IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v301y2022ics0277953622001861.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An audit test evaluation of state practices for supporting access to and promoting Covid-19 vaccinations

Author

Listed:
  • Heinrich, Carolyn J.
  • Camacho, Sayil
  • Binsted, Kaitlin
  • Gale, Shadlan

Abstract

A field experiment, using a paired audit testing design with testers of different racial and language profiles, was conducted to document and evaluate individual encounters in inquiring about COVID-19 vaccinations in the U.S. states. Testers communicated with state health department and major vaccination site staff about obtaining the COVID-19 vaccine and assessed the extent to which evidence-informed communication tactics for encouraging take-up were employed. The audit testers included individuals representing Latinx identities, given research showing they face greater hardships in navigating vaccine infrastructure and place less trust in public immunization efforts. Data were collected in phone and electronic communications between mid-June and mid-August of 2021. Empirical analyses confirmed that states vary considerably in how clearly officials communicate vaccination requirements and procedures, and in what they ask of individuals before providing the opportunity to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. The Spanish-speaking tester was more likely to encounter negative or racialized language—primarily implicit in nature—such as calls abruptly ended (vs. attempting to secure language support) and requests for additional identification or personal information before continuing with vaccination registration. Examples of overtly negative or racist encounters included condescending comments about Latinx testers' identification (or perceived undocumented status) and the Spanish-speaking tester's communication in Spanish. Analysis of an index of good practices constructed from the audit data revealed that very few strategies for promoting vaccinations were regularly implemented. In regression analyses, an additional point on the good practices index predicted a 0.133 percentage point increase in the percent of the population receiving the first vaccine dose, suggesting the lack of implementation of these good practices may represent a missed opportunity to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates. We identified exemplars in the communications that the federal government could disseminate to rapidly improve state practices and the accessibility of accurate information on COVID-19 vaccination opportunities.

Suggested Citation

  • Heinrich, Carolyn J. & Camacho, Sayil & Binsted, Kaitlin & Gale, Shadlan, 2022. "An audit test evaluation of state practices for supporting access to and promoting Covid-19 vaccinations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:301:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622001861
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622001861
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114880?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. Tom Chang & Mireille Jacobson & Manisha Shah & Rajiv Pramanik & Samir B. Shah, 2021. "Financial Incentives and Other Nudges Do Not Increase COVID-19 Vaccinations among the Vaccine Hesitant," NBER Working Papers 29403, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Ray, Victor Erik & Herd, Pamela & Moynihan, Donald, 2020. "Racialized Burdens: Applying Racialized Organization Theory to the Administrative State," SocArXiv q3xb8, Center for Open Science.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Patrick Carlin & Brian E. Dixon & Kosali I. Simon & Ryan Sullivan & Coady Wing, 2022. "How Undervalued is the Covid-19 Vaccine? Evidence from Discrete Choice Experiments and VSL Benchmarks," NBER Working Papers 30118, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Alexander Karaivanov & Dongwoo Kim & Shih En Lu & Hitoshi Shigeoka, 2022. "COVID-19 vaccination mandates and vaccine uptake," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(12), pages 1615-1624, December.
    3. Holt, Stephen B & Vinopal, Katie M., 2021. "It's About Time: Examining Inequality in the Time Cost of Waiting," SocArXiv jbk3x, Center for Open Science.
    4. Reddinger, J. Lucas & Charness, Gary & Levine, David, 2022. "Prosocial motivation for vaccination," SocArXiv emj6v, Center for Open Science.
    5. Barber, Andrew & West, Jeremy, 2022. "Conditional cash lotteries increase COVID-19 vaccination rates," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Islam, Asad & Kusnadi, Gita & Rezki, Jahen & Sim, Armand & van Empel, Giovanni & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Zenou, Yves, 2023. "Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy Using Local Ambassadors: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Indonesia," IZA Discussion Papers 15899, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Ashley Sexton & Maria D. Tito, 2022. "The Vaccine Boost: Quantifying the Impact of the COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout on Measures of Activity," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2022-035, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    8. Irene Mussio & Angela C. M. Oliveira, 2022. "An (un)healthy social dilemma: a normative messaging field experiment with flu vaccinations," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Philipp Sprengholz & Luca Henkel & Robert Böhm & Cornelia Betsch, 2023. "Different Interventions for COVID-19 Primary and Booster Vaccination? Effects of Psychological Factors and Health Policies on Vaccine Uptake," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(2), pages 239-251, February.
    10. Hirani, Jonas Cuzulan & Wüst, Miriam, 2023. "Reminder Design and Childhood Vaccination Coverage," IZA Discussion Papers 15877, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Huang, Qian & Gilkey, Melissa B. & Thompson, Peyton & Grabert, Brigid K. & Dailey, Susan Alton & Brewer, Noel T., 2022. "Explaining higher Covid-19 vaccination among some US primary care professionals," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    12. Marta Serra-Garcia & Nora Szech, 2023. "Incentives and Defaults Can Increase COVID-19 Vaccine Intentions and Test Demand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 1037-1049, February.

    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:301:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622001861. 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.