Psychological reactance and vaccine uptake: a longitudinal study.

IF 2.4 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Psychology & Health Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-22 DOI:10.1080/08870446.2023.2190761

Iris A M Verpaalen, Simone M Ritter, Madelon L M van Hooff, Aart van Stekelenburg, Marieke L Fransen, Rob W Holland

{"title":"Psychological reactance and vaccine uptake: a longitudinal study.","authors":"Iris A M Verpaalen, Simone M Ritter, Madelon L M van Hooff, Aart van Stekelenburg, Marieke L Fransen, Rob W Holland","doi":"10.1080/08870446.2023.2190761","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: In most countries, vaccine uptake is a voluntary decision. If people experience threats to this freedom, for example, by pro-vaccination media campaigns or government pressure, psychological reactance may be induced. To regain freedom, the opposite behaviour (vaccine refusal) may become more attractive, forming a vaccination barrier. It remains unclear how state reactance fluctuates and how it relates to vaccination intention versus behaviour. Therefore, this pre-registered longitudinal study aimed to gain insight in the changes in state reactance during a COVID-19 vaccination programme and its relationship with vaccine uptake.Methods: A representative sample of Dutch adults under 60 completed questionnaires before being eligible for vaccination, shortly before they were invited for vaccination, and after the opportunity for vaccination.Results: Data were analysed using regression analyses (N = 1411). Reactance did not change as hypothesised, but remained stable over time. As hypothesised, reactance predicted lower subsequent vaccination intention. Controlling for intentions, however, reactance did not predict vaccine uptake. Furthermore, reactance predicted lower decision confidence about vaccination, except for people who strongly opposed vaccination.Conclusion: Reactance has a sustained role in anticipation of a vaccination decision. Although reactance seems to affect the process towards the decision, this does not determine the final choice.","PeriodicalId":20718,"journal":{"name":"Psychology & Health","volume":" ","pages":"84-104"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2023.2190761","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: In most countries, vaccine uptake is a voluntary decision. If people experience threats to this freedom, for example, by pro-vaccination media campaigns or government pressure, psychological reactance may be induced. To regain freedom, the opposite behaviour (vaccine refusal) may become more attractive, forming a vaccination barrier. It remains unclear how state reactance fluctuates and how it relates to vaccination intention versus behaviour. Therefore, this pre-registered longitudinal study aimed to gain insight in the changes in state reactance during a COVID-19 vaccination programme and its relationship with vaccine uptake.

Methods: A representative sample of Dutch adults under 60 completed questionnaires before being eligible for vaccination, shortly before they were invited for vaccination, and after the opportunity for vaccination.

Results: Data were analysed using regression analyses (N = 1411). Reactance did not change as hypothesised, but remained stable over time. As hypothesised, reactance predicted lower subsequent vaccination intention. Controlling for intentions, however, reactance did not predict vaccine uptake. Furthermore, reactance predicted lower decision confidence about vaccination, except for people who strongly opposed vaccination.

Conclusion: Reactance has a sustained role in anticipation of a vaccination decision. Although reactance seems to affect the process towards the decision, this does not determine the final choice.

查看原文本刊更多论文

心理抗拒与疫苗摄取：一项纵向研究。

目的：在大多数国家，接种疫苗是一项自愿决定。如果人们的这种自由受到威胁，例如来自支持接种疫苗的媒体运动或政府压力，就可能产生心理抗拒。为了重新获得自由，相反的行为（拒绝接种疫苗）可能变得更有吸引力，形成接种障碍。目前尚不清楚状态电抗是如何波动的，以及它与疫苗接种意图和行为之间的关系。因此，这项预先注册的纵向研究旨在深入了解COVID-19疫苗接种计划期间状态电抗的变化及其与疫苗摄取的关系。方法：60岁以下荷兰成年人的代表性样本在有资格接种疫苗前、被邀请接种疫苗前不久和有机会接种疫苗后完成了问卷调查。结果：数据采用回归分析（N = 1411）。电抗并没有像假设的那样改变，而是随着时间的推移保持稳定。正如假设的那样，抵抗预示着较低的后续疫苗接种意愿。然而，在控制了意向的情况下，抵抗力并不能预测疫苗的吸收。此外，除了强烈反对接种疫苗的人之外，抗拒预示着对疫苗接种的决策信心较低。结论：抗拒在疫苗接种决定的预期中具有持续的作用。虽然抗拒似乎会影响决策的过程，但这并不能决定最终的选择。

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

Psychology & Health Multiple-

CiteScore

7.30

自引率

3.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Psychology & Health promotes the study and application of psychological approaches to health and illness. The contents include work on psychological aspects of physical illness, treatment processes and recovery; psychosocial factors in the aetiology of physical illnesses; health attitudes and behaviour, including prevention; the individual-health care system interface particularly communication and psychologically-based interventions. The journal publishes original research, and accepts not only papers describing rigorous empirical work, including meta-analyses, but also those outlining new psychological approaches and interventions in health-related fields.