Search

Achieving sufficient COVID-19 vaccination coverage has been hindered in many areas by vaccine hesitancy. Many studies based on large survey samples have characterized vaccine refusal, but there are fewer in-depth qualitative studies that explore hesitant adoption: the middle-ground between vaccine acceptance and refusal, and how individuals may move across this continuum depending on their lived experience. For this paper, we use the narratives of 25 adults living in off-road, predominately Alaska Native communities to describe the complex decision-making processes undertaken by ' hesitant adopters', defined in our study as those who completed their initial COVID-19 series despite reporting hesitancy. Interviewees' stories help illustrate how hesitant adopters' decision-making processes involved making sense of information through interactions with trusted individuals, lived experiences, observations, emotions, and personal motivations. For the majority of these hesitant adopters' (n = 20, 80%) interpersonal interactions were key in helping to make the decision to get vaccinated. Over half of the interviewees (n = 14, 56%) described how conversations with individuals they trusted, including healthcare providers, family, friends, and interactions through their professional network made them feel safe. One third of the hesitant adopters (n = 7, 28%) attributed their decision to get vaccinated based on the influence of Alaska Native Elders including their knowledge, personal experiences, as well as being motivated by the desire to protect them. Independent research was also important to about a quarter of hesitant adopters (n = 6, 24%), and for these interviewees it was the process of gathering information on their own and learning from others, especially healthcare providers who could answer their questions and alleviate their concerns. This paper illustrates the temporality of vaccine decision-making: vaccine acceptance for those who are hesitant may be an ongoing process that is influenced by personal experience, relationships, and context. • Understanding hesitant adoption provides insights into increasing vaccine acceptance • In remote Alaska, Elders may influence the decisions community members make • Images and conversations reinforced narratives of safety and efficacy • Agency in information-seeking increased vaccine confidence [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines whether individualism weakens the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine eligibility expansions in the United States in 2021, and assesses the associated social benefits or costs associated with individualism. We construct a county-level composite individualism index as a proxy of culture and the fraction of vaccine eligible population as a proxy of vaccination campaign (mean: 41.34%). We estimate whether the COVID-19 vaccine eligibility policy is less effective in promoting vaccine coverage, reducing in COVID-19 related hospitalization and death using a linear two-way fixed effect model in a sample of 2866 counties for the period between early December 2020 and July 1, 2021. We also test whether individualism shapes people's attitudes towards vaccine using a linear probability model in a sample of 625,308 individuals aged 18–65 (mean age: 43.3; 49% male; 59.1% non-Hispanic white, 19.1% Hispanic, 12% African American; 5.9% Asian) from the Household Pulse Survey. The effects of expanded vaccine eligibility are diminished in counties with greater individualism, as evidenced by lower effectiveness in increasing vaccination rates and reducing outpatient doctor visits primarily for COVID-related symptoms and COVID deaths. Moreover, our results show that this cultural influence on attitudes towards vaccine is more pronounced among the less educated, but unrelated to race. Assuming an average level of vaccine eligibility policies and an average intensity of individualism across the nation, we calculate that the average social cost associated with an individualistic culture amid the pandemic is approximately $50.044 billion, equivalent to 1.32% of the total U.S. health care spending in 2019. Our paper suggests that strategies to promote public policy compliance should be tailored to accommodate cultural and social contexts. • We examine whether individualism weakens effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine policies. • The effects of vaccine policy are diminished in counties with greater individualism. • Individuals have less trust in COVID-19 vaccine in a more individualistic culture. • Strategies to promote policy compliance should be tailored to accommodate cultural contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has previously been modelled using data on intentions – expressed prior to vaccine availability. Once vaccines became widely available, it became possible to model hesitancy using actual vaccination uptake data. This paper estimates the determinants of the joint distribution of COVID-19 vaccination intentions (declared before the release of any vaccine) and actual vaccination take-up (when it was widely available across the age distribution). We use high quality longitudinal data (UK Household Longitudinal Study) collected during the pandemic in the UK, merged to a wide variety of individual characteristics collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our estimation draws on pre-Covid values of variables for a sample that includes 10,073 observations from the September 2021 wave. The contribution of this paper is to model hesitancy and uptake jointly. The work shows that people who might be regarded as marginalised in society (measured, before the pandemic began) are less likely to say that they intend to be vaccinated and they go on to also be more likely to actually remain unvaccinated. It also shows that there is a large positive correlation between the unobservable determinants of intention and of uptake. This high positive correlation has an important implication - that information campaigns can be reasonably well profiled to target specific groups on the basis of intention data alone. We also show that changing one's mind is not correlated with observable data. This is consistent with two explanations. Firstly, the new information available on the arrival of vaccines, that they are safe and effective, may be more optimistic than was originally assumed. Secondly, individuals may have been more pessimistic about the effects associated with infection before vaccines became available. • We use high quality longitudinal data collected during the pandemic in the UK. • The contribution of this paper is to model vaccine hesitancy and uptake jointly. • People who are marginalised in society are more likely to be hesitant and not vaccinated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccine hesitancy is a barrier to Covid-19 vaccine uptake and displays a social gradient, compounding health disparities. While social gradients are a vital concept in health, they flatten distinctions between types of disadvantaged community. This paper focuses on vaccine hesitance in post-industrial and de-industrialising coalfields. The social consequences of the decline of coal mining may present barriers to vaccine uptake. We ran parallel surveys in Wales (N = 4187) and US states overlapping with central Appalachia (N = 4864), to examine whether vaccine attitudes and uptake varied between areas with different coal mining histories. These surveys were accompanied by qualitative interviews of 36 residents of these coalfields to explore vaccination decisions and triangulate with survey data. Factor analysis identified four axes of attitudes in the survey data: vaccine confidence , covid scepticism , v accine individualism , and concerned confusion. These themes were echoed in the interviews. Vaccine confidence was lower; and covid scepticism, vaccine individualism, and concerned confusion higher, in residents of areas of Wales with greater mining extent and where pits closed during certain periods. Residents of former US coal counties had lower vaccine confidence and higher covid scepticism, while those in current coal counties had greater vaccine individualism and concerned confusion. In former US coal counties and Welsh areas where pits closed since 1980, vaccine uptake was lower. Differences could not be explained by respondents' income and education. In the interviews, norms of social solidarity were often invoked by vaccinated respondents, while unvaccinated respondents did not frame decisions in the context of the industrial history of their areas. The legacy of coal-mining's decline presents barriers to public health campaigns. We show evidence of this across two historically significant coalfields. Attention is needed to avert negative public health consequences of global energy transition. • Coalfields a distinct class of, often disadvantaged, community. • Industrial history may undermine trust in public health. • We find evidence of greater vaccine hesitancy on Welsh and Appalachian coalfields. • Coalfields may require specific public health campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the successful development of vaccines for COVID-19, attention turned to the problem of vaccine access. However, in contexts where vaccines are available, hesitancy remains a major problem. Informed theoretically by the scholarship on vaccine anxiety, this paper uses a qualitative research approach that included 144 semi-structured interviews to investigate how social and political dynamics shaped people's perspectives in particular environments in Ghana, Cameroon, and Malawi about COVID-19's viral spread and COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccines and the viral spread of COVID-19 are related to political tensions and class-related fractures in particular contexts, and how the public interprets COVID-19's viral spread and engages with vaccination is based on people's social and political environment and their experience. Subjectivities are also rooted in coloniality. Vaccine confidence goes beyond clinical and regulatory authority approvals, and encompasses forces that are economic, social, and political in nature. Thus, an exclusive focus on technical prescriptions for enhancing vaccine uptake will not achieve significant positive results. • Vaccines are related to political tensions and class-related fractures in particular settings. • Political context shapes how people view mandatory vaccination. • The body is a mirror of socio-political context. • Worries about getting COVID-19 vaccines cut across professional and income-related categories. • Distrust in vaccines has national and international dimensions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy poses a global health threat by potentially delaying the attainment of herd immunity to attenuate infection and transmission. Most governments across the world are engrossed with formulating strategies to surmount conservative group behavior such as vaccine hesitancy typical under risky and uncertain situations such as in the case of COVID-19. This paper examines herding behavior in vaccine hesitancy with a special focus on the moderating role of household access to health information from village health workers under different risk perceptions. We use the 2021 Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment Committee cross-section household national survey consisting of 13, 583 valid observations. Our major findings indicate that herding behavior plays a role in rural households' hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccine inoculation. Furthermore, whilst access to health information from village health workers reduces herding behavior in vaccine hesitancy, it does so more when the household perceives itself to be at high risk of contracting COVID-19. Analysing herding behavior in vaccine hesitancy can help policymakers develop more targeted vaccination strategies, such as promoting access to health information through channels like village health workers, especially for households at high risk of contracting COVID-19. • People follow the herd in vaccine hesitancy when the vaccine is fairly unknown. • Health information from village health workers reduces vaccine hesitancy. • Perceived high risk of infection increases acceptance of expert vaccination advice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The information set from which individuals make their decision on vaccination includes signals from trusted agents, such as governments, community leaders and the media. By implementing restrictions, or by relaxing them, governments can provide a signal about the underlying risk of the pandemic and indirectly affect vaccination take-up. Rather than focusing on measures specifically designed to increase vaccine acceptance, this paper studies how governments' non-pharmaceutical policy responses to the pandemic can modify the degree of preventive health behavior, including vaccination. To do so, we use repeated waves of a global survey on COVID-19 Beliefs, Behaviors and Norms covering 18 countries from October 2020 to March 2021. Controlling for the usual determinants, we explore how individuals' willingness to get vaccinated is affected by changes in government restriction measures (as measured by the Oxford Stringency Index). This relationship is mediated by individual characteristics, social norms (social pressure to conform with what most people do), and trust in government institutions. Our results point to a complex picture as the implementation of restrictions is associated with increased acceptance in some contexts and decreased acceptance in others. The stringency of government restrictions has significant positive correlations with vaccine acceptance in contexts of weak social norms of vaccine acceptance and lower trust in government. In countries or communities with tighter social norms and high trust in health authorities, vaccine acceptance is high but less sensitive to changes in policies. These results suggest that the effect of government policy stringency is stronger among individuals who report lower trust and weaker social norms of vaccine acceptance. • Reports results from the analysis of an online survey on health behaviors during the COVID-19 • Provides evidence on the relationship between vaccine acceptance and lockdown policies • Finds stricter non-pharmaceutical interventions are associated with higher vaccine acceptance • Shows that this association is stronger for individuals with lower trust in health authorities [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As Covid-19 spreads across the world, governments turn a hopeful eye towards research and development of a vaccine against this new disease. But it is one thing to make a vaccine available, and it is quite another to convince the public to take the shot, as the precedent of the 2009 H1N1 influenza illustrated. In this paper, we present the results of four online surveys conducted in April 2020 in representative samples of the French population 18 years of age and over (N = 5018). These surveys were conducted during a period when the French population was on lockdown and the daily number of deaths attributed to the virus reached its peak. We found that if a vaccine against the new coronavirus became available, almost a quarter of respondents would not use it. We also found that attitudes to this vaccine were correlated significantly with political partisanship and engagement with the political system. Attitudes towards this future vaccine did not follow the traditional mapping of political attitudes along a Left-Right axis. The rift seems to be between people who feel close to governing parties (Centre, Left and Right) on the one hand, and, on the other, people who feel close to Far-Left and Far-Right parties as well as people who do not feel close to any party. We draw on the French sociological literature on ordinary attitudes to politics to discuss our results as well as the cultural pathways via which political beliefs can affect perceptions of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. • Almost a quarter of the French population would not get vaccinated against COVID-19. • Attitudes are correlated with political partisanship and engagement with politics. • Attitudes do not follow the traditional separation between Left-wing and Right-wing. • Refusal is associated with proximity radical parties and to abstention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]