Limits of the social-benefit motive among high-risk patients: a field experiment on influenza vaccination behaviour

Ozan Isler, Burcu Isler, Orestis Kopsacheilis, Eamonn Ferguson, Ozan Isler, Burcu Isler, Orestis Kopsacheilis, Eamonn Ferguson

Abstract

Background: Influenza vaccine uptake remains low worldwide, inflicting substantial costs to public health. Messages promoting social welfare have been shown to increase vaccination intentions, and it has been recommended that health professionals communicate the socially beneficial aspects of vaccination. We provide the first test whether this prosocial vaccination hypothesis applies to actual vaccination behaviour of high-risk patients.

Methods: In a field experiment at a tertiary care public hospital in Istanbul, Turkey, we compare the effects of two motivational messages for promoting vaccination. Using a between-subjects single-blind experimental design patients were randomly assigned to frames emphasizing the vaccine's benefits to self (n = 125) or social benefits (n = 119). Free influenza vaccination was offered to each patient.

Results: Among 222 patients who were not vaccinated for the season prior to the study (72% medically assessed to be at high risk), 42% in the self-benefit frame chose to receive a vaccination compared with 34% in the social-benefits frame, but the difference was not statistically significant (aOR = 1.63, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.95, p = 0.108). Reasons for vaccination focused primarily on self-benefit (67%) rather than social-benefit (5%). Exploratory analysis showed that the effect of messages depended on patient perception of risk group membership (aORHigh / aORLow = 5.59, 95% CI 1.30 to 24.05, p = 0.021). In particular, emphasis on self-benefit was more influential among patients who perceived themselves to be in the risk group (aOR = 6.22, 95% CI 1.69 to 22.88, p = 0.006).

Conclusions: In contrast to the literature observing intentions of low-risk populations, we found no evidence that social-benefit motivates actual vaccination behaviour among a high-risk patient population. Instead, those who self-categorize as being in the high risk group are more motivated by the self-benefit message. Our results suggest that a stratified approach can improve coverage: even if an emphasis on social-benefit could be effective among low-risk groups, an emphasis on self-benefit holds more promise for increasing vaccination in medical organizational settings where high-risk groups are prevalent.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04230343 Retrospectively registered on the 13th January 2020.

Keywords: Field experiment; Framing; Influenza; Nudge; Risk group; Risk perceptions; Social benefit; Vaccination.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study flow
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Experimental Treatments

References

    1. Palache A, Oriol-Mathieu V, Fino M, & Xydia-Charmanta M. Seasonal influenza vaccine dose distribution in 195 countries (2004–2013): Little progress in estimated global vaccination coverage. Vaccine. 2015;33(42): 5598-5605. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.08.082
    1. ECDC. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Seasonal influenza vaccination and antiviral use in EU/EEA Member States – Overview of vaccine recommendations for 2017–2018 and vaccination coverage rates for 2015–2016 and 2016–2017 influenza sea [Internet]. 2018. Available from:
    1. Wheelock A, Thomson A, Sevdalis N. Social and psychological factors underlying adult vaccination behavior: lessons from seasonal influenza vaccination in the US and the UK. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2013;12(8):893–901. doi: 10.1586/14760584.2013.814841.
    1. Galvani AP, Reluga TC, Chapman GB. Long-standing influenza vaccination policy is in accord with individual self-interest but not with the utilitarian optimum. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2007;104(13):5692–5697. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0606774104.
    1. Osterholm MT, Kelley NS, Sommer A, Belongia EA. Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2012;12(1):36–44. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70295-X.
    1. Wheelock A, Miraldo M, Thomson A, Vincent C, Sevdalis N. Evaluating the importance of policy amenable factors in explaining influenza vaccination: a cross-sectional multinational study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(7):e014668. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014668.
    1. Schmid P, Rauber D, Betsch C, Lidolt G, Denker M-L. Barriers of influenza vaccination intention and behavior–a systematic review of influenza vaccine hesitancy, 2005–2016. PLoS One. 2017;12(1):e0170550. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170550.
    1. Brewer NT, Chapman GB, Gibbons FX, Gerrard M, McCaul KD, Weinstein ND. Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: the example of vaccination. Health Psychol. 2007;26(2):136. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.2.136.
    1. Brewer NT, Chapman GB, Rothman AJ, Leask J, Kempe A. Increasing vaccination: putting psychological science into action. Psychol Sci Public Interes. 2017;18(3):149–207. doi: 10.1177/1529100618760521.
    1. Betsch C, Böhm R, Korn L. Inviting free-riders or appealing to prosocial behavior? Game-theoretical reflections on communicating herd immunity in vaccine advocacy. Health Psychol. 2013;32(9):978. doi: 10.1037/a0031590.
    1. Betsch C, Böhm R, Korn L, Holtmann C. On the benefits of explaining herd immunity in vaccine advocacy. Nat Hum Behav. 2017;1(3):56. doi: 10.1038/s41562-017-0056.
    1. Li M, Taylor EG, Atkins KE, Chapman GB, Galvani AP. Stimulating influenza vaccination via prosocial motives. PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0159780. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159780.
    1. Brockmann D. Public health: this message must be herd. Nat Hum Behav. 2017;1(3):65. doi: 10.1038/s41562-017-0065.
    1. Fehr E, Schmidt KM. A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q J Econ. 1999;114(3):817–868. doi: 10.1162/003355399556151.
    1. Henrich J, Boyd R, Bowles S, Camerer C, Fehr E, Gintis H. Foundations of human sociality: economic experiments and ethnographic evidence from fifteen small-scale societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand; 2004.
    1. Boersma GJ, Benthem L, van Beek AP, van Dijk G, Scheurink AJW. Personality, a key factor in personalized medicine? Eur J Pharmacol. 2011;667(1–3):23–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2011.05.079.
    1. Israel S, Moffitt TE, Belsky DW, Hancox RJ, Poulton R, Roberts B, et al. Translating personality psychology to help personalize preventive medicine for young adult patients. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2014;106(3):484. doi: 10.1037/a0035687.
    1. Ferguson E, Gallagher L. Message framing with respect to decisions about vaccination: the roles of frame valence, frame method and perceived risk. Br J Psychol. 2007;98(4):667–680. doi: 10.1348/000712607X190692.
    1. Rothman AJ, Salovey P. Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: the role of message framing. Psychol Bull. 1997;121(1):3. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3.
    1. Weinstein ND, Kwitel A, McCaul KD, Magnan RE, Gerrard M, Gibbons FX. Risk perceptions: assessment and relationship to influenza vaccination. Health Psychol. 2007;26(2):146. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.2.146.
    1. Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2001;127(2):267. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267.
    1. Vietri JT, Li M, Galvani AP, Chapman GB. Vaccinating to help ourselves and others. Med Decis Mak. 2012;32(3):447–458. doi: 10.1177/0272989X11427762.
    1. Böhm R, Meier NW, Korn L, Betsch C. Behavioural consequences of vaccination recommendations: an experimental analysis. Health Econ. 2017;26(S3):66–75. doi: 10.1002/hec.3584.
    1. Sheeran P, Webb TL. The intention–behavior gap. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2016;10(9):503–518. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12265.
    1. Harris KM, Maurer J, Lurie N. Do people who intend to get a flu shot actually get one? J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24(12):1311. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1126-2.
    1. Maurer J. Inspecting the mechanism: a longitudinal analysis of socioeconomic status differences in perceived influenza risks, vaccination intentions, and vaccination behaviors during the 2009–2010 influenza pandemic. Med Decis Mak. 2016;36(7):887–899. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15608379.
    1. Camerer C, Mobbs D. Differences in behavior and brain activity during hypothetical and real choices. Trends Cogn Sci. 2017;21(1):46–56. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.11.001.
    1. Andreoni J, Bernheim BD. Social image and the 50–50 norm: a theoretical and experimental analysis of audience effects. Econometrica. 2009;77(5):1607–1636. doi: 10.3982/ECTA7384.
    1. Harrison GW, List JA. Field experiments. J Econ Lit. 2004;42(4):1009–1055. doi: 10.1257/0022051043004577.
    1. Hertwig R, Ortmann A. Experimental practices in economics: a methodological challenge for psychologists? Behav Brain Sci. 2001;24(3):383–403. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X01004149.
    1. Llupià A, Mena G, Olivé V, Quesada S, Aldea M, Sequera VG, et al. Evaluating influenza vaccination campaigns beyond coverage: a before-after study among health care workers. Am J Infect Control. 2013;41(8):674–678. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2013.04.006.
    1. Rothan-Tondeur M, Filali-Zegzouti Y, Belmin J, Lejeune B, Golmard J-L, de Wazières B, et al. Assessment of healthcare worker influenza vaccination program in French geriatric wards: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2010;22(5–6):450–455. doi: 10.1007/BF03337740.
    1. Brewer NT, Hallman WK. Subjective and objective risk as predictors of influenza vaccination during the vaccine shortage of 2004–2005. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;43(11):1379–1386. doi: 10.1086/508466.
    1. Chen H, Cohen P, Chen S. How big is a big odds ratio? Interpreting the magnitudes of odds ratios in epidemiological studies. Commun Stat Comput. 2010;39(4):860–864. doi: 10.1080/03610911003650383.
    1. Rosenthal JA. Qualitative descriptors of strength of association and effect size. J Soc Serv Res. 1996;21(4):37–59. doi: 10.1300/J079v21n04_02.
    1. Derks D, Bos AER, Von Grumbkow J. Emoticons in computer-mediated communication: social motives and social context. CyberPsychology Behav. 2008;11(1):99–101. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.9926.
    1. Lo S-K. The nonverbal communication functions of emoticons in computer-mediated communication. CyberPsychology Behav. 2008;11(5):595–597. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0132.
    1. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2008.
    1. Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U. False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychol Sci. 2011;22(11):1359–1366. doi: 10.1177/0956797611417632.
    1. Ciblak MA, Platformu G. Influenza vaccination in Turkey: prevalence of risk groups, current vaccination status, factors influencing vaccine uptake and steps taken to increase vaccination rate. Vaccine. 2013;31(3):518–523. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.11.022.
    1. Buyuktiryaki B, Soyer OU, Erkocoglu M, Dogan A, Azkur D, Kocabas CN, et al. What a pandemic teaches us about vaccination attitudes of parents of children with asthma. Vaccine. 2014;32(20):2275–2280. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.02.076.
    1. Akan H, Gurol Y, Izbirak G, Ozdatlı S, Yilmaz G, Vitrinel A, et al. Knowledge and attitudes of university students toward pandemic influenza: a cross-sectional study from Turkey. BMC Public Health. 2010;10(1):413. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-413.
    1. Arda B, Durusoy R, Yamazhan T, Sipahi OR, Taşbakan M, Pullukçu H, et al. Did the pandemic have an impact on influenza vaccination attitude? A survey among health care workers. BMC Infect Dis. 2011;11(1):87. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-11-87.
    1. Hingorani AD, van der Windt DA, Riley RD, Abrams K, Moons KGM, Steyerberg EW, et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS) 4: stratified medicine research. Bmj. 2013;346:e5793. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e5793.
    1. Trusheim MR, Berndt ER, Douglas FL. Stratified medicine: strategic and economic implications of combining drugs and clinical biomarkers. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2007;6(4):287. doi: 10.1038/nrd2251.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel