IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v310y2022ics0277953622005834.html

COVID-19 booster uptake among US adults: Assessing the impact of vaccine attributes, incentives, and context in a choice-based experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Raman, Shyam
  • Kriner, Douglas
  • Ziebarth, Nicolas
  • Simon, Kosali
  • Kreps, Sarah

Abstract

Evidence shows that booster shots offer strong protection against the Omicron variant of COVID-19. However, we know little about why individuals would receive a booster compared to the initial decision to vaccinate. We investigate and assess the factors that affect individuals' reported willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine booster. This information can aid in tailoring public health messaging to communicate attributes that are associated with individuals’ attitudes toward the COVID-19 booster.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:310:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622005834
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622005834
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115277?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimaging," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    3. Min Ding & Rajdeep Grewal & John Liechty, 2005. "Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis," Framed Field Experiments 00139, The Field Experiments Website.
    4. Carlos E. Carpio & Ioana A. Coman & Oscar Sarasty & Manuel García, 2021. "COVID-19 Vaccine Demand and Financial Incentives," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 871-883, November.
    5. Barak Mizrahi & Roni Lotan & Nir Kalkstein & Asaf Peretz & Galit Perez & Amir Ben-Tov & Gabriel Chodick & Sivan Gazit & Tal Patalon, 2021. "Correlation of SARS-CoV-2-breakthrough infections to time-from-vaccine," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-5, December.
    6. Mickael Bech & Trine Kjaer & Jørgen Lauridsen, 2011. "Does the number of choice sets matter? Results from a web survey applying a discrete choice experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 273-286, March.
    7. Yi, Youjae, 1990. "The Effects of Contextual Priming in Print Advertisements," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(2), pages 215-222, September.
    8. Matthew Quaife & Fern Terris-Prestholt & Gian Luca Di Tanna & Peter Vickerman, 2018. "How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(8), pages 1053-1066, November.
    9. Sophia L. Pink & James Chu & James N. Druckman & David G. Rand & Robb Willer, 2021. "Elite party cues increase vaccination intentions among Republicans," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118(32), pages 2106559118-, August.
    10. 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.
    11. 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).
    12. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    13. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    14. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Berinsky, Adam J. & Huber, Gregory A. & Lenz, Gabriel S., 2012. "Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 351-368, July.
    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. Kim, Sung Eun & Park, Jong Hee & Rhee, Inbok & Yang, Joonseok, 2025. "What do aid recipients want? Public attitudes toward foreign aid in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    2. 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).
    3. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    4. 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).
    5. 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.
    6. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    7. Fumiya Uchikoshi & Hirofumi Miwa & Yoshikuni Ono, 2025. "Gendered Expectations for College Applications: Experimental Evidence from a Gender Inegalitarian Education Context," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 66(5), pages 1-27, August.
    8. Lindgren, Oskar & Jagers, Sverker C. & Lindvall, Daniel, 2026. "The impact of policy design on opposition to restrictive climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    9. Liza G. Steele & Laird Gallagher, 2025. "Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Refugees During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the U.S," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 2593-2627, December.
    10. Hsu Yumin Wang & Stefano Jud & Will Giles, 2025. "Does shaming make non-compliance with international court rulings costlier? Evidence from China," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2445-2453, December.
    11. Ahlback, Johan & Yeandle, Alexander, 2025. "What drives public trust in elections? Experimental evidence from Malawi," OSF Preprints xhuz5_v1, Center for Open Science.
    12. repec:plo:pone00:0232424 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Nela Mrchkovska & Nives Dolšak & Aseem Prakash, 2024. "Morality meets menu: investigating the impact of moral appeals on vegetarianism through a conjoint survey experiment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 1-19, March.
    14. Kelly Morrison, 2025. "Why voters (sometimes) punish repression," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2203-2220, December.
    15. Yuko KASUYA & Hirofumi MIWA & Yoshikuni ONO, 2022. "Why are There More Women in the Upper House?," Discussion papers 22094, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    16. Burak Sonmez & Kirils Makarovs & Nick Allum, 2023. "Public perception of scientists: Experimental evidence on the role of sociodemographic, partisan, and professional characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-20, July.
    17. Jaroslaw Kantorowicz & Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko & Gerdien de Vries, 2025. "Public perception of terrorism attacks: A conjoint experiment," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(2), pages 310-327, March.
    18. Akira Igarashi & Yoshinobu Kano & Hirofumi Miwa, 2025. "ChatGPT versus humans in judging discriminatory scenarios: experimental evidence from a Japanese context," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Austin J Knuppe, 2022. "Blowback or overblown? Why civilians under threat support invasive foreign intervention," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(4), pages 478-494, July.
    20. Tellez,Juan Fernando & Balcells,Laia, 2022. "Social Cohesion, Economic Security, and Forced Displacement in the Long-Run : Evidence from Rural Colombia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10019, The World Bank.
    21. Michael Blauberger & Soso Makaradze & Gabriele Spilker, 2026. "International sanctions and domestic backlash. Exploring public support towards the EU's rule of law enforcement," European Union Politics, , vol. 27(1), pages 60-87, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:310:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622005834. 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.