IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/has/discpr/2207.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding hesitancy with revealed preferences across COVID-19 vaccine types

Author

Listed:
  • Kutasi Kristóf

    (Rice University, Department of Economics, Houston TX, 77005-1827, USA)

  • Koltai Júlia

    (Centre for Social Sciences, Computational Social Science - Research Center for Educational and Network Studies, Budapest, 1097, HungaryEötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Budapest, 1117, Hungary Central European University, Department of Network and Data Science, Vienna, 1100, Austria)

  • Szabó-Morvai Ágnes

    (Eötvös Loránd Research Network, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Health and Population Lendület Research Group, Budapest, 1097, Hungary Debrecen University, Department of Economics, Debrecen, 4032, Hungary)

  • Röst Gergely

    (University of Szeged, Bolyai Institute, Szeged, 6722, Hungary)

  • Karsai Márton

    (Central European University, Department of Network and Data Science, Vienna, 1100, Austria Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics, Budapest, 1053, Hungary)

  • Biró Péter

    (Eötvös Loránd Research Network, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Mechanism Design Lendület Research Group, Budapest, 1097, Hungary Corvinus University of Budapest, Department of Operations Research and Actuarial Sciences, Budapest, 1093, Hungary)

  • Lengyel Balázs

    (Eötvös Loránd Research Network, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Agglomeration and Social Networks Lendület Research Group, Budapest, 1097, HungaryCorvinus University of Budapest, Corvinus Institute for Advanced Studies, Budapest,)

Abstract

Many countries have secured larger quantities of COVID-19 vaccines than their populace is willing to take. This abundance and variety of vaccines created a historical moment to understand vaccine hesitancy better. Never before were more types of vaccines available for an illness and the intensity of vaccine-related public discourse is unprecedented. Yet, the heterogeneity of hesitancy by vaccine types in certain segments of society has been neglected so far, even though factual or believed vaccine characteristics and patient attributes are known to influence acceptance. In this paper, we address this problem by analysing acceptance and assessment of five vaccine types using information collected with a nationally representative survey (N=1000) at the end of the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Hungary, where a unique portfolio of vaccines were available to the public in large quantities. Our special case enables us to quantify revealed preferences across vaccine types since one could evaluate a vaccine unacceptable and even could reject an assigned vaccine to wait for another type. We find that the source of information that respondents trust characterizes their attitudes towards vaccine types differently and leads to divergent vaccine hesitancy. Believers of conspiracy theories were significantly more likely to evaluate the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) unacceptable while those who follow the advice of politicians evaluate vector-based (AstraZeneca and Sputnik) or whole-virus vaccines (Sinopharm) acceptable with higher likelihood. We illustrate that the rejection of non-desired and re-selection of preferred vaccines fragments the population by the mRNA versus other type of vaccines while it generally improves the assessment of the received vaccine. These results highlight that greater variance of available vaccine types and individual free choice are desirable conditions that can widen the acceptance of vaccines in societies.

Suggested Citation

  • Kutasi Kristóf & Koltai Júlia & Szabó-Morvai Ágnes & Röst Gergely & Karsai Márton & Biró Péter & Lengyel Balázs, 2022. "Understanding hesitancy with revealed preferences across COVID-19 vaccine types," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2207, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:has:discpr:2207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://kti.krtk.hu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/CERSIEWP202207.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heidi Ledford, 2021. "How could a COVID vaccine cause blood clots? Scientists race to investigate," Nature, Nature, vol. 592(7854), pages 334-335, April.
    2. Sahil Loomba & Alexandre Figueiredo & Simon J. Piatek & Kristen Graaf & Heidi J. Larson, 2021. "Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(3), pages 337-348, March.
    3. Jamie Murphy & Frédérique Vallières & Richard P. Bentall & Mark Shevlin & Orla McBride & Todd K. Hartman & Ryan McKay & Kate Bennett & Liam Mason & Jilly Gibson-Miller & Liat Levita & Anton P. Martine, 2021. "Psychological characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stefkovics, Ádám & Krekó, Péter & Koltai, Júlia, 2024. "When reality knocks on the door. The effect of conspiracy beliefs on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and the moderating role of experience with the virus," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 356(C).

    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. Giulietti, Corrado & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Zenou, Yves, 2021. "When Reality Bites: Local Deaths and Vaccine Take-Up," GLO Discussion Paper Series 999, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    2. Raluca Buturoiu & Georgiana Udrea & Denisa-Adriana Oprea & Nicoleta Corbu, 2021. "Who Believes in Conspiracy Theories about the COVID-19 Pandemic in Romania? An Analysis of Conspiracy Theories Believers’ Profiles," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Kejriwal, Saransh & Sheth, Sarjan & Silpa, P.S. & Sarkar, Sumit & Guha, Apratim, 2022. "Attaining herd immunity to a new infectious disease through multi-stage policies incentivising voluntary vaccination," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    4. Fulian Yin & Meiqi Ji & Zhongliang Yang & Zhaoliang Wu & Xinyu Xia & Tongtong Xing & Yuwei She & Zhiwen Hu, 2022. "Exploring the determinants of global vaccination campaigns to combat COVID-19," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Maureen Ayikoru, & Cole, Jennifer & Dodds, Klaus & Atcero, Milburga & Bada, Joseph K. & Petrikova, Ivica & Worodria, William, 2023. "Addressing vaccine concerns through the spectrum of vaccine acceptance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 333(C).
    6. Shasha Teng & Nan Jiang & Kok Wei Khong, 2022. "Using big data to understand the online ecology of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Giulietti, Corrado & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Zenou, Yves, 2023. "When reality bites: Local deaths and vaccine take-up," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Yiang Li & Xingzuo Zhou & Zejian Lyu, 2024. "Regional contagion in health behaviors: evidence from COVID-19 vaccination modeling in England with social network theorem," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 197-216, April.
    9. Wood, Reed M. & Juanchich, Marie & Ramirez, Mark & Zhang, Shenghao, 2023. "Promoting COVID-19 vaccine confidence through public responses to misinformation: The joint influence of message source and message content," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    10. Carlos Carrasco-Farré, 2022. "The fingerprints of misinformation: how deceptive content differs from reliable sources in terms of cognitive effort and appeal to emotions," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Balcaen, Pieter & Buts, Caroline & Bois, Cind Du & Tkacheva, Olesya, 2023. "The effect of disinformation about COVID-19 on consumer confidence: Insights from a survey experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    12. Motta, Matt & Motta, Gabriella & Stecula, Dominik, 2023. "Sick as a Dog? The Prevalence, Politicization, and Health Policy Consequences of Canine Vaccine Hesitancy (CVH)," SocArXiv qmbkv, Center for Open Science.
    13. John M. Carey & Andrew M. Guess & Peter J. Loewen & Eric Merkley & Brendan Nyhan & Joseph B. Phillips & Jason Reifler, 2022. "The ephemeral effects of fact-checks on COVID-19 misperceptions in the United States, Great Britain and Canada," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(2), pages 236-243, February.
    14. Ronnie Das & Wasim Ahmed, 2022. "Rethinking Fake News: Disinformation and Ideology during the time of COVID-19 Global Pandemic," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 11(1), pages 146-159, January.
    15. Louise Rawlings & Jeffrey C. L. Looi & Stephen J. Robson, 2022. "Economic Considerations in COVID‐19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Refusal: A Survey of the Literature," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 98(321), pages 214-229, June.
    16. Tuomo Hartonen & Bradley Jermy & Hanna Sõnajalg & Pekka Vartiainen & Kristi Krebs & Andrius Vabalas & Tuija Leino & Hanna Nohynek & Jonas Sivelä & Reedik Mägi & Mark Daly & Hanna M. Ollila & Lili Mila, 2023. "Nationwide health, socio-economic and genetic predictors of COVID-19 vaccination status in Finland," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1069-1083, July.
    17. Sou Hyun Jang, 2022. "Social-ecological factors related to preventive behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-14, March.
    18. Manfred Füllsack & Daniel Reisinger & Marie Kapeller & Georg Jäger, 2022. "Early warning signals from the periphery," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 665-685, May.
    19. Albanese, Andrea & Fallucchi, Francesco & Verheyden, Bertrand, 2021. "Can a supranational medicines agency restore trust after vaccine suspensions? The case of Vaxzevria," GLO Discussion Paper Series 878, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    20. Jianping Zhu & Futian Weng & Muni Zhuang & Xin Lu & Xu Tan & Songjie Lin & Ruoyi Zhang, 2022. "Revealing Public Opinion towards the COVID-19 Vaccine with Weibo Data in China: BertFDA-Based Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-26, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    vaccination; COVID-19; revealed preferences;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior

    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:has:discpr:2207. 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: Nora Horvath (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehashu.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.