COVID-19 vaccines and anti-consumption: Understanding anti-vaxxers hesitancy.

Damien Chaney, Michael Sw Lee
Author Information
  1. Damien Chaney: Department of Marketing EM Normandie Business School Paris France. ORCID
  2. Michael Sw Lee: Department of Marketing The University of Auckland Business School Auckland New Zealand. ORCID

Abstract

Anti-vaccination sentiment and vaccine hesitancy are on the rise. This is unfortunate given the world's coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic response plan relies on a global vaccination program the likes of which has never been attempted. Using an anti-consumption lens, this study utilizes a qualitative approach and 53 interviews revolving around people's attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccination plan. The findings reveal that COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy comes from two major factors: stable factors and contextual factors. Stable factors refer to factors that are consistently found in anti-vaccination movements and include political and philosophical opposition. Contextual factors refer to factors that are highly dependent on the COVID-19 situation and relates to a negative benefit to risk ratio informed by information overload and the influence of marketing phenomena such as branding and country of origin effects. Finally, theoretical and managerial contributions are offered for public policymakers and social marketers.

Keywords

References

  1. Psychol Bull. 2001 Mar;127(2):267-86 [PMID: 11316014]
  2. Lancet Digit Health. 2020 Oct;2(10):e504-e505 [PMID: 32984795]
  3. Public Health Rep. 2005 May-Jun;120(3):252-8 [PMID: 16134564]
  4. J Risk Res. 2022;25(9):1047-1054 [PMID: 36467603]
  5. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2022 Dec 31;18(1):1-3 [PMID: 33684019]
  6. Psychol Mark. 2020 Oct;37(10):1433-1445 [PMID: 32836727]
  7. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Jun 8;18(1):61 [PMID: 32513202]
  8. N Engl J Med. 2009 May 7;360(19):1981-8 [PMID: 19420367]
  9. Psychol Mark. 2022 Apr;39(4):741-754 [PMID: 35465079]
  10. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021 Feb 26;70(8):283-288 [PMID: 33630816]
  11. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2019 May;3(5):281 [PMID: 30981382]
  12. Nat Med. 2021 Aug;27(8):1338-1339 [PMID: 34272500]
  13. Adv Ther. 2020 Nov;37(11):4481-4490 [PMID: 32965654]
  14. Nat Med. 2021 Feb;27(2):225-228 [PMID: 33082575]
  15. Psychol Med. 2020 Oct 19;:1-3 [PMID: 33070804]
  16. PLoS One. 2018 Dec 7;13(12):e0208601 [PMID: 30532274]
  17. Vaccine. 2015 Aug 14;33(34):4161-4 [PMID: 25896383]
  18. Nature. 2021 Feb;590(7847):538-540 [PMID: 33597779]
  19. J Public Health (Oxf). 2021 Jun 7;43(2):e291-e292 [PMID: 33454769]
  20. Cogn Sci. 2017 May;41(4):1020-1041 [PMID: 27471016]
  21. EBioMedicine. 2016 Oct;12:295-301 [PMID: 27658738]
  22. Psychol Mark. 2021 Nov;38(11):2006-2018 [PMID: 34539053]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0factorsCOVID-19hesitancyvaccinationvaccineplanreferbrandingcountryoriginAnti-vaccinationsentimentriseunfortunategivenworld'scoronavirusdisease2019pandemicresponsereliesglobalprogramlikesneverattemptedUsinganti-consumptionlensstudyutilizesqualitativeapproach53interviewsrevolvingaroundpeople'sattitudestowardsfindingsrevealcomestwomajorfactors:stablecontextualStableconsistentlyfoundanti-vaccinationmovementsincludepoliticalphilosophicaloppositionContextualhighlydependentsituationrelatesnegativebenefitriskratioinformedinformationoverloadinfluencemarketingphenomenaeffectsFinallytheoreticalmanagerialcontributionsofferedpublicpolicymakerssocialmarketersvaccinesanti-consumption:Understandinganti-vaxxersCOVID‐19anti‐consumptionanti‐vaccination

Similar Articles

Cited By