Knowledge, attitudes, and intentions regarding COVID-19 vaccination in the general population and the effect of different framing messages for a brief video on intentions to get vaccinated among unvaccinated individuals in the United States during July 2021

OBJECTIVE

To identify knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs (KABs) associated with COVID-19 vaccination intentions and assess the impact of vaccine-promoting messages on vaccination intentions.

METHODS

Our nationally representative survey measured KABs of COVID-19 vaccination and incorporated a randomized experiment to assess the impact of different framing messages for a video encouraging vaccination intentions among unvaccinated adults in the US. Multivariable multinomial logistic regression models were fitted to investigate the relationships of KABs, trust in public health authorities (PHAs), and vaccine confidence with vaccination intentions. Difference-in-difference estimation was conducted to assess the impact of framing messages for a video on unvaccinated individuals' vaccination intentions.

RESULTS

We observed that people with increasingly favorable vaccine KABs, trust in PHAs, and vaccine confidence were more likely to be vaccinated or intend to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Difference-in-difference estimates indicated a positive impact of exposure to the video on vaccination intentions while framing messages in some cases appeared to lower vaccination intentions. Associations between the video and vaccination intentions were more pronounced among Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx populations and Democrats; however, associations did not vary by trust in PHAs or vaccine confidence.

CONCLUSION

Videos that encourage people to get vaccinated may provide an efficient approach to nudge vaccine-hesitant individuals towards getting vaccinated. However, framing messages may negatively impact vaccination intentions and need to be developed carefully.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This study provides solid experimental evidence for the importance of tailoring message framing to the characteristics and experience of the audience, while cautioning potential negative impacts of framing that does not match its intended audience. Our findings are applicable to health communication strategies on the population level, such as mass media campaigns, and the use of framing for messages to encourage vaccination but may also be informative for healthcare professionals consulting hesitant individuals about COVID-19 vaccinations.

Message testing in India for COVID-19 vaccine uptake: What appeal and what messenger are most persuasive?

Few studies have examined the relationships between the different aspects of vaccination communication and vaccine attitudes. We aimed to evaluate the influence of three unique messaging appeal framings of vaccination from two types of messengers on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in India. We surveyed 534 online participants in India using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) from December 2021 through January 2022. We assessed participants' perception of three messaging appeals of vaccination - COVID-19 disease health outcomes, social norms related to vaccination, and economic impact of COVID-19 - from two messengers, healthcare providers (HCP) and peers. Using a multivariable multinomial logistic regression, we examined participants' ad preference and vaccine hesitancy. Participants expressed a high level of approval for all of the ads, with >80% positive responses for all questions across ads. Overall ads delivered by health care workers were preferred by a majority of participants in our study (n = 381, 71.4%). Ad preference ranged from 3.6% (n = 19) social norm/peer ad to 32.4% (n = 173) health outcome/HCP ad and half of participants preferred the health outcome ad (n = 279, 52.3%). Additionally, vaccine hesitancy was not related to preference (p = .513): HCP vs. peer ads (p = .522); message type (p = .284). The results suggest that all three appeals tested were generally acceptable, as well as the two messenger types, although preference was for the health care provider messenger and health outcome appeal. Individuals are motivated and influenced by a multitude of factors, requiring vaccine messaging that is persuasive, salient, and induces contextually relevant action.

What message appeal and messenger are most persuasive for COVID-19 vaccine uptake: Results from a 5-country survey in India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Ukraine

Effective strategies to encourage COVID-19 vaccination should consider how health communication can be tailored to specific contexts. Our study aimed to evaluate the influence of three specific messaging appeals from two kinds of messengers on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in diverse countries. We surveyed 953 online participants in five countries (India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Ukraine). We assessed participants’ perceptions of three messaging appeals of vaccination—COVID-19 disease health outcomes, social norms related to COVID-19 vaccination, and economic impact of COVID-19—from two messengers, healthcare providers (HCP), and peers. We examined participants’ ad preference and vaccine hesitancy using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. Participants expressed a high level of approval for all the ads. The healthcare outcome–healthcare provider ad was most preferred among participants from India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Ukraine. Participants in Kenya reported a preference for the health outcome–peer ad. The majority of participants in each country expressed high levels of vaccine hesitancy. However, in a final logistic regression model participant characteristics were not significantly related to vaccine hesitancy. These findings suggest that appeals related to health outcomes, economic benefit, and social norms are all acceptable to diverse general populations, while specific audience segments (i.e., mothers, younger adults, etc.) may have preferences for specific appeals over others. Tailored approaches, or approaches that are developed with the target audience’s concerns and preferences in mind, will be more effective than broad-based or mass appeals.