dc.contributor.advisor | Bruce, Jared M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Francisco, Alex Joseph | |
dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2018 Summer | |
dc.description | Title from PDF of title page viewed August 28, 2018 | |
dc.description | Dissertation advisor: Jared Bruce | |
dc.description | Vita | |
dc.description | Includes bibliographical references (pages 102-107) | |
dc.description | Thesis (Ph.D.)--Department of Psychology. University of Missouri--Kansas City, 2018 | |
dc.description.abstract | This dissertation utilized two separate studies to investigate the effects of social
motivation during vaccine decision-making. Some parents cite social motivations, like
contributing to herd immunity, as an influence on vaccine decisions, but differences in social
motivation between parents who are confident and those who are hesitant about vaccines has
yet to be investigated. Results from our first investigation among both vaccine confident and
hesitant participants show decreased willingness to risk side effects to prevent disease in
socially distant individuals. In vaccine hesitant individuals, empathic concern was associated
with increased willingness to risk side effects to prevent disease in socially distant
individuals. In vaccine confident participants, personal distress during prosocial scenarios
was associated with decreased willingness to risk side effects in socially distant individuals.
Shared decision making and educational programs that emphasizing empathic concern may
increase the likelihood that hesitant individuals will vaccinate their children to protect
socially distant individuals.
Our second investigation focused on the primary drivers during social vaccination
decisions. Certain vaccines carry an unbalanced ratio of risk and benefit to the individual
being vaccinated. Symptoms of the flu, and potential side effects from the vaccine, are
relatively low in cost to a younger individual, but can be deadly to an immunocompromised
person. Thus, vaccinating in some cases may have more of a benefit to socially distant
individuals. Results from our second study show that as benefits of the vaccine shifted to
socially distant individuals, the influence of risk on decision making increased. This increase
was seen in both vaccine hesitant and vaccine confident participants. Confident participants
valued benefits equally across social distance, while hesitant participants showed an
increased influence of benefits for socially proximate recipients. Together these results
suggest targeting benefits to socially proximate individuals, while downplaying risks, may be
the best strategy for increasing overall vaccine uptake. | eng |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Paper one: Vaccine Hesitancy and Social Motivation During Vaccine Decisions -- Paper two: Influence of Side Effect Risk Increases During Prosocial Vaccine Decisions -- Additional analyses -- Original proposal Literature review | |
dc.format.extent | viii, 108 pages | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10355/65468 | |
dc.publisher | University of Missouri -- Kansas City | eng |
dc.subject.lcsh | Vaccination | |
dc.subject.lcsh | Vaccination -- Social aspects | |
dc.subject.other | Dissertation -- University of Missouri--Kansas City -- Psychology | |
dc.title | Assessing Social Motivations During Vaccination Decisions | eng |
dc.type | Thesis | eng |
thesis.degree.discipline | Psychology (UMKC) | |
thesis.degree.grantor | University of Missouri--Kansas City | |
thesis.degree.level | Doctoral | |
thesis.degree.name | Ph.D. | |