Dual decision-making routes for COVID-19 and influenza vaccines uptake in parents: A mixed-methods study

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Jiehu Yuan, Meihong Dong, Dennis Kai Ming Ip, Hau Chi So, Qiuyan Liao
{"title":"Dual decision-making routes for COVID-19 and influenza vaccines uptake in parents: A mixed-methods study","authors":"Jiehu Yuan,&nbsp;Meihong Dong,&nbsp;Dennis Kai Ming Ip,&nbsp;Hau Chi So,&nbsp;Qiuyan Liao","doi":"10.1111/bjhp.12789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Parental decision-making for children's uptake of a relatively novel vaccine and a more common vaccine could involve different processes. This study aimed to compare the psychological processes and the relative importance of psychological factors influencing parental decision-making for children's seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) and COVID-19 vaccination.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We adopted mixed-methods approach. Study 1 was a qualitative study involving 29 parents to explore and compare their decision-making processes for children's SIV and COVID-19 vaccination. In Study 2, data from 632 parents were collected longitudinally; then, machine learning was used to quantify the relative importance of factors identified in Study 1 that were relevant to parents' decision-making for childhood vaccination decisions. Alluvial plots were used to compare the predictability of parents' baseline intention for follow-up children's SIV and COVID-19 vaccination.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Study 1 revealed that parents used the influenza vaccine as an anchor to assess the COVID-19 vaccine's risks. Decision-making for children's SIV was habitual and rule-based, while for COVID-19 vaccination, it involved more deliberation influenced by negative situational cues like negative news and anecdotal experiences. Study 2 further found that, for COVID-19 vaccination, situation-varying factors including distressed emotional states and affective response to news were significant. While for SIV, past-year vaccination behaviour was a more important factor. Baseline intention reliably predicted children's SIV but not COVID-19 vaccination.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The convergence of qualitative and quantitative data highlighted the distinct decision-making strategies for these two vaccines. Targeting key factors in parental decisions can enhance the effectiveness of future vaccination campaigns.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48161,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Health Psychology","volume":"30 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjhp.12789","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjhp.12789","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Parental decision-making for children's uptake of a relatively novel vaccine and a more common vaccine could involve different processes. This study aimed to compare the psychological processes and the relative importance of psychological factors influencing parental decision-making for children's seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) and COVID-19 vaccination.

Design and Methods

We adopted mixed-methods approach. Study 1 was a qualitative study involving 29 parents to explore and compare their decision-making processes for children's SIV and COVID-19 vaccination. In Study 2, data from 632 parents were collected longitudinally; then, machine learning was used to quantify the relative importance of factors identified in Study 1 that were relevant to parents' decision-making for childhood vaccination decisions. Alluvial plots were used to compare the predictability of parents' baseline intention for follow-up children's SIV and COVID-19 vaccination.

Results

Study 1 revealed that parents used the influenza vaccine as an anchor to assess the COVID-19 vaccine's risks. Decision-making for children's SIV was habitual and rule-based, while for COVID-19 vaccination, it involved more deliberation influenced by negative situational cues like negative news and anecdotal experiences. Study 2 further found that, for COVID-19 vaccination, situation-varying factors including distressed emotional states and affective response to news were significant. While for SIV, past-year vaccination behaviour was a more important factor. Baseline intention reliably predicted children's SIV but not COVID-19 vaccination.

Conclusions

The convergence of qualitative and quantitative data highlighted the distinct decision-making strategies for these two vaccines. Targeting key factors in parental decisions can enhance the effectiveness of future vaccination campaigns.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Health Psychology
British Journal of Health Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
1.30%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The focus of the British Journal of Health Psychology is to publish original research on various aspects of psychology that are related to health, health-related behavior, and illness throughout a person's life. The journal specifically seeks articles that are based on health psychology theory or discuss theoretical matters within the field.
×
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