The Psychology of COVID-19 Booster Hesitancy, Acceptance and Resistance in Australia.

COVID-19 booster vaccinations have been recommended as a primary line of defence against serious illness and hospitalisation. This study identifies and characterises distinct profiles of attitudes towards vaccination, particularly the willingness to get a booster dose. A sample of 582 adults from Australia completed an online survey capturing COVID-related behaviours, beliefs and attitudes and a range of sociodemographic, psychological, political, social and cultural variables. Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) identified three subgroups: Acceptant (61%), Hesitant (30%) and Resistant (9%). Compared to the Acceptant group, the Hesitant and Resistant groups were less worried about catching COVID-19, used fewer official COVID-19 information sources, checked the news less, were lower on the agreeableness personality dimension and reported more conservatism, persecutory thinking, amoral attitudes and need for chaos. The Hesitant group also reported checking the legitimacy of information sources less, scored lower on the openness to new experiences personality dimension and were more likely than the Resistant and Acceptant groups to report regaining freedoms (e.g., travel) and work requirements or external pressures as reasons to get a booster. The Resistant group were higher on reactance, held more conspiratorial beliefs and rated their culture as being less tolerant of deviance than the Hesitant and Acceptant groups. This research can inform tailored approaches to increasing booster uptake and optimal strategies for public health messaging.

News Media Coverage of Childcare: How U.S. Local TV News Framed the Problem Before and During the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Early care and education (ECE), or the care young children receive before entering formal schooling, can take multiple forms and is delivered in different settings, such as a center, church, or public school. Federal and state governments regularly fund ECE programs and policies through the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act (CCDBG). Many families, however, face significant challenges in access, cost, and quality of ECE programs, and ECE professionals report substantial challenges in the workplace (e.g., inadequate training) and beyond (e.g., low wages). Policies addressing issues related to ECE were proposed in 2021, but stalled on the U.S. federal policy agenda. In this study, we examine the ECE content of local television news coverage both for its representations of and for its potential influences on ECE policy agendas. We use data from local stations affiliated with the major networks (ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX) in media markets across the U.S., airing before and during the pandemic. We analyze elements of coverage that could affect public recognition of ECE-related issues, including how problems were framed (e.g., news coverage highlighting scandals or adverse events at ECE facilities) and solutions identified (e.g., public policy). We find that during 2018 and 2019, more coverage highlighted scandalous activity than public policy. The reverse was true, however, during the early period of the pandemic (from mid-March through June of 2020). Researchers and health professionals were seldom included in stories in either sample, and very few stories offered context about the benefits of ECE for health and well-being. These coverage patterns have implications for the public's understanding of ECE policy and the perceived need for reform. Policymakers, advocates, and researchers looking to advance support for ECE should consider ways to use local television news to present health and policy-relevant information to broad segments of the public.

Health-related quality of life of Australians during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic: a comparison with pre-pandemic data and factors associated with poor outcomes.

PURPOSE: Compare the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of the Australian general population during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) with pre-pandemic data (2015-2016) and identify pandemic-related and demographic factors associated with poorer HRQL. METHODS: Participants were quota sampled from an online panel by four regions (defined by active COVID-19 case numbers); then by age and sex. Participants completed an online survey about their HRQL [EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire and General Health Question (GHQ)], demographic characteristics, and the impact of the pandemic on daily life. HRQL scores were compared to a 2015-2016 reference sample using independent t-tests, adjusted for multiple testing. Associations between 22 pre-specified factors (pandemic-related and demographic) and 15 QLQ-C30 domains and GHQ, were assessed with multiple regressions. RESULTS: Most domains were statistically significantly worse for the 2020 sample (n = 1898) compared to the reference sample (n = 1979), except fatigue and pain. Differences were largest for the youngest group (18-29 years) for cognitive functioning, nausea, diarrhoea, and financial difficulties. Emotional functioning was worse for 2020 participants aged 18-59, but not for those 60 +. All models were statistically significant at p < .001; the most variance was explained for emotional functioning, QLQ-C30 global health/QOL, nausea/vomiting, GHQ, and financial difficulties. Generally, increased workload, negative COVID-19 impacts, COVID-19-related worries, and negative attitudes towards public health order compliance were associated with poorer HRQL outcomes. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, Australians reported poorer HRQL relative to a pre-pandemic sample. Risk factors for poor HRQL outcomes included greater negative pandemic-related impacts, poorer compliance attitudes, and younger age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR number is: ACTRN12621001240831. Web address of your trial: https://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12621001240831.aspx . Date submitted: 26/08/2021 2:56:53 PM. Date registered: 14/09/2021 9:40:31 AM. Registered by: Margaret-Ann Tait. Principal Investigator: Madeleine King.

Television airings of U.S. federal COVID-19 public service announcements in 2020 were associated with market-level political orientation, not COVID-19 rates.

Televised public service announcements were one of the ways that the U.S. federal government distributed health information about the COVID-19 pandemic to Americans in 2020. However, little is known about the reach of these campaigns or the populations who might have been exposed to the information these ads conveyed. We conducted a descriptive analysis of federally-affiliated public service announcement airings to assess where they were aired and the market-level social and demographic characteristics associated with the airings. We found no correspondence between airings and COVID-19 incidence rates from March to December 2020, but we found a positive association between airings and the Democratic vote share of the market, adjusting for other market demographic characteristics. Our results suggest that PSAs may have contributed to divergent exposure to health information among the U.S. public during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Picturing the populations who could benefit from health insurance access expansions: An analysis of US health insurance television ads airing in 2018

Efforts to expand access to health insurance in the United States are key to addressing health inequities and ensuring that all individuals have access to health care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Yet, attempts to expand public insurance programs, including Medicaid, continue to face opposition in state and federal policymaking. Limited policy success raises questions about the health insurance information environment and the extent that available information signals both available resources and the need for policy reform. In this study, we explore one way that consumers and policymakers learn about health insurance—television advertisements—and analyze content in ads that could contribute to an understanding of who needs health insurance or who deserves to benefit from policies to expand insurance access. Specifically, we implement a content analysis of health insurance ads airing throughout 2018 on broadcast television or national cable, focusing on the depictions of people in those ads. Our findings indicate that individuals depicted in ads for Medicaid plans differ from those in ads for non‐Medicaid plans. Groups that comprise large populations of current Medicaid enrollees, children and pregnant people, were more likely to appear in ads for non‐Medicaid plans than in ads for Medicaid plans. This has implications for potential enrollees' understanding of who is eligible as well as the general public's and policymakers' perspectives on who should be targeted for current or future policies. (English) [ FROM AUTHOR] Resumen Los esfuerzos para ampliar el acceso al seguro médico en los Estados Unidos son clave para abordar las desigualdades en salud y garantizar que todas las personas tengan acceso a la atención médica durante la pandemia de COVID‐19. Sin embargo, los intentos de expandir los programas de seguro público, incluido Medicaid, continúan enfrentándose a la oposición en la formulación de políticas estatales y federales. El éxito limitado de las políticas plantea interrogantes sobre el entorno de información del seguro de salud y la medida en que la información disponible señala tanto los recursos disponibles como la necesidad de reformar las políticas. En este estudio, exploramos una forma en que los consumidores y los formuladores de políticas aprenden sobre seguros de salud (anuncios de televisión) y analizamos el contenido de los anuncios que podrían contribuir a comprender quién necesita un seguro de salud o quién merece beneficiarse de las pólizas para expandir el acceso al seguro. Específicamente, implementamos un análisis de contenido de los anuncios de seguros de salud que se transmitieron a lo largo de 2018 en la televisión o el cable nacional, centrándonos en las representaciones de las personas en esos anuncios. Nuestros hallazgos indican que las personas representadas en los anuncios de planes de Medicaid difieren de las de los anuncios de planes que no son de Medicaid. Los grupos que comprenden grandes poblaciones de afiliados actuales de Medicaid, niños y personas embarazadas, tenían más probabilidades de aparecer en anuncios de planes que no son de Medicaid que en anuncios de planes de Medicaid. Esto tiene implicaciones para la comprensión de los afiliados potenciales sobre quién es elegible, así como para las perspectivas del público en general y de los formuladores de políticas sobre a quién deben dirigirse las políticas actuales o futuras. (Spanish) [ FROM AUTHOR] 摘要 为扩大美国健康保险覆盖范围所作的努力，是解决健康不公平问题和确保在COVID‐19大流行期间所有人都能获得医疗保健一事的关键。不过，扩大包括医疗补助（Medicaid）在内的公共保险计划的尝试，在州决策和联邦决策中继续面临阻力。有限的政策成功引发的一系列问题有关于健康保险信息环境，以及可用信息在多大程度上表明可用资源和政策改革之需。本研究中，我们探究了消费者和决策者了解健康保险的一种方式——电视广告——并分析广告中的内容，这些内容能有助于了解谁需要健康保险，或者谁应该从扩大保险范围的政策中受益。具体而言，我们对2018全年期间在广播电视或国家有线电视上播出的健康保险广告进行了内容分析，聚焦于这些广告中的人物描绘。我们的研究结果表明，医疗补助计划广告中描绘的个人与非医疗补助计划广告中的个人不同。包含大量当前医疗补助参与者、儿童和孕妇的群体更有可能出现在非医疗补助计划的广告中。这对潜在参保者对“谁有资格参保”的理解，以及公众和决策者对“当前或未来政策的目标对象应是谁”的看法具有启示。 (Chinese) [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of World Medical & Health Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell 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 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 . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Serving the public? A content analysis of COVID-19 public service announcements airing from March - December of 2020 in the U.S.

The objective of this research was to examine the health messages conveyed in public service announcements (PSAs) affiliated with the U.S. federal government response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. To do so, we conducted a content analysis of 132 federally-affiliated PSAs that were aired 170,820 times between March 12 and December 16, 2020. Using a quantitative coding instrument, we analyzed health behavioral guidance, messages about groups, people depicted, and other PSA features. We calculated frequencies of exposure to messages at the airing-level to account for the varying number of times each PSA was aired. Far more PSAs aired between March and June than between July and December. The most common health guidance was to stay at home (80.7%), practice social distancing (61.9%), and wash hands (54.5%); 36.1% of airings included guidance to wear masks. Few PSAs referenced group differences in risk of infection or transmission, nor did they reference scientific evidence or the future availability of vaccines. PSAs aired in 2020 missed opportunities to convey important information to the public and to center health equity in public communication.