A "step too far" or "perfect sense"? A qualitative study of British adults' views on mandating COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine passports

Do COVID-19 Vaccination Policies Backfire? The Effects of Mandates, Vaccination Passports, and Financial Incentives on COVID-19 Vaccination

Faced with the challenges of motivating people to vaccinate, many countries have introduced policy-level interventions to encourage vaccination against COVID-19. For example, mandates were widely imposed requiring individuals to vaccinate to work and attend school, and vaccination passports required individuals to show proof of vaccination to travel and access public spaces and events. Furthermore, some countries also began offering financial incentives for getting vaccinated. One major criticism of these policies was the possibility that they would produce reactance and thus undermine voluntary vaccination. This article therefore reviews relevant empirical evidence to examine whether this is indeed the case. Specifically, we devote separate sections to reviewing and discussing the impacts of three major policies that were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: vaccination mandates, vaccination passports, and the provision of financial incentives. A careful analysis of the evidence provides little support that these policies backfire but instead can effectively promote vaccination at the population level. The policies are not without limitations, however, such as their inability to mobilize those that are strongly hesitant to vaccines. Finally, we discuss how policy-level interventions should be designed and implemented to address future epidemics and pandemics.

From polarity to plurality: Perceptions of COVID-19 and policy measures in England and Scotland

AIM

The aim of this study was to uncover perspectives on the COVID-19 pandemic and the responses implemented by the UK and Scottish Governments to help control the spread of infection. Such understanding could help to inform future responses to pandemics at individual, community and national levels.

METHOD

Q methodology was used to elicit perspectives from people in England and Scotland with different experiences of the pandemic including public health officials, key workers, those on furlough, those who were unvaccinated or vaccinated to different levels, those who were 'shielding' because they were at higher risk and people with different scientific expertise. Participants rank-ordered phrases about different aspects of COVID-19 according to their viewpoint. Factor analysis was then conducted in conjunction with interview material from the same respondents.

RESULTS

A four-factor solution was statistically supported and was interpretable alongside the qualitative accounts of participants loading on these factors. These four perspectives are titled Dangerous and Unaccountable Leadership, Fear and Anger at Policy and Public responses, Governing Through a Crisis and Injustices Exposed.

CONCLUSION

The four perspectives demonstrate plurality and nuance in views on COVID-19 and the associated policies and restrictions, going beyond a binary narrative that has been apparent in popular and social media. The four perspectives include some areas of common ground, as well as disagreement. We argue that understanding the detail of different perspectives might be used to build cohesion around policy initiatives in future.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The development of the statement set, which is rank-ordered by participants in a Q study, and factor interpretations were informed by views of the general public. The statement set was initially developed using existing publicly available material based on members of the general public experiencing the pandemic first hand. It was then piloted with members of the public experiencing different challenges as a result of COVID-19 and the subsequent lockdown and updated based on feedback. Finally, interpretations of the identified factors were presented publicly and edited according to their feedback.

From speculative to real: community attitudes towards government COVID-19 vaccine mandates in Western Australia from May 2021 to April 2022

Many governments employed mandates for COVID-19 vaccines, imposing consequences upon unvaccinated people. Attitudes towards these policies have generally been positive, but little is known about how discourses around them changed as the characteristics of the disease and the vaccinations evolved. Western Australia (WA) employed sweeping COVID-19 vaccine mandates for employment and public spaces whilst the state was closed off from the rest of the country and world, and mostly with no COVID-19 in the community. This article analyses WA public attitudes during the mandate policy lifecycle from speculative to real. Qualitative interview data from 151 adults were analysed in NVivo 20 via a novel chronological analysis anchored in key policy phases: no vaccine mandates, key worker vaccine mandates, vaccine mandates covering 75% of the workforce and public space mandates. Participants justified mandates as essential for border reopening and, less frequently, for goals such as protecting the health system. However, public discourse focusing on 'getting coverage rates up' may prove counter-productive for building support for vaccination; governments should reinforce end goals in public messaging (reducing suffering and saving lives) because such messaging is likely to be more meaningful to vaccination behaviour in the longer term.

Vaccinating without complete willingness against COVID-19: Personal and social aspects of Israeli nursing students and faculty members

Soon after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic outbreak, it became clear that vaccination will be the most useful tool to combat the disease. Despite the apparent safety and efficacy of the developed anti-COVID-19 vaccines, relatively high percentages of the population worldwide refused to get vaccinated, including many health workers and health students. The present cross-sectional study examined the motives, attitudes, and personal characteristics of those who did not get vaccinated against COVID-19 or vaccinated without complete willingness among nursing students and nursing faculty members in Israel (n = 472). Results show that the vast majority of the study participants (97%) received at least one dose of the anti-COVID-19 vaccine. Nearly 37% of the participants indicated that they received the vaccine without complete willingness. As compared to faculty members, nursing students reported lower trust in the efficacy of the vaccine, perceived the COVID-19 pandemic as a health threat to a lesser extent, exhibited lower institutional and personal trust, and had higher levels of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. Non-Jewish participants were at risk of vaccinating without complete willingness. These findings underscore the need for developing evidence-based strategies to promote the safety and efficacy of the anti-COVID-19 vaccines in nursing schools.

An online RCT on behavioural expectations effects of COVID-19 certification policies in England

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of different types of COVID-19 certification policy on subsequent behavioural expectations.

Design

4 × 2 between-subjects pre-registered randomised controlled trial.

Method

In August 2022, participants (n = 2726) in England were presented with a scenario describing a rise in COVID-19 infections and the introduction of new protective measures. The protective measures described varied with regards to the setting (healthcare vs. recreational) and the type of policy (no certification vs. vaccination vs. vaccination or free Lateral Flow test vs. vaccination or Lateral Flow test at personal cost). Participants then answered questions on their expectations to receive another dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, to receive the seasonal influenza vaccine and to adhere to other protective behaviours following the announcement, as well as questions based on Self-Determination Theory, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and broader vaccine hesitancy.

Results

We found no main effects of setting or type of certification on expectation to receive the next dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, to receive the seasonal influenza vaccine, or to adhere to other protective measures, when controlling for baseline expectations.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that it is unlikely that the concept of certification, however it is framed, alters inclinations in the English population towards COVID-19 and seasonal flu vaccination or inclinations towards adhering to other protective behaviours within settings to which certification would apply. These findings are based on a hypothetical scenario and should be interpreted with caution.

Between nudges and mandates: The drivers of COVID-19 vaccination intentions and subsequent uptake in Russia

Despite high levels of morbidity and mortality, as well as the widespread availability of domestic vaccines, Russia demonstrated significantly low rates of vaccination throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. This research explores vaccination intentions before the start of the immunisation campaign and the consequent uptake in Russia after the introduction of mandatory vaccination policy in certain industries and proof-of-immunisation for social activities. Using a nationally representative panel dataset, we analyse factors behind individual vaccination decisions using binary and multinomial logistic regressions. Special attention is given to the effect of employment in industries with vaccine mandates and personal factors which determine individual "nudgeability" to vaccination (e.g., personality traits, beliefs, vaccine alertness, self-perceived vaccine availability etc.). Our results show that 49 per cent of the population received at least one shot of COVID-19 vaccine by autumn 2021 after the introduction of mandatory vaccination. Vaccination intentions before the rollout of the nationwide immunisation campaign are correlated with the consequent attitudes and uptake, although the prediction is not perfect. 40 percent of vaccine refusers eventually got vaccinated, while 16 percent of vaccine supporters turned into refusers, revealing the lack of promotion of vaccine safety and effectiveness. To a large extent, vaccination refusal and hesitance are explained by vaccine alertness. Vaccine mandates significantly increased the uptake in several affected industries, especially education. These results offer important insights for designing information policy, relevant for future vaccination campaigns.

The Moral Foundations of Vaccine Passports

The debate around vaccine passports has been polarising and controversial. Although the measure allows businesses to resume in-person operations and enables transitioning out of lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, some have expressed concerns about liberty violations and discrimination. Understanding the splintered viewpoints can aid businesses in communicating such measures to employees and consumers. We conceptualise the business implementation of vaccine passports as a moral decision rooted in individual values that influence reasoning and emotional reaction. We surveyed support for vaccine passports on a nationally representative sample in the United Kingdom in 2021: April (n = 349), May (n = 328), and July (n = 311). Drawing on the Moral Foundations Theory-binding (loyalty, authority, and sanctity), individualising (fairness and harm), and liberty values-we find that individualising values are a positive predictor and liberty values a negative predictor of support for passports, suggesting adoption hinges on addressing liberty concerns. Longitudinal analysis examining the trajectory of change in support over time finds that individualising foundations positively predict changes in utilitarian and deontological reasoning over time. In contrast, a fall in anger over time predicts increased support towards vaccine passports. Our study can inform business and policy communication strategies of existing vaccine passports, general vaccine mandates, and similar measures in future pandemics.

Consolidating a research agenda for vaccine mandates

A workshop on mandatory vaccination was pitched to the World Public Health Congress in 2019 and the resultant special issue was pitched to Vaccine in 2020. During this project, the COVID-19 pandemic pushed vaccine policy to the forefront of global public health policy, and the imposition of vaccine mandates prompted a new wave of scholarship in the field. This introductory article employs the heuristic of Lasswell's (1956) policy cycle to synthesise the findings of the articles in the special issue. It considers the temporal lifetime of mandates and highlights findings regarding: the emergence of mandates as a policy option, public support and policy instrument design, what matters in the implementation of mandates, and what we can learn from evaluating them. The second half of the paper categorizes the included papers in terms of what aspects of mandates they study and the methods they employ to do so, in order to formulate a guide for future researchers of vaccine mandates. Scholars study either speculative or existing mandates - research can address several stages of the policy cycle or just one of them, ranging from attitudinal research to implementation studies and impact studies. Historical and contextual studies that take deep dives into a particular mandate are a much needed resource for studying emerging mandates, too, and scoping and framework- building work will undoubtedly be valuable in understanding and appreciating the wealth of knowledge production in this growing field. This special issue can serve as a roadmap for a consolidation of this interdisciplinary research agenda, and provide a helpful resource for decisionmakers at this historical juncture.

Healthcare workers' attitudes on mandates, incentives, and strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A mixed methods study

Healthcare workers are a trusted health information source and are uniquely positioned to reduce the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this sequential exploratory mixed methods study was to understand attitudes of healthcare workers working in Massachusetts during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine utilization, including vaccine mandates and incentives. Fifty-two individuals completed one-on-one interviews between April 22^nd and September 7th, 2021. The survey was developed based on findings from the interviews; 209 individuals completed the online survey between February 17^th and March 23^rd, 2022. Both the interview and survey asked about attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine and booster mandates, incentives, and strategies to improve vaccination rates. Most participants were female (79%-interview, 81%-survey), Caucasian (56%, 73%), and worked as physicians (37%, 34%) or nurses (10%, 18%). Overall, nuanced attitudes regarding vaccine and booster mandates were expressed; many supported mandates to protect their patients' health, others emphasized personal autonomy, while some were against mandates if job termination was the consequence of declining vaccines. Similarly, views regarding vaccine incentives differed; some considered incentives helpful, yet many viewed them as coercive. Strategies believed to be most effective to encourage vaccination included improving accessibility to vaccination sites, addressing misinformation, discussing vaccine safety, tailored community outreach via trusted messengers, and one-on-one conversations between patients and healthcare workers. Healthcare workers' experiences with strategies to improve utilization of COVID-19 vaccines and boosters have implications for public health policies. Generally, efforts to improve access and education were viewed more favorably than incentives and mandates.

Barriers and facilitators to the future uptake of regular COVID-19 booster vaccinations among young adults in the UK

The evidence of waning immunity offered by COVID-19 vaccines suggests that widespread and regular uptake of routine COVID-19 booster vaccines will be needed. In order to understand the hesitancy toward COVID-19 boosters, we examined the barriers and facilitators to receiving regular COVID-19 boosters in a sample of young adults in the UK. A cross-sectional survey was completed by 423 participants (M = 22.8; SD = 8.6 years) and assessed intention to receive regular COVID-19 boosters, the 7C antecedents of vaccination (i.e. confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, collective responsibility, and compliance and conspiracy), and any previous experience of side-effects from COVID-19 vaccines. Participants also provided a free text qualitative response outlining their barriers and facilitators to receiving regular COVID-19 boosters. Overall, 42.8% of the sample were hesitant about receiving regular COVID-19 boosters. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that intention to accept future boosters was associated with having higher levels of confidence in, and compliance with, vaccines, lower levels of complacency, calculation and perceptions of constraints to vaccination, and having experienced less severe side effects from the COVID-19 vaccines. Qualitative responses highlighted the main barriers included experiencing side effects with previous COVID-19 vaccines and inaccessibility of vaccination services. Key facilitators included protecting the health of friends and family members, protecting personal health, and maintaining regular activities. Our findings suggest that interventions targeted at increasing booster uptake should address the experience of side effects while also emphasizing the positive vaccine benefits relating to the individual's health and the maintenance of their regular work and social activities.

Impact of Media Use on Chinese Public Behavior towards Vaccination with the COVID-19 Vaccine: A Latent Profile Analysis

(1) Background: research on vaccines has received extensive attention during epidemics. However, few studies have focused on the impact of media use on vaccination behavior and the factors influencing vaccination in groups with different media use degrees; (2) Method: Based on seven items related to media use, a total of 11,031 respondents were categorized by the frequency of media use by using latent profile analysis (LPA). Binary regression analysis was used to study the factors that influence the vaccination behaviors of people with different media use frequencies; (3) Results: All respondents were classified into the following three groups: media use low frequency (9.7%), media use general (67.1%), and media use high frequency (23.2%). Media use low frequency (β = −0.608, p < 0.001) was negatively associated with COVID-19 vaccination behavior. In the media use low frequency, analysis showed that “aged 41 years or older” β = 1.784, p < 0.001), had religious belief (β = 0.075, p < 0.05), were ethnic minorities (β = 0.936, p < 0.01) and had friends support (β = 0.923, p < 0.05) were associated with a preference to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. In the media use general, those who aged 41 years old and older (β = 1.682, p < 0.001), had major depression (β = 0.951, p < 0.05), had friends support (β = 0.048, p < 0.001) would be more likely to receive COVID-19 vaccination. However, respondents who live in towns (β = −0.300, p < 0.01) had lower behaviors to receive vaccination for COVID-19. In the media use high frequency, the respondents who aged 41 or older (β = 1.010, p < 0.001), were ethnic minorities (β = 0.741, p < 0.001), had moderate depression (β = 1.003, p < 0.05) would receive the vaccination for COVID-19 positively; (4) Conclusions: The more occluded the media use is, the less likely the respondents are to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Vaccination behavior is influenced by different factors in groups with different frequencies of media use. Therefore, the government and appropriate departments should make individualized and targeted strategies about COVID-19 vaccination and disseminate the vaccination information to different media use groups.

Attitudes to Vaccine Mandates among Late Adopters of COVID-19 Vaccines in Zimbabwe

Despite sufficient supply, <25% of the population in sub-Saharan Africa has received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine mandates have previously been effective in increasing vaccine uptake. Attitudes to COVID-19 vaccine mandates and vaccines for children in African populations are not well understood. We surveyed late-adopters presenting for COVID-19 vaccination one year after program initiation in Zimbabwe. Logistic regression models were developed to evaluate factors associated with attitudes to mandates. In total, 1016 adults were enrolled; 690 (67.9%) approved of mandating vaccination for use of public spaces, 686 (67.5%) approved of employer mandates, and 796 (78.3%) approved of mandating COVID-19 vaccines for schools. Individuals of lower economic status were twice as likely as high-income individuals to approve of mandates. Further, 743 (73.1%) participants indicated that they were extremely/very likely to accept vaccines for children. Approval of vaccine mandates was strongly associated with perceptions of vaccine safety, effectiveness, and trust in regulatory processes that approved vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy is an important driver of low vaccine coverage in Africa and can be mitigated by vaccine mandates. Overall, participants favored vaccine mandates; however, attitudes to mandates were strongly associated with level of education and socioeconomic status.