Visual policy narrative messaging improves COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

In the face of vaccine hesitancy, public health officials are seeking more effective risk communication approaches to increase vaccination rates. We test the influence of visual policy narratives on COVID-19 vaccination behavior through a panel survey experiment conducted in early 2021 (n = 3,900) and then 8 weeks later (n = 2,268). We examine the effects of three visual policy narrative messages that test the narrative mechanism of character selection (yourself, your circle, and your community) and a nonnarrative control on COVID-19 vaccine behavior. Visual risk messages that use narratives positively influence COVID-19 vaccination through serial mediation of affective response to the messages and motivation to get the COVID-19 vaccination. Additionally, character selection matters, as messages focusing on protecting others (i.e. your circle and your community) perform stronger than those of yourself. Political ideology moderated some of the effects, with conservative respondents in the nonnarrative control condition having a higher probability of vaccination in comparison to the protect yourself condition. Taken together, these results suggest that public health officials should use narrative-based visual communication messages that emphasize communal benefits of vaccinations.

Getting COVID-19: Anticipated negative emotions are worse than experienced negative emotions.

OBJECTIVE: When people think about negative events that may occur in the future, they tend to overestimate their emotional reactions, and these "affective forecasts" can influence their present behavior (Wilson and Gilbert, 2003). The present research examined affective forecasting for COVID-19 infection including the associations between emotions and preventive intentions and behavior. METHODS: In two studies, we compared individuals' anticipated emotions and recalled emotions for COVID-19 infection. Study 1 asked college students (N = 219) and Study 2 asked general adults (N = 401) to either predict their emotions in response to a future COVID-19 infection or to recall their emotions associated with a previous infection. RESULTS: In both studies, reliable differences in negative emotions emerged. Those who were predicting their feelings associated with a future infection anticipated more negative emotion than those who were recalling their feelings associated with a past infection reported. Greater negative emotion in both studies was significantly associated with being more likely to have been vaccinated as well as higher intentions to get the booster vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that compared to those who have had a COVID-19 infection, those who have not yet experienced infection anticipate they will experience greater negative emotion, and this may have implications for preventive behaviors. In general, these findings suggest that people may have an impact bias for COVID-19 infection.

Lack of clear national policy guidance on COVID-19 vaccines influences behaviors in pregnant and lactating women in Kenya.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is associated with a greater risk of maternal and newborn morbidity and maternal death. In Kenya, pregnant and lactating women (PLW) were ineligible to receive COVID-19 vaccines until August 2021. How shifts in policy influence vaccine behaviors, such as health worker recommendations and vaccine uptake, is not well documented. We conducted qualitative interviews with PLW, health workers, and policymakers in Kenya to understand how different stakeholders' perceptions of national policy regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy shaped vaccine behaviors and decision-making. Policymakers and health workers described pervasive uncertainty and lack of communication about the national policy, cited vaccine safety as their primary concern for administering COVID-19 vaccines to PLW, and expressed that PLW were inadequately prioritized in the COVID-19 vaccine program. PLW perceived the restrictive policy as indicative of a safety risk, resulting in vaccine hesitancy and potentially exacerbated inequities in vaccine access. These findings support the need for the development and dissemination of effective vaccine communication guidelines and the prioritization of PLW in COVID-19 vaccination policies and campaigns. To ensure PLW do not face the same inequities in future epidemics, data on infectious disease burdens and vaccine uptake should be collected systematically among pregnant women, and PLW should be included in future vaccine trials.

The Role of Psychological Factors and Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs in Influenza Vaccine Hesitancy and Uptake among Jordanian Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection and to lessen its severity is recommended among healthcare workers (HCWs). Health professionals have a higher risk of exposure to viruses and could transmit the influenza virus to vulnerable patients who are prone to severe disease and mortality. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the levels of influenza vaccine acceptance and uptake as well as its determinants, among Jordanian HCWs over the last influenza season of 2021/2022. This study was based on a self-administered electronic survey that was distributed in March 2022. Psychological determinants of influenza vaccine acceptance and vaccine conspiracy beliefs were assessed using the previously validated 5C scale questionnaire (confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation and collective responsibility) and the vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale. The study sample comprised a total of 1218 HCWs: nurses (n = 412, 33.8%), physicians (n = 367, 30.1%), medical technicians (n = 182, 14.9%), pharmacists (n = 161, 13.2%) and dentists (n = 87, 7.1%), among others. About two-thirds of the study sample expressed willingness to receive influenza vaccination if provided free of charge (n = 807, 66.3%), whereas less than one-third were willing to pay for the vaccine (n = 388, 31.9%). The self-reported uptake of the influenza vaccine in the last influenza season was 62.8%. The following factors were significantly associated with higher acceptance of influenza vaccination if provided freely, as opposed to vaccine hesitancy/rejection: male sex; physicians and dentists among HCW categories; higher confidence and collective responsibility; and lower complacency, constraints and calculation. Higher influenza vaccine uptake was significantly correlated with nurses and physicians among HCW categories, older age, a higher monthly income, higher confidence and collective responsibility, lower complacency and constraints and lower embrace of general vaccine conspiracy beliefs. The results of the current study can provide helpful clues to improve influenza vaccine coverage among HCWs in Jordan. Consequently, this can help to protect vulnerable patient groups and reserve valuable resources in healthcare settings. Psychological determinants appeared to be the most significant factors for vaccine acceptance and uptake, whereas the embrace of general vaccine conspiracy beliefs was associated with lower rates of influenza vaccine uptake, which should be considered in educational and interventional measures aiming to promote influenza vaccination.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Intention: Evidence from Chile, Mexico, and Colombia.

(1) Background: Although the evidence is consistent that vaccines for COVID-19 effectively prevent severe illness or death, the rapid development of vaccines has led to increased beliefs about possible negative consequences and conspiracy theories about the vaccine. Several factors influence whether or not people decide to be vaccinated. Some studies suggest that our perception of what significant others do and think influences our behavior. (2) Methods: This study evaluates the predictive role of beliefs about negative consequences of the COVID-19 vaccine, conspiracy beliefs about this vaccine, and social influence on the intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 in three Latin American and Caribbean countries: Chile, Mexico, and Colombia. Using convenience sampling, 2075 adults from Chile (48.3%), Mexico (27.6%), and Colombia (24.6%) participated by answering an online questionnaire with variables of interest. (3) Results: Despite the differences between countries, the results showed that the proposed model is invariant and explains between 56-66% of the COVID-19 vaccination intent. Specifically, controlling for age, socioeconomic status, political orientation, and educational level, we found that beliefs about the negative consequences of the COVID-19 vaccine were the main predictor followed by social influence. Beliefs in conspiracy theories did not predict vaccination intention (4) Conclusions: Considering these variables in campaigns to boost vaccination intention is discussed.