Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine fatigue.

There is growing concern that Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine fatigue will be a major obstacle in maintaining immunity in the general population. In this study, we assessed vaccine acceptance in future scenarios in two conjoint experiments, investigating determinants such as new vaccines, communication, costs/incentives and legal rules. The experiments were embedded in an online survey (n = 6,357 participants) conducted in two European countries (Austria and Italy). Our results suggest that vaccination campaigns should be tailored to subgroups based on their vaccination status. Among the unvaccinated, campaign messages conveying community spirit had a positive effect (0.343, confidence interval (CI) 0.019-0.666), whereas offering positive incentives, such as a cash reward (0.722, CI 0.429-1.014) or voucher (0.670, CI 0.373-0.967), was pivotal to the decision-making of those vaccinated once or twice. Among the triple vaccinated, vaccination readiness increased when adapted vaccines were offered (0.279, CI 0.182-0.377), but costs (-0.795, CI -0.935 to -0.654) and medical dissensus (-0.161, CI -0.293 to -0.030) reduced their likelihood to get vaccinated. We conclude that failing to mobilize the triple vaccinated is likely to result in booster vaccination rates falling short of expectations. For long-term success, measures fostering institutional trust should be considered. These results provide guidance to those responsible for future COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.

Coronavirus vaccine hesitancy among unvaccinated Austrians: Assessing underlying motivations and the effectiveness of interventions based on a cross-sectional survey with two embedded conjoint experiments.

Background: To date, Austria is among the countries with the lowest coronavirus vaccination rates in Western Europe. It has announced the introduction of a general vaccine mandate but is experiencing an increasing societal polarization over this issue. We, therefore, aimed to provide evidence on the underlying motivations of vaccine hesitancy and evaluate what kinds of interventions - information, incentives, and rules - might increase vaccination readiness. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional survey with a sample of 1,543 unvaccinated Austrian residents in October 2021, including two embedded conjoint experiments. Findings: We screened 8,190 individuals to recruit the sample matching the Austrian micro-census. In experiment 1, easing rather than tightening of societal restrictions, a fixed monetary reward compared to a lottery and physicians' recommendations were associated with significantly higher intentions to get vaccinated. In experiment 2, standard approval by European or national authorities and simple information had a significant positive effect on vaccination propensity. Among the unvaccinated, fear of side effects, beliefs that comorbidities or the desire to have children would not allow vaccination, the assumption that the own immune system would provide sufficient protection, conspirational thinking (e.g., the refusal to participate in a 'large genetic experiment'), low trust in societal institutions, and spiritual beliefs were very common. Interpretation: While many unvaccinated showed a low propensity to become vaccinated, we identified a cluster of 195 (23% of the participants without missing values) that could potentially be reached by information and incentives, including people with heightened comorbidity rates or a desire for children. Funding: Vienna Science and Technology Fund.

Qualitative Interviews with Irregular Migrants in Times of COVID-19: Recourse to Remote Interview Techniques as a Possible Methodological Adjustment

Research designs require flexibility, and adjustments made to the designs do not always have to lead exclusively to disadvantages. In this research note, we would like to share our reflections on the impact of COVID-19 on the conduct of qualitative interviews with irregular migrants. Since these considerations were developed in close connection with one of our own projects, in which fieldwork is currently in the planning phase, we believe they may be relevant to similar projects. We include a brief remark on the current situation of irregular migrants in different (European) countries, as well as an assessment of the methodological feasibility of qualitative face-to-face interviews with irregular migrants and possible alternatives to this method such as remote and online interview formats. We conclude with insights on our recommendation to rely on a mixed-mode approach, which allows us to use various remote interview modes, thus providing the necessary flexibility to adapt to profound health and social crises such as COVID-19. Forschungsdesigns erfordern Flexibilität. Wichtig ist aber, dass Anpassungen nicht immer ausschließlich mit Nachteilen verbunden sein müssen. In dieser Forschungsnotiz möchten wir unsere Überlegungen zu den Auswirkungen von COVID-19 auf die Durchführung von qualitativen Interviews mit irregulären Migrant*innen veranschaulichen. Die Ausführungen wurden in Anlehnung an eines unserer eigenen Projekte entwickelt, bei dem sich die Feldarbeit derzeit in der Planungsphase befindet. Aufgrund ihrer möglichen Relevanz für ähnliche Projekte möchten wir unsere methodischen Überlegungen teilen. Wir liefern Anmerkungen zur aktuellen Situation irregulärer Migrant*innen in verschiedenen (europäischen) Ländern sowie eine Einschätzung der methodischen Durchführbarkeit von qualitativen Face-to-Face-Interviews mit irregulären Migrant*innen und möglicher Alternativen zu dieser Methode (insbesondere verschiedener Formen von Ferninterviews). Abschließend kommen wir auf unsere Entscheidung zu sprechen, mit einem Mixed-Mode-Ansatz zu arbeiten, der es uns erlaubt, verschiedene Fernbefragungsmodi zu nutzen, und damit die nötige Flexibilität zur Anpassung an den Verlauf derartiger gesundheitlicher und gesellschaftlicher Krisen bietet.

Policy-Relevant Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccination: Associations With Demography, Health Risk, and Social and Political Factors.

Background: Vaccination is considered to be a key public health intervention to end the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, the success of the intervention is contingent on attitudes toward vaccination and the design of vaccination policies. Methods: We conduct cross-sectional analyses of policy-relevant attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination using survey data of a representative sample of Austrian residents collected by the Austrian Corona Panel Project (ACPP). As outcomes, we examine the individual readiness to get vaccinated, the support for compulsory vaccinations, and the preference for making the vaccine available free of charge. The independent variables include demographics, objective and perceived health risks, and social and political factors. Results: Although there is broad public support for making the vaccine available free of charge, vaccine hesitancy and the opposition to a vaccine mandate are widespread. The protective function of the vaccine for the individual only motivates limited support for vaccinations. Opposition to COVID-19 vaccination also stems from a lack of sense of community and an ongoing politicization of the issue through conspiracy theories and party politics. Conclusion: We propose that overcoming the inherent free-rider problem of achieving sufficiently high vaccination rates poses a potential dilemma for policymakers: Given the politicized nature of the issue, they may find themselves having to choose between making vaccinations compulsory at political costs and a lingering pandemic at high costs for public health and the economy. We propose that promoting a sense of community and addressing potential practical constraints will be key in designing an effective COVID-19 vaccination policy.

From populism to the "plandemic": why populists believe in COVID-19 conspiracies

Why are COVID-19 conspiracy theories so prevalent? Particularly, why would some citizens ignore scientific evidence and common logic but, instead, be convinced that COVID-19 was a military experiment or spread by 5G signals? Why would they believe that Bill Gates had anything to do with it? In this contribution, we argue that populism is at the centre of these beliefs, as the complex nature of the COVID-19 pandemic makes it an ideal playground for populists' opposition to scientific and political elites. We use Structural Equation Models and panel survey data (n = 823) from the Austrian Corona Panel Project to test this argument. We demonstrate a negative correlation of populist attitudes with both trust in political and scientific institutions, which, in return, negatively relate to COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs. This results in an overall positive relationship of populist attitudes and conspiracy beliefs that is independent of political ideology. These findings have important implications for elite communication regarding virus mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)