IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v272y2021ics0277953620308613.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can a COVID-19 vaccine live up to Americans’ expectations? A conjoint analysis of how vaccine characteristics influence vaccination intentions

Author

Listed:
  • Motta, Matt

Abstract

A vaccine for the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) could prove critical in establishing herd immunity. While past work has documented the prevalence and correlates of vaccine refusal, I assess how a less explored topic -- properties of vaccines themselves (e.g., national origin, efficacy, risk of side effects) -- might influence vaccination intentions. This information can help public health officials preempt differential intentions to vaccinate, and inform health communication campaigns that encourage vaccine uptake.

Suggested Citation

  • Motta, Matt, 2021. "Can a COVID-19 vaccine live up to Americans’ expectations? A conjoint analysis of how vaccine characteristics influence vaccination intentions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:272:y:2021:i:c:s0277953620308613
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113642
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620308613
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113642?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ewen Callaway, 2020. "The race for coronavirus vaccines: a graphical guide," Nature, Nature, vol. 580(7805), pages 576-577, April.
    2. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    3. Yaqub, Ohid & Castle-Clarke, Sophie & Sevdalis, Nick & Chataway, Joanna, 2014. "Attitudes to vaccination: A critical review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Callaghan, Timothy & Motta, Matthew & Sylvester, Steven & Lunz Trujillo, Kristin & Blackburn, Christine Crudo, 2019. "Parent psychology and the decision to delay childhood vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Nelson, J.C. & Bittner, R.C.L. & Bounds, L. & Zhao, S. & Baggs, J. & Donahue, J.G. & Hambidge, S.J. & Jacobsen, S.J. & Klein, N.P. & Naleway, A.L. & Zangwill, K.M. & Jackson, L.A., 2009. "Compliance with multiple-dose vaccine schedules among older children, adolescents, and adults: Results from a vaccine safety datalink study," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(S2), pages 389-397.
    6. Kenneth M. Winneg & Jo Ellen Stryker & Daniel Romer & Kathleen Hall Jamieson, 2018. "Differences Between Florida and the Rest of the United States in Response to Local Transmission of the Zika Virus: Implications for Future Communication Campaigns," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2546-2560, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barceló, Joan & Sheen, Greg Chih-Hsin & Tung, Hans H. & Wu, Wen-Chin, 2022. "Vaccine nationalism among the public: A cross-country experimental evidence of own-country bias towards COVID-19 vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    2. Daziano, Ricardo & Budziński, Wiktor, 2023. "Evolution of preferences for COVID-19 vaccine throughout the pandemic – The choice experiment approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    3. Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Howell, Christopher & Heinrich, Tobias, 2021. "Vaccine hesitancy, state bias, and Covid-19: Evidence from a survey experiment using Phase-3 results announcement by BioNTech and Pfizer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    4. Hess, Stephane & Lancsar, Emily & Mariel, Petr & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Song, Fangqing & van den Broek-Altenburg, Eline & Alaba, Olufunke A. & Amaris, Gloria & Arellana, Julián & Basso, Leonardo J. & Ben, 2022. "The path towards herd immunity: Predicting COVID-19 vaccination uptake through results from a stated choice study across six continents," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    5. Chu, Haoran & Liu, Sixiao, 2021. "Light at the end of the tunnel: Influence of vaccine availability and vaccination intention on people’s consideration of the COVID-19 vaccine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    6. Raman, Shyam & Kriner, Douglas & Ziebarth, Nicolas & Simon, Kosali & Kreps, Sarah, 2022. "COVID-19 booster uptake among US adults: Assessing the impact of vaccine attributes, incentives, and context in a choice-based experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    7. Mouter, Niek & de Ruijter, Annamarie & Ardine de Wit, G. & Lambooij, Mattijs S & van Wijhe, Maarten & van Exel, Job & Kessels, Roselinde, 2022. "“Please, you go first!” preferences for a COVID-19 vaccine among adults in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    8. S. Ong, Ardvin Kester & Prasetyo, Yogi Tri & Chuenyindee, Thanatorn & Young, Michael Nayat & Doma, Bonifacio T. & Caballes, Dennis G. & Centeno, Raffy S. & Morfe, Anthony S. & Bautista, Christine S., 2022. "Preference analysis on the online learning attributes among senior high school students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A conjoint analysis approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    9. Chiang, Chun-Fang & Kuo, Jason & Liu, Jin-Tan, 2022. "Cueing quality: Unpacking country-of-origin effects on intentions to vaccinate against COVID-19 in Taiwan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    10. Liu, Xin & Zhao, Ning & Li, Shu & Zheng, Rui, 2022. "Opt-out policy and its improvements promote COVID-19 vaccinations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    11. Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Howell, Christopher & Heinrich, Tobias & Motta, Matthew, 2022. "Investigating how historical legacies of militarized violence can motivate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Evidence from global dyadic survey," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 311(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Motta, Matthew, 2020. "Can a COVID-19 Vaccine Live up to Americans’ Expectations? A Conjoint Analysis of how Vaccine Characteristics Influence Vaccination Intentions," SocArXiv kxmw7, Center for Open Science.
    2. Milošević Đorđević, J. & Mari, S. & Vdović, M. & Milošević, A., 2021. "Links between conspiracy beliefs, vaccine knowledge, and trust: Anti-vaccine behavior of Serbian adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    3. Barceló, Joan & Sheen, Greg Chih-Hsin & Tung, Hans H. & Wu, Wen-Chin, 2022. "Vaccine nationalism among the public: A cross-country experimental evidence of own-country bias towards COVID-19 vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    4. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    5. Philipp Wassler & Giacomo Del Chiappa & Thi Hong Hai Nguyen & Giancarlo Fedeli & Nigel L. Williams, 2022. "Increasing vaccination intention in pandemic times: a social marketing perspective," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2022(1), pages 37-58, March.
    6. Joana Mendonça & Ana Patrícia Hilário, 2023. "Healthism vis-à-vis Vaccine Hesitancy: Insights from Parents Who Either Delay or Refuse Children’s Vaccination in Portugal," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-15, August.
    7. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    8. Naiya Patel & Moneba Anees & Reema Kola & Juan Acuña & Pura Rodriguez de la Vega & Grettel Castro & Juan G. Ruiz & Patria Rojas, 2019. "Association between Knowledge of Zika Transmission and Preventative Measures among Latinas of Childbearing Age in Farm-Working Communities in South Florida," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-11, April.
    9. Robert Kubinec, 2018. "Patrons or Clients? Measuring and Experimentally Evaluating Political Connections of Firms in Morocco and Jordan," Working Papers 1280, Economic Research Forum, revised 26 Dec 2018.
    10. E. Keith Smith & Dennis Kolcava & Thomas Bernauer, 2024. "Stringent sustainability regulations for global supply chains are supported across middle-income democracies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Vrânceanu, Alina & Dinas, Elias & Heidland, Tobias & Ruhs, Martin, 2023. "The European refugee crisis and public support for the externalisation of migration management," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 279441, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    12. repec:beo:swcetp:23-03 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Theiss Bendixen, 2020. "How cultural evolution can inform the science of science communication—and vice versa," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    14. Athey, Susan & Karlan, Dean & Palikot, Emil & Yuan, Yuan, 2022. "Smiles in Profiles: Improving Fairness and Efficiency Using Estimates of User Preferences in Online Marketplaces," Research Papers 4071, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Janne Tukiainen & Sebastian Blesse & Albrecht Bohne & Leonardo M. Giuffrida & Jan Jäässkeläinen & Ari Luukinen & Antti Sieppi, 2021. "What Are the Priorities of Bureaucrats? Evidence from Conjoint Experiments with Procurement Officials," EconPol Working Paper 63, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    16. Tulsi Ram Aryal & Masaru Ichihashi & Shinji Kaneko, 2022. "How strong is demand for public transport service in Nepal? A case study of Kathmandu using a choice-based conjoint experiment," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    18. Vincenzo Carrieri & Raffele Lagravinese & Giuliano Resce, 2021. "Predicting vaccine hesitancy from area‐level indicators: A machine learning approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(12), pages 3248-3256, December.
    19. Auerbach, Jan, 2022. "Productive Office and Political Elitism," MPRA Paper 114582, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Mohammad Wais Azimy & Ghulam Dastgir Khan & Yuichiro Yoshida & Keisuke Kawata, 2020. "Measuring the Impacts of Saffron Production Promotion Measures on Farmers’ Policy Acceptance Probability: A Randomized Conjoint Field Experiment in Herat Province, Afghanistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, May.
    21. Jamison, Amelia M. & Quinn, Sandra Crouse & Freimuth, Vicki S., 2019. "“You don't trust a government vaccine”: Narratives of institutional trust and influenza vaccination among African American and white adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 87-94.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:272:y:2021:i:c:s0277953620308613. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.