Putting Emotions in the Health Belief Model: The Role of Hope and Anticipated Guilt on the Chinese's Intentions to Get COVID-19 Vaccination

The Yearlong Effect of COVID-19 on Food Safety: Consumer Practices and Perceptions Using Longitudinal Consumer Surveys and Focus Groups

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused many consumers in the United States to change their perceptions and food handling practices at the height of the pandemic. We used a quantitative-qualitative mixed-method approach to assess consumers' risk perceptions and food safety practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nine waves of surveys were distributed to an online consumer panel over a 13-month period (April 2020-May 2021), and four waves of focus groups were conducted (May-July 2020 and June 2021). While the pandemic elevated peoples' perceptions of risks related to food safety practices, many consumers were reverting to past behaviors by May 2021. Participants asserted high confidence in their food safety measures; however, they perceived a low risk of contracting COVID-19 from food. Contrasts in food handling became apparent when assessing different age groups; observations revealed that practices in households with high-risk individuals differed significantly from those without. Although not recommended, the practice of washing produce with soap was consistent, predicting a possible continuation of this practice over time. This study highlights various factors that food safety educators and policymakers need to consider for effective communication about risks associated with food safety practices in preparation for pandemics and other major health events.

COVID-19 Vaccine Information Exposure: The Effect of Online Authority vs. Non-Authority Sources on Beliefs, Emotions and Information Engagement Behaviors

Background/Objectives: Limited research has examined the theoretical linkages between exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information sources, vaccination-related beliefs, vaccination-induced emotions, and vaccine information engagement. Methods: An online survey was conducted with a national sample of adults (N = 630) residing in the U.S. to test these relationships, guided by the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) framework and the Health Belief Model. Results: Study findings showed that exposure to online authority vaccine information sources was positively related to vaccination-benefit beliefs and negatively related to vaccination-barrier beliefs, in addition to hopeful feelings connected to vaccination. Exposure to non-authority sources was positively associated with vaccination-barrier beliefs, hopeful and fearful feelings connected to vaccination, and vaccine information engagement. While vaccination-benefit beliefs and vaccination-barrier beliefs were negatively and positively linked to vaccine information engagement, respectively, these beliefs were each positively connected to hopeful feelings and fearful feelings toward vaccination in that order. Both hopeful and fearful feelings toward vaccination also emerged as positive correlates of vaccine information engagement. Conclusions: This study contributes to our understanding of how cognitive appraisals of and affective responses to risk information disseminated by different types of sources may be related to risk information engagement behavior in a public health crisis. Results bring evidence-based insights to both researchers and health professionals to better equip them to counter vaccine misinformation and reduce vaccination barriers.

The role of collectivism, liberty, COVID fatigue, and fatalism in public support for the zero-COVID policy and relaxing restrictions in China

BACKGROUND

China was the last country in the world to relax COVID-19 restrictions. A successful public health policy requires public support. This analysis examined the factors associated with Chinese support for zero-COVID and relaxing COVID-19 restrictions in China.

METHOD

Two online surveys were conducted among Chinese participants in mainland China on June 10-13 (N = 460) and December 2, 2022 (N = 450). These two samples were similar based on the participants' demographics.

RESULTS

The results revealed that the perceived health consequences of a COVID-19 policy, perceived norms of approving a COVID-19 policy, and hope positively predicted the participants' support for the COVID-19 policy. The results further showed that collectivism and fatalism positively predicted support for zero-COVID and negatively predicted support for relaxing restrictions. COVID fatigue was negatively associated with support for zero-COVID and positively associated with support for relaxing restrictions. Liberty positively predicted support for relaxing restrictions in June and negatively predicted zero-COVID in December 2023. It did not positively or negatively predict support for the policy adopted by the government.

CONCLUSION

Collectivism, liberty, COVID fatigue, and fatalistic beliefs are important considerations connected to public support for a COVID-19 policy. The role of liberty was more nuanced and depended on the survey's time and whether the government adopted the policy.

Campaign Governance and Partnerships: Unraveling COVID-19 Vaccine Promotion Efforts in China's Neighborhoods

Background

COVID-19 vaccine promotion helps counter vaccine hesitancy and raise vaccine acceptance. Therefore, the Chinese state created collaborative infrastructures of COVID-19 vaccine promotion programs to promote stakeholder engagement and unload the burden of policy practitioners. However, partnerships in COVID-19 vaccine promotion programs have been underrepresented.

Methods

To address this lacuna, we qualitatively explored how partnerships in the COVID-19 vaccine promotion campaign (CVPC) were organized in China's neighborhoods. Specifically, we recruited participants via personal networks, referrals from acquaintances, and snowballing approaches, and conducted the qualitative thematic analysis following interviews with 62 Chinese stakeholders.

Results

This study indicates that to promote partnerships in CVPCs, neighborhood managers formed leadership in CVPCs, expanded the collaborative network, trained Health Promotion Practitioners (HPPs), and coordinated with HPPs to shape partnership agreements, produced COVID-19 vaccine promotional materials and advertised COVID-19 vaccines via diverse media tools. Although coproduction of CVPCs to a certain extent promoted state-society interaction in neighborhoods and state responsiveness to public demands, partners' disagreements on strategies applied by states for promoting COVID-19 vaccines eroded partnerships in CVPCs.

Conclusion

To construct a robust partnership in CVPCs, depoliticizing CVPCs and creating shared values among stakeholders in CVPCs are expected. Our study will not only deepen global audiences' understanding of CVCPs in China but also offer potential neighborhood-level solutions for implementing local and global health promotion efforts.

Encouraging COVID-19 vaccination by focusing on anticipated affect: A scoping review

Objective

This study reviewed studies of the anticipated affect related with COVID-19 vaccination to understand gaps in currently available studies and practice implications.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and other multiple databases for English language articles of studies that investigated COVID-19 vaccination related anticipated affects.

Results

We identified seventeen studies. Thirteen studies focused anticipated regret from inaction (i.e., not vaccinated). Other studies focused anticipated regret from action (i.e., vaccinated), guilt from inaction, pride from action, and positive feelings from action. Eleven studies showed that anticipated regret from inaction was significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccination behavior or intention. Three of the 11 studies showed that anticipated regret from inaction was more strongly associated with vaccination behavior or intention than cognitive belief.

Conclusion

Most studies showed that positive associations between anticipated regret and COVID-19 vaccination outcomes. The use of messages that target cognitive beliefs as well as those that appeal to anticipated affect may be effective to promote COVID-19 vaccination. However, most studies employed a cross-sectional design and examined negative affect. Future studies should adopt an experimental design as well as examine positive affect.

How Well the Constructs of Health Belief Model Predict Vaccination Intention: A Systematic Review on COVID-19 Primary Series and Booster Vaccines

This systematic review synthesizes the findings of quantitative studies examining the relationships between Health Belief Model (HBM) constructs and COVID-19 vaccination intention. We searched PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and identified 109 eligible studies. The overall vaccination intention rate was 68.19%. Perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and cues to action were the three most frequently demonstrated predictors of vaccination intention for both primary series and booster vaccines. For booster doses, the influence of susceptibility slightly increased, but the impact of severity, self-efficacy, and cues to action on vaccination intention declined. The impact of susceptibility increased, but severity's effect declined sharply from 2020 to 2022. The influence of barriers slightly declined from 2020 to 2021, but it skyrocketed in 2022. Conversely, the role of self-efficacy dipped in 2022. Susceptibility, severity, and barriers were dominant predictors in Saudi Arabia, but self-efficacy and cues to action had weaker effects in the USA. Susceptibility and severity had a lower impact on students, especially in North America, and barriers had a lower impact on health care workers. However, cues to action and self-efficacy had a dominant influence among parents. The most prevalent modifying variables were age, gender, education, income, and occupation. The results show that HBM is useful in predicting vaccine intention.