Willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 might be systematically underestimated

IF 5 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
M. Rieger
{"title":"Willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 might be systematically underestimated","authors":"M. Rieger","doi":"10.4103/shb.shb_7_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Estimations of the willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 are important to plan the vaccination process and also to coordinate efforts to reach herd immunity.Aims and Objectives: In this article, we test standard measures of vaccination willingness against systematic biases caused by misunderstandings and lack of information. We use a survey among 730 persons living in Germany at the start of the official vaccination program. We elicit willingness to vaccinate first in a standard form, and then again after clarifications and after providing additional information. We find that a substantial number of persons who state initially that they do not want to get vaccinated does so simply because they want to let people with higher risk be vaccinated first. Appropriately rephrasing the question increases the willingness by around 5 percentage points. Information about herd immunity increases the willingness by additional 7%, confirming previous findings. Standard survey-based estimates of vaccination willingness might underestimate the real number of persons who want to get a vaccination. This number can be increased even further by simply providing appropriate information on herd immunity. In our sample this increased vaccination willingness from 71.4% to 83.6%.","PeriodicalId":34783,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Social Health and Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Social Health and Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/shb.shb_7_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

Estimations of the willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 are important to plan the vaccination process and also to coordinate efforts to reach herd immunity.Aims and Objectives: In this article, we test standard measures of vaccination willingness against systematic biases caused by misunderstandings and lack of information. We use a survey among 730 persons living in Germany at the start of the official vaccination program. We elicit willingness to vaccinate first in a standard form, and then again after clarifications and after providing additional information. We find that a substantial number of persons who state initially that they do not want to get vaccinated does so simply because they want to let people with higher risk be vaccinated first. Appropriately rephrasing the question increases the willingness by around 5 percentage points. Information about herd immunity increases the willingness by additional 7%, confirming previous findings. Standard survey-based estimates of vaccination willingness might underestimate the real number of persons who want to get a vaccination. This number can be increased even further by simply providing appropriate information on herd immunity. In our sample this increased vaccination willingness from 71.4% to 83.6%.
接种新冠肺炎疫苗的意愿可能被系统性低估
估计接种新冠肺炎疫苗的意愿对于规划疫苗接种过程以及协调实现群体免疫的努力都很重要。目的和目的:在这篇文章中,我们测试了疫苗接种意愿的标准衡量标准,以对抗由误解和信息缺乏引起的系统性偏见。我们在正式疫苗接种计划开始时对730名居住在德国的人进行了调查。我们首先以标准形式征求接种疫苗的意愿,然后在澄清和提供额外信息后再次征求。我们发现,相当多的人最初表示不想接种疫苗,只是因为他们想让风险较高的人先接种疫苗。适当地重新表述问题会使意愿提高约5个百分点。关于群体免疫的信息使意愿增加了7%,证实了之前的发现。基于标准调查的疫苗接种意愿估计可能低估了想要接种疫苗的真实人数。只要提供适当的群体免疫信息,这个数字就可以进一步增加。在我们的样本中,这将疫苗接种意愿从71.4%提高到83.6%。
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
Asian Journal of Social Health and Behavior
Asian Journal of Social Health and Behavior Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
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