Exploring and contextualizing the associations among political identification, vaccine risk and benefit perceptions, and vaccine acceptance.

There is considerable research on the influence of political partisanship on vaccine acceptance. However, the current study is one of the first to investigate how political identification is related to risk and benefit perceptions vis-à-vis vaccines. Based on survey data collected in the United States regarding four different vaccines at three points in time (n = 383 for April-June 2012; n = 364 for March 2020; n = 334 for April-May 2020), Democrats were found to have more positive attitudes toward vaccinations in general and hold more favorable risk and benefit perceptions of pandemic and routine vaccines overall compared to Republicans. However, the onset of a pandemic can serve as an equalizing force and motivate similar risk and benefit perceptions across party lines, but this force can wane quickly when the information environment is politicized. For political partisans who are ideologically oriented to be more hesitant toward vaccines, two conditions can help sustain their favorable vaccine perceptions during a pandemic: (a) when they identify with the governing political party, and (b) when there are consistent reassurances of vaccine safety and effectiveness from their partisan leadership. Given that risk and benefit perceptions were found to be consistently associated with vaccine acceptance across contexts in this study, communication aimed at encouraging vaccinations should always address the risks and benefits of a vaccine in ways that are tailored for individuals with different political affiliations.

Do cognition and emotion matter? A study of COVID-19 vaccination decision-making in college students.

The unparalleled speed of COVID-19 vaccine development has necessitated an expansion of existing knowledge on vaccination decision-making. The current study explored (1) how cognitions and emotions shaped college students' COVID-19 vaccination decisions, and (2) where vaccination-inclined and vaccination-hesitant students converged and diverged in their decision-making process. Seventy-seven students participated in 26 focus groups to discuss their complex thoughts and feelings regarding COVID-19 vaccination, offering a more nuanced understanding of COVID-19 vaccination decision-making that has not been fully captured by quantitative studies. Thematic analysis found that vaccination-inclined participants and their hesitant counterparts reported differential patterns of positive and negative emotions, systematic appraisals, and heuristics in decision-making. Future research should investigate the roles of hope and relief, non-health-related benefits of vaccination, social trust, and interpersonal influence in vaccination decision-making.

Predicting Vaccination Intention and Benefit and Risk Perceptions: The Incorporation of Affect, Trust, and Television Influence in a Dual-Mode Model.

Major health behavior change models tend to consider health decisions as primarily resulting from a systematic appraisal of relevant beliefs, such as the perceived benefits and risks of a pharmacological intervention. Drawing on research from the disciplines of risk management, communication, and psychology, this study proposed the inclusion of a heuristic route in established theory and tested the direction of influence between heuristic and systematic process variables. Affect and social trust were included as key heuristics in the proposed dual-mode framework of health decision making. Furthermore, exposure to health-related coverage on television was considered potentially influential over both heuristic and systematic process variables. To test this framework, data were collected from a national probability sample of 584 adults in the United States in 2012 regarding their decision to vaccinate against a hypothetical avian flu. The results provided some support for the bidirectional influence between heuristic and systematic processing. Affect toward flu vaccination and trust in the Food and Drug Administration were found to be powerful predictors of vaccination intention, enhancing intention both directly and indirectly via certain systematic process variables. The direction of influence between perceived susceptibility and severity, on the one hand, and affect, on the other, is less clear, suggesting the need for further research. Contrary to the opinion of media critics, exposure to televised health coverage was negatively associated with the perceived risks of vaccination. Results from this study carry theoretical and practical implications, and applying this model to the acceptance of different health interventions constitutes an area for future inquiries.