IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_11134.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mistrust and Missed Shots: Trust and Covid-19 Vaccination Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Amelia Blamey
  • Ilan Noy

Abstract

We investigate the effect of interpersonal and institutional trust on COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy. We ask whether interpersonal and institutional trust predict COVID-19 vaccination delay and refusal. We use an unprecedently rich and representative dataset of over 22,000 New Zealand respondents, sourced from the 2014, 2016, and 2018 General Social Survey. Respondents reported their trust in seven domains: Parliament, police, health, education, courts, media, and the general public. Their survey responses are linked to respondents’ later records of COVID-19 vaccinations and their socio-demographic characteristics, as collected in the 2018 census. We find that all measured trust domains exhibit a significant and negative correlation with vaccine hesitancy. As trust increases, vaccination hesitancy decreases and so does the time it takes people to vaccinate. The correlation is strongest for trust in police and interpersonal trust, and weakest for trust in media. By understanding how trust informs vaccination decision-making, we can better prepare for future pandemics and improve public health vaccination campaigns more generally.

Suggested Citation

  • Amelia Blamey & Ilan Noy, 2024. "Mistrust and Missed Shots: Trust and Covid-19 Vaccination Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 11134, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_11134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp11134.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Alesina & Eliana La Ferrara, 2000. "The Determinants of Trust," NBER Working Papers 7621, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Romer, Daniel & Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, 2020. "Conspiracy theories as barriers to controlling the spread of COVID-19 in the U.S," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    3. Angelo Fasce & Philipp Schmid & Dawn L. Holford & Luke Bates & Iryna Gurevych & Stephan Lewandowsky, 2023. "A taxonomy of anti-vaccination arguments from a systematic literature review and text modelling," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(9), pages 1462-1480, September.
    4. Heidi Ledford & David Cyranoski & Richard Van Noorden, 2020. "The UK has approved a COVID vaccine — here’s what scientists now want to know," Nature, Nature, vol. 588(7837), pages 205-206, December.
    5. Latkin, Carl A. & Dayton, Lauren & Yi, Grace & Konstantopoulos, Arianna & Boodram, Basmattee, 2021. "Trust in a COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S.: A social-ecological perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    6. Gollier, Christian, 2021. "The Welfare Cost of Vaccine Misallocation, Delays and Nationalism," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 199-226, July.
    7. Johnson, Noel D. & Mislin, Alexandra A., 2011. "Trust games: A meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 865-889.
    8. van Mulukom, Valerie & Pummerer, Lotte J. & Alper, Sinan & Bai, Hui & Čavojová, Vladimíra & Farias, Jessica & Kay, Cameron S. & Lazarevic, Ljiljana B. & Lobato, Emilio J.C. & Marinthe, Gaëlle & Pavela, 2022. "Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    9. Heikki Ervasti & Antti Kouvo & Takis Venetoklis, 2019. "Social and Institutional Trust in Times of Crisis: Greece, 2002–2011," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 1207-1231, February.
    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. Stoler, Justin & Klofstad, Casey A. & Enders, Adam M. & Uscinski, Joseph E., 2022. "Sociopolitical and psychological correlates of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the United States during summer 2021," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 306(C).
    2. Coelho, Priscila & Foster, Katrina & Nedri, Meriam & Marques, Mathew D., 2022. "Increased belief in vaccination conspiracy theories predicts increases in vaccination hesitancy and powerlessness: Results from a longitudinal study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    3. Fotakis, Emmanouil Alexandros & Simou, Effie, 2023. "Belief in COVID-19 related conspiracy theories around the globe: A systematic review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    4. Frisco, Michelle L. & Van Hook, Jennifer & Thomas, Kevin J.A., 2022. "Racial/ethnic and nativity disparities in U.S. Covid-19 vaccination hesitancy during vaccine rollout and factors that explain them," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    5. Milošević Đorđević, J. & Mari, S. & Vdović, M. & Milošević, A., 2021. "Links between conspiracy beliefs, vaccine knowledge, and trust: Anti-vaccine behavior of Serbian adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    6. Acar-Burkay, Sinem & Cristian, Daniela-Carmen, 2022. "Cognitive underpinnings of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    7. Oleksy, Tomasz & Wnuk, Anna & Gambin, Małgorzata & Łyś, Agnieszka, 2021. "Dynamic relationships between different types of conspiracy theories about COVID-19 and protective behaviour: A four-wave panel study in Poland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    8. Indra de Soysa & Synøve Almås, 2019. "Does Ethnolinguistic Diversity Preclude Good Governance? A Comparative Study with Alternative Data, 1990‐2015," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 604-636, November.
    9. Ziqiang Xin & Guofang Liu, 2013. "Homo Economicus Belief Inhibits Trust," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-5, October.
    10. Tatiana Kozitsina & Anna Mikhaylova & Anna Komkova & Anastasia Peshkovskaya & Anna Sedush & Olga Menshikova & Mikhail Myagkov & Ivan Menshikov, 2020. "Ethnicity and gender influence the decision making in a multinational state: The case of Russia," Papers 2012.01272, arXiv.org.
    11. Claudia Keser & David Masclet & Claude Montmarquette, 2020. "Labor Supply, Taxation, and the Use of Tax Revenues: A Real-Effort Experiment in Canada, France, and Germany," Public Finance Review, , vol. 48(6), pages 714-750, November.
    12. Rémi Suchon & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "Does upward mobility harm trust?," Post-Print halshs-01659021, HAL.
    13. Daniel Woods & Maroš Servátka, 2019. "Nice to you, nicer to me: Does self-serving generosity diminish the reciprocal response?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 506-529, June.
    14. Anneli Kaasa & Eve Parts, 2007. "Individual-Level Determinants Of Social Capital In Europe: Differences Between Country Groups," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 56, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    15. Yunhan Huang & Quanyan Zhu, 2022. "Game-Theoretic Frameworks for Epidemic Spreading and Human Decision-Making: A Review," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 7-48, March.
    16. Dhami, Sanjit & Wei, Mengxing & Mamidi, Pavan, 2024. "Religious identity, trust, reciprocity, and prosociality: Theory and evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    17. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2021. "Nonverbal content and trust: An experiment on digital communication," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1517-1532, October.
    18. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2019. "How Do Social Preferences and Norms of Reciprocity affect Generalized and Particularized Trust?," CLTS Working Papers 8/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 10 Oct 2019.
    19. Fabian Dvorak & Regina Stumpf & Sebastian Fehrler & Urs Fischbacher, 2024. "Generative AI Triggers Welfare-Reducing Decisions in Humans," Papers 2401.12773, arXiv.org.
    20. Fehr, Dietmar & Sutter, Matthias, 2019. "Gossip and the efficiency of interactions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 448-460.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Covid-19; vaccination; trust; general social survey; GSS;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ces:ceswps:_11134. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.