Drivers of Noncompliance With Vaccine Mandates—The Interplay Between Distrust, Rationality, Morality, and Social Motivation

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Katie Attwell, Hang Duong, Amy Morris, Leah Roberts, Mark Navin
{"title":"Drivers of Noncompliance With Vaccine Mandates—The Interplay Between Distrust, Rationality, Morality, and Social Motivation","authors":"Katie Attwell, Hang Duong, Amy Morris, Leah Roberts, Mark Navin","doi":"10.1111/rego.70018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"COVID‐19 amplified the issue of public resistance to government vaccination programs. Little attention has focused on people's moral reasons for noncompliance, which differ from—but often build upon—the epistemic claims they make about vaccine safety and efficacy, disease severity, and the trustworthiness of government. This study explores the drivers of noncompliance with the COVID‐19 vaccination program in Western Australia, using in‐depth interviews with refusers. Distrust in the government and concerns about safety, efficacy, and necessity (rationality) drive noncompliance when vaccination is voluntary. When governments mandate vaccines, rationales expand to include cost–benefit analyses of consequences, consideration of available alternatives, and moral justifications, with policytakers expressing “morality policy reactance” toward mandates as morality (rather than regulatory) policies. Our theoretical framework of vaccine noncompliance drivers shows distrust, rationality, and morality as interrelated and supported by social motivation. We consider policy implications and suggest holistic measures.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

COVID‐19 amplified the issue of public resistance to government vaccination programs. Little attention has focused on people's moral reasons for noncompliance, which differ from—but often build upon—the epistemic claims they make about vaccine safety and efficacy, disease severity, and the trustworthiness of government. This study explores the drivers of noncompliance with the COVID‐19 vaccination program in Western Australia, using in‐depth interviews with refusers. Distrust in the government and concerns about safety, efficacy, and necessity (rationality) drive noncompliance when vaccination is voluntary. When governments mandate vaccines, rationales expand to include cost–benefit analyses of consequences, consideration of available alternatives, and moral justifications, with policytakers expressing “morality policy reactance” toward mandates as morality (rather than regulatory) policies. Our theoretical framework of vaccine noncompliance drivers shows distrust, rationality, and morality as interrelated and supported by social motivation. We consider policy implications and suggest holistic measures.
不遵守疫苗规定的驱动因素——不信任、理性、道德和社会动机之间的相互作用
COVID - 19加剧了公众对政府疫苗接种计划的抵制问题。很少有人关注人们不遵守规定的道德原因,这些原因不同于——但往往建立在——他们对疫苗安全性和有效性、疾病严重性和政府可信度的认识论主张之上。本研究通过对拒绝者的深入访谈,探讨了西澳大利亚州不遵守COVID - 19疫苗接种计划的驱动因素。在自愿接种疫苗的情况下,对政府的不信任以及对安全性、有效性和必要性(合理性)的担忧导致了不遵守规定。当政府强制要求接种疫苗时,其理由扩展到包括对后果的成本效益分析、对可用替代方案的考虑和道德理由,决策者对强制要求表示“道德政策抗拒”,认为这是道德(而不是监管)政策。我们关于疫苗不合规驱动因素的理论框架表明,不信任、理性和道德是相互关联的,并得到社会动机的支持。我们考虑政策影响并提出整体措施。
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
7.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信