vmPFC then expanded to other brain regions. The results of CaSCN analysis revealed that the hippocampus and the vmPFC corporately exerted causal effect on regions such as nucleus accumbens, the precuneus and the cerebellum. In addition, GMV alteration in the hippocampus was also potentially causally related to that in the dorsolateral frontal gyrus.
Conclusions
Consistent with the neuroprogressive hypothesis, our results reveal progressive morphological alteration originating from the vmPFC and the hippocampus and further elucidate possible details about disease progression of depression.
We examine how social contacts and feelings of solidarity shape experiences of loneliness during the COVID-19 lockdown in early 2020. From the PsyCorona database, we obtained longitudinal data from 23 countries, collected between March and May 2020. The results demonstrated that although online contacts help to reduce feelings of loneliness, people who feel more lonely are less likely to use that strategy. Solidarity played only a small role in shaping feelings of loneliness during lockdown. Thus, it seems we must look beyond the current focus on online contact and solidarity to help people address feelings of loneliness during lockdown. Finally, online contacts did not function as a substitute for face-to-face contacts outside the home—in fact, more frequent online contact in earlier weeks predicted more frequent face-to-face contacts in later weeks. As such, this work provides relevant insights into how individuals manage the impact of restrictions on their social lives.
Background: Despite being recommended by many medical organizations, the uptake rates of seasonal influenza vaccination among healthcare workers, including nurses, are still unsatisfactory. Considering the impact of cultural values on organizational behaviors, vaccination among nurses may also be influenced by cultural values via their impacts on socially oriented motivation and the acceptance of social influence.
Objectives: This study examined whether and in what way two individual-level cultural dimensions, collectivism and power distance, would influence vaccination via social benefits (i.e., self-and-clan protection and community protection) and social influence (i.e., authority advice, and family-and-peer advice), respectively, among nurses.
Design: A cross-sectional online survey.
Setting: An invitation to participate in the survey was sent to nurses using the contact list of a professional nursing organization in Hong Kong and by personal referrals.
Participants: A total of 1386 nurses (mean age = 37.82, SD = 10.36; 89% women) completed the survey.
Methods: The survey included instruments on cultural values, perceived social benefits, and social influence, and questions regarding 2-year vaccination records. The mediation model was tested using structural equation modeling with bootstrapped samples. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine whether the mediation paths were different across different levels of demographic factors.
Results: The structural paths in the mediation model were different between nurses that had been vaccinated in the past and those who had not. In the adoption model (i.e., for nurses non-vaccinated in the past), the positive effects of collectivism on vaccination were mediated by self-and-clan protection and authority advice, whereas the negative effect of collectivism on vaccination was mediated by community protection. In addition, the positive effect of power distance on vaccination was mediated by authority advice. In the maintenance model (i.e., for nurses vaccinated in the past), except for the positive effect of collectivism on vaccination via authority advice, the other indirect effects were not significant. The direct effect of collectivism on vaccination was negative, whereas the direct effect of power distance on vaccination was positive.
Conclusions: Collectivism and power distance may guide how nurses attend to and process social information and subsequently influence their vaccination adoption behaviors. More research is needed to examine how cultural dimensions may influence vaccination maintenance and the applicability of the current findings to other cultures.
Background
In many regions of the world, vaccine hesitancy has become an important concern to public health. A key part of any effective solution to it is to gain an in-depth understanding of the problem: its scope, who holds hesitant views and for which reasons.
Methods
We adapt the original 10-item Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS), which targets parental attitudes, to a more generic version that captures general attitudes to vaccination. We use this adapted VHS in a sample of 1402 British citizens, selected from a large online panel (N > 1,000,000) based on quota for age, gender, educational attainment and region (response rate 43%). The existence of VHS subscales is evaluated via exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. We describe the extent of vaccine hesitancy in the sample, and use simple and multiple regression analysis to examine associations between respondent characteristics and vaccine hesitancy.
Results
Despite ambiguities in defining hesitancy, we found that a substantial part of our sample held hesitant views about vaccination, particularly for those items reflecting aversion to risks of side effects. Four percent responded in a hesitant way to all ten items and ninety to at least one of the ten items. In line with recent studies in other populations, we identified two subscales within the VHS: lack of confidence in the need for vaccines and aversion to the risk of side effects. We found significant associations between hesitancy and various respondent characteristics but the predictive power of these associations remained limited.
Conclusion
Our study suggests that whereas a substantial percentage of the British population is vaccine hesitant, these views are not clustered in typical demographic features. The small but important adaptation of the VHS to target general attitudes seems to result in highly similar psychometric characteristics as the original scale that exclusively targets parents. We provide suggestions for further validation of the VHS.
Objective:
Strengthening of antivaccination movements in recent decades has coincided with unprecedented increases in the incidence of some communicable diseases. Many intervention programs work from a deficit model of science communication, presuming that vaccination skeptics lack the ability to access or understand evidence. However, interventions focusing on evidence and the debunking of vaccine-related myths have proven to be either nonproductive or counterproductive. Working from a motivated reasoning perspective, we examine the psychological factors that might motivate people to reject scientific consensus around vaccination. To assist with international generalizability, we examine this question in 24 countries.
Methods:
We sampled 5,323 participants in 24 countries, and measured their antivaccination attitudes. We also measured their belief in conspiracy theories, reactance (the tendency for people to have a low tolerance for impingements on their freedoms), disgust sensitivity toward blood and needles, and individualistic/hierarchical worldviews (i.e., people's beliefs about how much control society should have over individuals, and whether hierarchies are desirable).
Results:
In order of magnitude, antivaccination attitudes were highest among those who (a) were high in conspiratorial thinking, (b) were high in reactance, (c) reported high levels of disgust toward blood and needles, and (d) had strong individualistic/hierarchical worldviews. In contrast, demographic variables (including education) accounted for nonsignificant or trivial levels of variance.
Conclusions:
These data help identify the "attitude roots" that may motivate and sustain vaccine skepticism. In so doing, they help shed light on why repetition of evidence can be nonproductive, and suggest communication solutions to that problem. (PsycINFO Database Record
Introduction:
The SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy developed a vaccine hesitancy measure, the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS). This scale has the potential to aid in the advancement of research and immunization policy but has not yet been psychometrically evaluated.
Methods:
Using a cross-sectional design, we collected self-reported survey data from a large national sample of Canadian parents from August to September 2016. An online questionnaire was completed in English or French. We used exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to identify latent constructs underlying parents' responses to 10 VHS items (response scale 1-5, with higher scores indicating greater hesitancy). In addition to the VHS, measures included socio-demographics items, vaccine attitudes, parents' human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine decision-making stage, and vaccine refusal.
Results:
A total of 3779 Canadian parents completed the survey in English (74.1%) or French (25.9%). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure best explained the data, consisting of 'lack of confidence' (M = 1.98, SD = 0.72) and 'risks' (M = 3.07, SD = 0.95). Significant Pearson correlations were found between the scales and related vaccine attitudes. ANOVA analyses found significant differences in the VHS sub-scales by parents' vaccine decision-making stages (p < .001). Independent samples t-tests found that the VHS sub-scales were associated with HPV vaccine refusal and refusing another vaccine (p < .001). Socio-demographic differences in the VHS were found; however, effect sizes were small (η2 < 0.02).
Conclusions:
The VHS was found to have two factors that have construct and criterion validity in identifying vaccine hesitant parents. A limitation of the VHS was few items that loaded on the 'risks' component and a lack of positively and negatively worded items for both components. Based on these results, we suggest modifying the wording of some items and adding items on risk perceptions.
This book explores the development of the goal of human solidarity at a time when the processes of globalisation offer the conditions for the development of a harmonious global community.
This article describes briefly the Hofstede model of six dimensions of national cultures: Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism/Collectivism, Masculinity/Femininity, Long/Short Term Orientation, and Indulgence/Restraint. It shows the conceptual and research efforts that preceded it and led up to it, and once it had become a paradigm for comparing cultures, research efforts that followed and built on it. The article stresses that dimensions depend on the level of aggregation; it describes the six entirely different dimensions found in the Hofstede et al. (2010) research into organizational cultures. It warns against confusion with value differences at the individual level. It concludes with a look ahead in what the study of dimensions of national cultures and the position of countries on them may still bring.