"Not Only a Matter of Personal Interest"-Vaccination Narratives and the Model of Moral Motives in China and Germany.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Selina Müller, Jonas Wachinger, Lirui Jiao, Till Bärnighausen, Simiao Chen, Shannon A McMahon
{"title":"\"Not Only a Matter of Personal Interest\"-Vaccination Narratives and the Model of Moral Motives in China and Germany.","authors":"Selina Müller, Jonas Wachinger, Lirui Jiao, Till Bärnighausen, Simiao Chen, Shannon A McMahon","doi":"10.1177/10497323241277107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Understanding vaccination decision-making processes is vital for guiding vaccine promotion within pandemic contexts and for routine immunization efforts. Vaccine-related attitudes influencing individual decision-making can be affected by broader cultural and normative contexts. We conducted 73 qualitative interviews with adults in China (<i>n</i> = 40) and Germany (<i>n</i> = 33) between December 2020 and April 2021 to understand COVID-19 vaccination intentions and preferences, and we analyzed transcripts using a five-step framework approach. During early analysis, we identified moral considerations in line with the tenets of the Model of Moral Motives (MMM) as a recurrent theme in the data. The MMM guided further analysis steps, particularly with its distinction between motives that are proscriptive (focus on avoiding harm by inhibiting \"bad\" behavior) and prescriptive (focus on actively seeking positive outcomes). Proscriptive vaccination arguments that compelled vaccination in our data included avoiding negative attention, being a law-abiding citizen, preventing harm to others, and protecting one's country. Prescriptive motives focused on self-efficacious behavior such as protecting the health of oneself and others via widespread but voluntary vaccination, prioritizing elderly and predisposed individuals for vaccination, and favoring a fair and equitable distribution of vaccines at the global level. In the interviews in China, both lines of arguments emerged, with a general tendency toward more proscriptive reasoning; interviews conducted in Germany tended to reflect more prescriptive motives. We encourage research and vaccine promotion practice to reflect moral considerations when aiming to understand public health preventive behavior and when developing tailored health promotion campaigns.</p>","PeriodicalId":48437,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Research","volume":" ","pages":"10497323241277107"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241277107","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Understanding vaccination decision-making processes is vital for guiding vaccine promotion within pandemic contexts and for routine immunization efforts. Vaccine-related attitudes influencing individual decision-making can be affected by broader cultural and normative contexts. We conducted 73 qualitative interviews with adults in China (n = 40) and Germany (n = 33) between December 2020 and April 2021 to understand COVID-19 vaccination intentions and preferences, and we analyzed transcripts using a five-step framework approach. During early analysis, we identified moral considerations in line with the tenets of the Model of Moral Motives (MMM) as a recurrent theme in the data. The MMM guided further analysis steps, particularly with its distinction between motives that are proscriptive (focus on avoiding harm by inhibiting "bad" behavior) and prescriptive (focus on actively seeking positive outcomes). Proscriptive vaccination arguments that compelled vaccination in our data included avoiding negative attention, being a law-abiding citizen, preventing harm to others, and protecting one's country. Prescriptive motives focused on self-efficacious behavior such as protecting the health of oneself and others via widespread but voluntary vaccination, prioritizing elderly and predisposed individuals for vaccination, and favoring a fair and equitable distribution of vaccines at the global level. In the interviews in China, both lines of arguments emerged, with a general tendency toward more proscriptive reasoning; interviews conducted in Germany tended to reflect more prescriptive motives. We encourage research and vaccine promotion practice to reflect moral considerations when aiming to understand public health preventive behavior and when developing tailored health promotion campaigns.

"不仅仅是个人利益问题"--中国和德国的疫苗接种叙事与道德动机模式。
了解疫苗接种决策过程对于指导大流行病背景下的疫苗推广和常规免疫工作至关重要。影响个人决策的疫苗相关态度可能会受到更广泛的文化和规范背景的影响。我们在 2020 年 12 月至 2021 年 4 月期间对中国(40 人)和德国(33 人)的成年人进行了 73 次定性访谈,以了解 COVID-19 疫苗接种意向和偏好。在早期分析过程中,我们根据道德动机模型(MMM)的原则确定了道德考虑因素作为数据中反复出现的主题。道德动机模型指导了进一步的分析步骤,尤其是它对规范性动机(侧重于通过抑制 "不良 "行为来避免伤害)和规定性动机(侧重于积极寻求积极结果)的区分。在我们的数据中,迫使人们接种疫苗的规范性动机包括避免负面关注、成为守法公民、防止伤害他人以及保护自己的国家。规范性动机侧重于自我效能行为,如通过广泛但自愿的疫苗接种来保护自己和他人的健康,优先为老年人和易感人群接种疫苗,以及支持在全球范围内公平、公正地分配疫苗。在中国进行的访谈中,这两种观点都有出现,但总体倾向于更多的规范性推理;在德国进行的访谈则倾向于反映更多的规范性动机。我们鼓励在研究和疫苗推广实践中,在了解公众健康预防行为和制定有针对性的健康推广活动时考虑道德因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
6.20%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH is an international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal for the enhancement of health care and to further the development and understanding of qualitative research methods in health care settings. We welcome manuscripts in the following areas: the description and analysis of the illness experience, health and health-seeking behaviors, the experiences of caregivers, the sociocultural organization of health care, health care policy, and related topics. We also seek critical reviews and commentaries addressing conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues pertaining to qualitative enquiry.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信