Vaccination Against COVID-19: A Longitudinal Trans-Theoretical Study to Determine Factors that Predict Intentions and Behavior

Motives for Vaccination Against COVID-19 Among the Ultra-orthodox Jewish Community in Israel

According to official data, the ultra-Orthodox group in Israel had the highest COVID-19 infection rate yet the lowest vaccination rate compared to the general population. The present study aimed to explore the rate of vaccine uptake as well as reported reasons for vaccine avoidance. In addition, we examined whether several protection motivation theory (PMT) components are good predictors of vaccine uptake. The components we addressed were: perceived susceptibility to the threat of COVID-19, perceived severity of the virus, and perceived efficiency and safety of the vaccine (i.e., response efficacy). The sample included 623 individuals (337 men) aged 18 + who were drawn from a database of a survey company specializing in the ultra-Orthodox community. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey between June 22, 2021, and July 7, 2021, approximately six months after the beginning of vaccination distribution. Results revealed that 65.8% of the participants (versus 89% of the general population) were vaccinated. Women were vaccinated at lower rates than men, whereas those in the Misnagdim ultra-Orthodox subgroup were vaccinated at higher rates than other subgroups in that community. The most prominent reasons for vaccine avoidance were perceived immunity based on prior infection by the virus and lack of trust in the vaccine's safety. In support of the PMT model, the perceived severity of the virus and the vaccine high efficacy were significant predictors of vaccine uptake. The study results call for better outreach to this community and specific psycho-education interventions tailored for its women.

Associations between vaccination and protective behaviors against COVID-19: transfer and redundancy effects as potential psychological mechanisms

This study aimed to investigate mechanisms explaining associations between vaccination and protective health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study used a secondary analysis of data from a longitudinal online study at four time points between April 2020 and March 2021. Two hundred and forty participants responded to questionnaires assessing adherence to multiple COVID-19 protection behaviors, COVID-19 vaccination, behavioral specific outcome expectancies and general healthy lifestyle. Statistical analyses included z statistic for differences between correlations and moderation analysis by the SPSS PROCESS macro. The correlation between initial adherence to protective behaviors prior to availability of vaccination and actual vaccination was positive, but when vaccination was available, the concurrent correlation between these behaviors was null. Healthy lifestyle and outcome expectancies moderated the association between vaccination and adherence to protection behaviors. These results were explained by a 'redundancy effect', conceptualized as beliefs that engagement in specific health behaviors justifies evading other health behaviors. The 'redundancy effect' cancelled the initial positive correlation between vaccination and protective health behaviors, produced by a 'transfer effect', based on similarities between the perceived purposes of those behaviors. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings were discussed.

Vaccination homophily in ego contact networks during the COVID-19 pandemic

Vaccine hesitancy is an inevitable risk for societies as it contributes to outbreaks of diseases. Prior research suggests that vaccination decisions of individuals tend to spread within social networks, resulting in a tendency to vaccination homophily. The clustering of individuals resistant to vaccination can substantially make the threshold necessary to achieve herd immunity harder to reach. In this study, we examined the extent of vaccination homophily among social contacts and its association with vaccine uptake during the COVID-19 pandemic in Hungary using a contact diary approach in two cross-sectional surveys. The results indicate strong clustering among both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. The most powerful predictor of vaccine uptake was the perceived vaccination rate within the egos' social contact network. Vaccination homophily and the role of the interpersonal contact network in vaccine uptake were particularly pronounced in the networks of close relationships, including family, kinship, and strong social ties of the ego. Our findings have important implications for understanding COVID-19 spread dynamics by showing that the strong clustering of unvaccinated individuals posed a great risk in preventing the spread of the disease.

Human PapillomaVirus vaccination in gay and bi men: Predictors, dynamic norms, and connectedness to the LGBT+ community

OBJECTIVES

This study tested social cognitive predictors of vaccination and a dynamic norms intervention for increasing HPV vaccination intentions in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM).

DESIGN

The study employed an experiment embedded in a cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

Participants (N = 217; gbMSM aged 18-45 in Ireland) provided cross-sectional data on sociodemographic constructs and constructs from the Theory of Planned Behaviour and the Health Belief Model. Unvaccinated participants (n = 94) were randomised to one of three experimental conditions (no norms, static norms, dynamic norms) and presented with information on HPV vaccine uptake in gbMSM in Ireland before reporting vaccination intentions.

RESULTS

In an adjusted logistic regression, significant predictors of vaccination included being in a relationship (OR = 8.69 [1.09, 38.91]), perceived susceptibility (OR = 1.11 [1.04, 1.19]), healthcare provider recommendation (OR = 107.24 [26.87, 427.99]), and perceived barriers (OR = 0.83 [.7, 0.98]). Adjusted linear regression models showed no significant differences in HPV vaccination intentions between no norms and static norms (B = -1.24 [-4.6, 2.12]), dynamic norms and static norms (B = -0.62 [-3.86, 2.63]), and dynamic norms and no norms (B = 0.62 [-2.74, 3.98]). Connectedness to the LGBT+ community did not moderate these differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The need for greater awareness of susceptibility, the impact of barriers, and the strong influence of a recommendation from a healthcare provider in predicting HPV vaccination among gbMSM are critical considerations for policymakers. Dynamic norm messaging may be less effective for vaccination than other behaviours more easily influenced by social norms. Efforts to implement dynamic norm-based interventions in gbMSM should consider the limited evidence of efficacy.

Association between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in a longitudinal panel survey of adults in the United States, 2021-2022

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been a major limiting factor to the widespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in the United States. A range of interventions, including mass media campaigns, have been implemented to encourage COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake. Such interventions are often guided by theories of behavior change, which posit that behavioral factors, including beliefs, influence behaviors such as vaccination. Although previous studies have examined relationships between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccination behavior, they come with limitations, such as the use of cross-sectional study designs and, for longitudinal studies, few survey waves. To account for these limitations, we examined associations between vaccination beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake using data from six waves of a nationally representative, longitudinal survey of U.S. adults (N = 3,524) administered over a nearly 2-year period (January 2021-November 2022). Survey-weighted lagged logistic regression models were used to examine the association between lagged reports of vaccination belief change and COVID-19 vaccine uptake, using five belief scales: (1) importance of COVID-19 vaccines, (2) perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, (3) COVID-19 vaccine concerns and risks, (4) normative beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination, and (5) perceptions of general vaccine safety and effectiveness. Analyses controlled for confounding factors and accounted for within-respondent dependence due to repeated measures. In individual models, all vaccination belief scales were significantly associated with increased COVID-19 vaccine uptake. In a combined model, all belief scales except the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination were significant predictors of vaccine uptake. Overall, belief scales indicating the importance of COVID-19 vaccines and normative beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination were the strongest predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Findings demonstrate that changes in vaccination beliefs influence subsequent COVID-19 vaccine uptake, with implications for the development of future interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination.

Dying to Fit In: How Interpersonal Networks Shape COVID-19 Health Outcomes Through Discussion and Social Norms

Research has repeatedly demonstrated the ability of social networks, interpersonal discussion, and perceived social norms to shape health-related outcomes. There are still substantial gaps, however, in understanding the theoretical mechanism that holds these components together, as well as the boundary conditions of their effects. Employing ego-network analysis with a representative sample of Illinois residents (N = 711) and focusing on the context of COVID-19 vaccine adherence, this study constructs a comprehensive framework to examine the direct, indirect, and conditional relationships linking social capital within networks, factual knowledge, and vaccination. Overall, the results point to the ability of tight-knit networks to influence knowledge and behavior for better or worse, depending on the composition of the network and its conversational valence. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Testing an extended theory of planned behaviour in predicting Covid-19 vaccination intention over the course of the pandemic: A three-wave repeated cross-sectional study

Background

Mass vaccination against Covid-19 has been recognised as the most effective strategy for overcoming the pandemic emergency and remains crucial in the ongoing efforts to mitigate the impact of the virus. The present study aimed to test the efficacy of an extended Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) model in predicting vaccination intention in three different phases of the pandemic. Understanding how psychological drivers of vaccine acceptance may have changed throughout the pandemic is essential for informing public health strategies and addressing vaccine hesitancy, even in the current post-pandemic context.

Methods

Using a repeated cross-sectional survey, we tested the hypothesised extended TPB model (intention, attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, anticipated affective reactions, risk perception, trust in science, trust in institutions and religiosity) across three independent samples: before (T1: November-December 2020; N = 657), during (T2: March-May 2021; N = 818), and after (T3: February-March 2022; N = 605) the start of the vaccination campaign in Italy.

Results

Results indicated significant differences between the time points in all investigated variables, pointing to a general trend of improvement in vaccine acceptability levels at T2 compared to T1, and a worsening at T3 compared to the other two time points. Interestingly, net of these differences, a multi-group Structural Equation Modeling analysis supported the invariance, across time, of the structural relationships examined within the extended TPB.

Conclusion

Findings demonstrated the efficacy of the TPB in predicting Covid-19 vaccination intention at different stages of the pandemic, suggesting that the model, in its extended version, represents a valuable framework for designing interventions aimed at promoting vaccine acceptance.

Impact of Actor's Initial State of Engagement in a Course of Action on Judgements of Post-decisional Regret and Joy: Revisiting Kahneman and Tversky (1982)

According to the phenomenon commonly known as action effect and vastly replicated across the judgment and decision-making literature, more regret is associated with decisions resulting from action than inaction. Action vs. inaction, however, might either refer to change vs. no change or doing something vs. not doing something. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of this variation in operationalization of action-inaction on the strength of action effect, for both positive and negative outcomes, across four different domains of employment, finance, education, and health. This was an experimental scenario-based study (N = 215) with four between-subjects conditions varying in outcome valence and the actor's initial state as either engaged or non-engaged in a particular course of action. Action effect was found to be stronger with respect to the initially engaged than the initially non-engaged decision-maker (ηp2 = .04), indicating that action as change results in a stronger action effect than action as doing something. The effect of the initial state was also moderated by domain. In addition, we both replicated and went beyond prior empirical literature regarding the effect of outcome valence and domain on action effect, with our findings being mostly consistent across joy and regret. Findings are discussed in light of the norm theory and its key concept of normality and contribute to the literature on moderators of action effect.

Measuring Motivation for COVID-19 Vaccination: An Application of the Transtheoretical Model

PURPOSE

In the United States (US), individuals vary widely in their readiness to get vaccinated for COVID-19. The present study developed measures based on the transtheoretical model (TTM) to better understand readiness, decisional balance (DCBL; pros and cons), self-efficacy (SE), as well as other motivators for change such as myths and barriers for COVID-19 vaccination.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional measurement development.

SETTING

Online survey.

SAMPLE

528 US adults ages 18-75.

MEASURES

Demographics, stage of change (SOC), DCBL, SE, myths, and barriers.

ANALYSIS

The sample was randomly split into halves for exploratory factor analysis using principal components analysis (EFA/PCA), followed by confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) to test measurement models. Correlation matrices were assessed and multivariate analyses examined relationships between constructs and sub-constructs.

RESULTS

For DCBL, EFA/PCA revealed three correlated factors (one pros, two cons) (n1 = 8, α = .97; n2 = 5, α = .93; n3 = 4, α = .84). For SE, two correlated factors were revealed (n1 = 12, α = .96; n2 = 3, α = .89). Single-factor solutions for Myths (n = 13, α = .94) and Barriers (n = 6, α = .82) were revealed. CFA confirmed models from EFAs/PCAs. Follow-up analyses of variance aligned with past theoretical predictions of the relationships between SOC, pros, cons, and SE, and the predicted relationships with myths and barriers.

CONCLUSION

This study produced reliable and valid measures of TTM constructs, myths, and barriers to understand motivation to receive COVID-19 vaccination that can be used in future research.

Associations of psychological inflexibility with posttraumatic stress disorder and adherence to COVID-19 control measures among refugees in Uganda: The moderating role of coping strategies

Refugees are vulnerable to developing mental health problems. The unprecedented appearance and rapid spread of COVID-19 exacerbated this vulnerability, especially in low-income countries where refugees survive on humanitarian aid and live in congested settlements. These appalling living conditions are a stressor, making adherence to COVID-19 control measures impractical and an additional psychological strain for refugees. The present study examined how psychological inflexibility is associated with adherence to COVID-19 control measures. A sample of 352 refugees from Kampala City and Bidibidi settlements were recruited. Refugees with high levels of psychological inflexibility reported higher PTSD symptom severity and low adherence to COVID-19 control measures. Moreover, PTSD severity mediated the association between psychological inflexibility and adherence, while avoidance coping moderated both direct and indirect effects. Interventions for reducing psychological inflexibility and avoidance coping may be essential in boosting adherence to measures relevant to the current and future status of the pandemic, along with other crises that refugees face.

Factors influencing attitudes toward vaccine safety and vaccine effectiveness amongst UK healthcare professionals prior to and at the time of COVID-19 vaccine rollout: Insights from the CoPE-HCP cohort study

Given the potential for nosocomial outbreaks, we must understand factors associated with negative vaccine attitudes amongst healthcare professionals (HCPs) before the rollout of a newly developed vaccine in a pandemic setting. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to study the impact of preexisting and prevailing mental health on United Kingdom HCPs' attitudes towards a newly developed COVID-19 vaccine. Two online surveys were distributed: first during vaccine development (July-September, 2020) and second during nationwide vaccine rollout (December 2020-March 2021). Mental health (PHQ-9 for depression; GAD-7 for anxiety) was assessed in both surveys. Negative attitude regarding vaccine safety and vaccine effectiveness was assessed at vaccine rollout. A series of logistic regression models were developed relating mental health (preexisting during vaccine development, ongoing and new-onset during rollout, and changes in symptom severity) to negative vaccine attitudes. In 634 HCPs, the presence of depression and/or anxiety during vaccine development was associated with elevated negative attitude towards vaccine safety (adj. OR 1.74 [95% CI 1.10-2.75], p = .02), but not vaccine effectiveness (1.13 [0.77-1.66], p = .53) at rollout. This was independent of other characteristics: age, ethnicity, professional role, and history of contracting COVID-19. Ongoing depression and/or anxiety (1.72 [1.10-2.69], p = .02) was associated with elevated negative attitude regarding vaccine effectiveness, but not vaccine safety. Worsened combined symptom scores over time were associated with elevated negative vaccine effectiveness attitudes (1.03 [1.00-1.05], p < .05), but not vaccine safety. Overall, adverse mental health can impact on HCPs' attitudes towards a newly developed vaccine. Further work is required to understand how this translates to vaccine uptake.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale and its association with actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Israel

BACKGROUND

The public's willingness to get vaccinated continues to be a source of concern. In this study we assessed the psychometric properties of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale (C19-VHS) as well as the association between the scale and self-reported past COVID-19 vaccination, approximately two weeks after the national vaccine distribution plan was launched in Israel.

METHODS

Participants were recruited via an online survey distributed through social media platforms and mailing lists. A total of 650 individuals completed the C19-VHS, the general vaccine hesitancy scale, and the fear of COVID-19 scale, and reported on demographic and pandemic-related characteristics. Principal component and Cronbach's alpha analyses were performed to assess the factor structure and reliability of the scale. Logistic regressions were employed to assess the scale's convergent and discriminative validity.

RESULTS

Two factors pertaining to "lack of confidence" (Factor 1) and "risk perception" (Factor 2) emerged. Cronbach's alpha indicated good reliability of Factor 1 (0.93), with lower reliability of Factor 2 (0.72). Younger age was associated with higher risk perception, with women showing less confidence and perceiving greater risks. Lower hesitancy significantly predicted actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake after adjusting for demographic and pandemic-related factors (OR = 1.16, 95%CI 1.11-1.21, p <.001). Older age, being a woman, and receiving the flu vaccine in the past year were also predictive of COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

DISCUSSION

The C19-VHS measure shows robust psychometric properties and is associated with actual vaccine uptake. Future studies assessing COVID-19 vaccination attitudes may utilize this scale to assess current COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in different contexts and cultures.

The Relationship between Information Dissemination Channels, Health Belief, and COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: Evidence from China

In the context of the ongoing global epidemic of COVID-19 and frequent virus mutations, the implementation of vaccine is the key to the prevention and control of the epidemic at this stage. In order to provide recommendations and evidence to support global epidemic prevention and control and vaccination efforts from the perspectives of health communication and individual psychological perceptions and to improve the vaccination rate of COVID-19 vaccine among appropriate populations, this study conducted a questionnaire survey in eight districts of Beijing and collected a total of 525 valid data points. A health belief model was used to examine the predictors of COVID-19 vaccination behavior, and the relationship between different COVID-19 vaccine information dissemination channels, residents' health beliefs, and propensity to vaccinate was analyzed. This study found the following: (1) among new media, interpersonal communication and traditional media communication channels, the new media channel had the largest number of audiences; (2) the personal health beliefs of audiences in the three information channels differed significantly, with the highest perceived benefits and lowest perceived barriers in the interpersonal communication channel and the highest perceived barriers in the new media communication channel; (3) the health belief model was a significant predictor, with perceived benefits and barriers being the most effective attitudinal variables for predicting vaccination intention. This study is valuable for advancing and improving vaccine communication diffusion research and promoting wider application of the health belief model and communication media in health communication topics.

Application of behavioral change theory and models on COVID-19 preventive behaviors, worldwide: A systematic review

Objective:

This systematic review aimed to assess the global application of behavioral change theory and models on COVID-19 preventive behaviors.

Methods:

This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses procedure. Databases such as PubMed/MIDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, EMB ASE, World Health Organization libraries, and Google Scholar were used to search all published articles in the area of application of behavioral change theory and model on COVID-19 preventive behavior until October 1, 2022. Studies published in another language other than English were excluded. Two independent reviewers did the article selection and quality check. A third reviewer asked if any disagreement were found.

Result:

Seventeen thousand four hundred thirty-six total articles were retrieved from all sources after the removal of duplicated articles and those not evaluating the outcome of interest were excluded. Finally, 82 articles done using behavioral change theory and model on COVID-19 preventive behaviors were included. The health belief model (HBM) and theory of planned behavior (TPB) were most commonly used in COVID-19 preventive behaviors. The constructs of most behavioral theories and models were significantly associated with COVID-19 preventive behaviors such as hand washing, face mask use, vaccine uptake, social isolation, self-quarantine, social distance, and use of sanitizers.

Conclusion:

This systematic review summarizes comprehensive evidence on the application of behavioral change theory and model on COVID-19 preventive behaviors globally. A total of seven behavioral change theories and models were included. The HBM and TPBs were most commonly used for COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Therefore, the application of behavioral change theory and models is recommended for developing behavioral change interventional strategies.

Characteristics of the Moveable Middle: Opportunities Among Adults Open to COVID-19 Vaccination

INTRODUCTION

Focusing on subpopulations that express the intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccination but are unvaccinated may improve the yield of COVID-19 vaccination efforts.

METHODS

A nationally representative sample of 789,658 U.S. adults aged ≥18 years participated in the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module from May 2021 to April 2022. The survey assessed respondents' COVID-19 vaccination status and intent by demographic characteristics (age, urbanicity, educational attainment, region, insurance, income, and race/ethnicity). This study compared composition and within-group estimates of those who responded that they definitely or probably will get vaccinated or are unsure (moveable middle) from the first and last month of data collection.

RESULTS

Because vaccination uptake increased over the study period, the moveable middle declined among persons aged ≥18 years. Adults aged 18-39 years and suburban residents comprised most of the moveable middle in April 2022. Groups with the largest moveable middles in April 2022 included persons with no insurance (10%), those aged 18-29 years (8%), and those with incomes below poverty (8%), followed by non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (7%), non-Hispanic multiple or other race (6%), non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native persons (6%), non-Hispanic Black or African American persons (6%), those with below high school education (6%), those with high school education (5%), and those aged 30-39 years (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A sizable percentage of adults open to receiving COVID-19 vaccination remain in several demographic groups. Emphasizing engagement of persons who are unvaccinated in some racial/ethnic groups, aged 18-39 years, without health insurance, or with lower income may reach more persons open to vaccination.

"I'm luckier than everybody else!": Optimistic bias, COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, vaccination status, and the link with the time spent online, anticipated regret, and the perceived threat

The catastrophic wave in the fall of 2021 drove Romania to the top of the list of dangerous COVID-19 infections, with the highest mortality rate in Europe. At the same time, Romania had one of the lowest vaccination rates. In this context, the present research aimed to explore the link between vaccination intention/status, optimistic bias, COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, the time spent online, and vaccination (anticipated) regret. Our convenience sample was formed by 408 adults aged 18-63 years (M = 22.11, SD = 6.18, 69.9 % females), who were distributed into four groups: (1) non-vaccinated who definitely refused COVID-19 vaccination, (2) non-vaccinated who considered COVID-19 vaccination, (3) non-vaccinated who reported their absolute willingness to COVID-19 vaccination, and (4) people who were COVID-19 vaccinated. We conducted our analyses separately, depending on these groups (i.e., vaccination intentions/status). Data were collected using an online questionnaire between November 10, 2021, and January 03, 2022. In our cross-sectional approach, following correlation and ANOVA analyses, among the observed patterns were (1) the significant negative relation between optimism bias and the perceived COVID-19 threat; (2) the positive link between anticipated regret, post-vaccination regret, age, and conspiracy beliefs. We discuss our findings considering their contribution to health policies and practices.

Cognitive predictors of COVID-19 mitigation behaviors in vaccinated and unvaccinated general population members

BACKGROUND

Given the long-term threat posed by COVID-19, predictors of mitigation behaviors are critical to identify. Prior studies have found that cognitive factors are associated with some COVID-19 mitigation behaviors, but few studies employ representative samples and no prior studies have examined cognitive predictors of vaccination status. The purpose of the present study was to examine associations between cognitive variables (executive function, delay discounting, and future orientation) and COVID-19 mitigation behaviors (mask wearing, social distancing, hand hygiene and vaccination) in a population representative sample.

METHODS

A population representative sample of 2,002 adults completed validated measures of delay discounting, future orientation, and executive function. Participants also reported frequency of mitigation behaviors, vaccination status, and demographics.

RESULTS

Future orientation was associated with more mask wearing (β = 0.160, 95 % CI [0.090, 0.220], p < 0.001), social distancing (β = 0.150, 95 % CI [0.070, 0.240], p < 0.001), hand hygiene behaviors (β = 0.090, 95 % CI [0.000, 0.190], p = 0.054), and a higher likelihood of being fully vaccinated (OR = 0.80, 95 % CI [0.670, 0.970], p = 0.020). Lower delay discounting predicted more consistent mask wearing (β = -0.060, 95 % CI[-0.120, -0.010], p = 0.032) and being fully vaccinated (OR = 1.28, 95 % CI [1.13, 1.44], p < 0.001), while more symptoms of executive dysfunction predicted less mask wearing (β = -0.240, 95 % CI [-0.320, -0.150] p < 0.001) and hand hygiene (β = -0.220, 95 % CI [-0.320, -0.130], p < 0.001), but not vaccination status (OR = 0.96, 95 % CI [0.80, 1.16], p = 0.690) or social distancing behaviors (β = -0.080, 95 % CI [-0.180, 0.020], p = 0.097). Overall, social distancing was the least well-predicted outcome from cognitive factors, while mask wearing was most well-predicted. Vaccination status was not a significant moderator of these effects of cognitive predictors on mitigation behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive variables predict significant variability in mitigation behaviors. regardless of vaccination status. In particular, thinking about the future and discounting it less may encourage more consistent implementation of mitigating behaviors.

Social cognition theories and behavior change in COVID-19: A conceptual review

The COVID-19 pandemic has had unprecedented health, economic, and social consequences worldwide. Although contact reductions and wearing face coverings have reduced infection rates, and vaccines have reduced illness severity, emergence of new variants of the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, and the shift from pandemic to endemic patterns of infection, highlights the importance of ongoing preventive behavior adherence to manage future outbreaks. Research applying social cognition theories may assist in explaining variance in these behaviors and inform the development of efficacious behavior change interventions to promote adherence. In the present article, we summarize research applying these theories to identify modifiable determinants of COVID-19 preventive behaviors and the mechanisms involved, and their utility in informing interventions. We identify limitations of these applications (e.g., overreliance on correlational data, lack of long-term behavioral follow-up), and suggest how they can be addressed. We demonstrate the virtue of augmenting theories with additional constructs (e.g., moral norms, anticipated regret) and processes (e.g., multiple action phases, automatic processes) to provide comprehensive, parsimonious behavioral explanations. We also outline how the theories contribute to testing mechanisms of action of behavioral interventions. Finally, we recommend future studies applying these theories to inform and test interventions to promote COVID-19 preventive behavior adherence.