IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i14p4984-d382990.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Countering Vaccine Hesitancy among Pregnant Women in England: The Case of Boostrix-IPV

Author

Listed:
  • Mairead Ryan

    (Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK)

  • Laura A V Marlow

    (Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK)

  • Alice Forster

    (Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK)

Abstract

This study explored the effects of message framing on vaccine hesitancy for the antenatal whooping cough vaccine. The study also assessed whether the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs had any explanatory utility for vaccine intentions and behaviours in pregnant women. A between-subjects, cross-sectional design was employed. Participants ( n = 282) were women who were pregnant (mean = 28 weeks, SD = 7.0), living in England and between 18 and 44 years of age. A self-report web-based survey was used to collect data. Participants were randomly assigned to read either (i) disease risk, (ii) myth busting, or (iii) control information before answering questions based on the TPB. No significant effects of message framing were found. Attitudes (Beta = 0.699; p < 0.001) and subjective norms (Beta = 0.262, p < 0.001) significantly predicted intention to vaccinate but perceived behavioural control did not. The TPB constructs accounted for 86% and 36% of the variance in vaccine intention and vaccine history respectively. Disease risk information did not influence vaccine acceptability in this sample of English pregnant women. The study offered preliminary evidence that interventions targeting constructs from the TPB may promote vaccine acceptability among pregnant women.

Suggested Citation

  • Mairead Ryan & Laura A V Marlow & Alice Forster, 2020. "Countering Vaccine Hesitancy among Pregnant Women in England: The Case of Boostrix-IPV," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-14, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:14:p:4984-:d:382990
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/14/4984/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/14/4984/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Fayolle, Alain & Liñán, Francisco, 2014. "The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 663-666.
    2. Fox, Stephen & Groesser, Stefan N., 2016. "Reframing the relevance of research to practice," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 457-465.
    3. Christopher M. Weible & Tanya Heikkila, 2017. "Policy Conflict Framework," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 23-40, March.
    4. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    5. Jaeyeob Jeong & Myeonggil Choi, 2017. "The Expected Job Satisfaction Affecting Entrepreneurial Intention as Career Choice in the Cultural and Artistic Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, September.
    6. Petschnig, Martin & Heidenreich, Sven & Spieth, Patrick, 2014. "Innovative alternatives take action – Investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 68-83.
    7. Dan K. Hsu & Johan Wiklund & Richard D. Cotton, 2017. "Success, Failure, and Entrepreneurial Reentry: An Experimental Assessment of the Veracity of Self–Efficacy and Prospect Theory," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(1), pages 19-47, January.
    8. van Wee, Bert & Witlox, Frank, 2021. "COVID-19 and its long-term effects on activity participation and travel behaviour: A multiperspective view," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. Daniel V. Holland & Dean A. Shepherd, 2013. "Deciding to Persist: Adversity, Values, and Entrepreneurs’ Decision Policies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 37(2), pages 331-358, March.
    10. Helena Hansson & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2014. "Decision Making for Animal Health and Welfare: Integrating Risk‐Benefit Analysis with Prospect Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 1149-1159, June.
    11. Michel Borgh & Jeroen Schepers, 2018. "Are conservative approaches to new product selling a blessing in disguise?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 857-878, September.
    12. Simon J. D. Schillebeeckx & Sankalp Chaturvedi & Gerard George & Zella King, 2016. "What do i want? The effects of individual aspiration and relational capability on collaboration preferences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1493-1506, July.
    13. Bacile, Todd J. & Ye, Christine & Swilley, Esther, 2014. "From Firm-Controlled to Consumer-Contributed: Consumer Co-Production of Personal Media Marketing Communication," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 117-133.
    14. Rachel Croson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 335-351, July.
    15. Maresch, Daniela & Harms, Rainer & Kailer, Norbert & Wimmer-Wurm, Birgit, 2016. "The impact of entrepreneurship education on the entrepreneurial intention of students in science and engineering versus business studies university programs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 172-179.
    16. Zamri Ahmad & Haslindar Ibrahim & Jasman Tuyon, 2017. "Institutional investor behavioral biases: syntheses of theory and evidence," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(5), pages 578-603, May.
    17. Oesterreich, Thuy Duong & Teuteberg, Frank, 2019. "Behind the scenes: Understanding the socio-technical barriers to BIM adoption through the theoretical lens of information systems research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 413-431.
    18. Siqi Dai & Kai Chen & Rui Jin, 2022. "The effect of message framing and language intensity on green consumption behavior willingness," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2432-2452, February.
    19. Arnstein Aassve & Alice Goisis & Maria Sironi, 2012. "Happiness and Childbearing Across Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 65-86, August.
    20. Hong, Areum & Nam, Changi & Kim, Seongcheol, 2020. "What will be the possible barriers to consumers’ adoption of smart home services?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2).

    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:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:14:p:4984-:d:382990. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.