Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2024-8
Investigating the Relation of Political Orientation and Vaccination Outcomes: Identifying the Roles of Political Ideology,Party Affiliation,and Vaccine Hesitancy
Popular press and academic articles alike suggest that political orientation is a primary determinant of vaccination willingness, vaccination, and vaccine word-of-mouth (i.e., sharing of information regarding vaccines). In the current article, we test the validity of these suggestions, and we also assess the differential roles of political ideology (e.g., liberal-conservative) and party affiliation (e.g., Democrat-Republican) as well as the mediating effect of vaccine hesitancy’s dimensions. To do so, we perform a four-wave survey study with 223 participants that completed all waves. Our results support that political orientation indeed relates to our outcomes of interest. Our results also show that political ideology has a more pronounced effect than party affiliation, and the vaccine hesitancy dimensions of Health Risks and Healthy mediate many of these relations. From these results, we suggest many directions for future research and practice, including the integration of political discourse theories in studies on political orientations and vaccination.
AguinisH.WhiteheadR. (1997). Sampling variance in the correlation coefficient under indirect range restriction: Implications for validity generalization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(4), 528–538. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.4.528
BachlM. (2016). How attacks and defenses resonate with viewers’ political attitudes in televised debates: An empirical test of the resonance model of campaign effects. In Political communication in real time (pp. 253–276). Routledge.
4.
BarkerD. C.MariettaM. (2022). Premise disputes and political ideology. British Journal of Political Science, 52(1), 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123420000460
CalvilloD. P.RossB. J.GarciaR. J.SmelterT. J.RutchickA. M. (2020). Political ideology predicts perceptions of the threat of COVID-19 (and susceptibility to fake news about it). Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(8), 1119–1128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620940539
8.
CollinsL. M.MurphyS. A.StrecherV. (2007). The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) and the sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART): New methods for more potent eHealth interventions. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32(5), S112–S118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2007.01.022
9.
ConnerM.ArmitageC. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behavior: A review and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1429–1464. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01685.x
10.
CruzS. M. (2017). The relationships of political ideology and party affiliation with environmental concern: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 53, 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.06.010
11.
de MunterA. C.KloosterT. M.van LierA.AkkermansR.de MelkerH. E.RuijsW. L. M. (2021). Determinants of HPV-vaccination uptake and subgroups with a lower uptake in The Netherlands. BMC Public Health, 21(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11897-0
12.
DiemerM. A.VoightA. M.MarchandA. D.BañalesJ. (2019). Political identification, political ideology, and critical social analysis of inequality among marginalized youth. Developmental Psychology, 55(3), 538–549. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000559
13.
EffronD. A.RajM. (2020). Misinformation and morality: Encountering fake-news headlines makes them seem less unethical to publish and share. Psychological Science, 31(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619887896
14.
FedericoC. M.EkstromP. D. (2018). The political self: How identity aligns preferences with epistemic needs. Psychological Science, 29(6), 901–913. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617748679
HairJ. F.BlackW. C.BabinB. J.AndersonR. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. Andover. HampshireCengage.
18.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
19.
HowardM. C. (2021a). A more comprehensive measure of vaccine hesitancy: Creation of the Multidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (MVHS). Journal of Health Psychology, 13591053211042062(10), 2402–2419. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053211042062
20.
HowardM. C. (2021b). Are face masks a partisan issue during the COVID‐19 pandemic? Differentiating political ideology and political party affiliation. International Journal of Psychology, 57(1), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12809
21.
HowardM. C. (2022). The good, the bad, and the neutral: Vaccine hesitancy mediates the relations of Psychological Capital, the Dark Triad, and the Big Five with vaccination willingness and behaviors. Personality and individual differences, 190. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111523.
22.
HowardM. C.DavisM. (2022). The mediating role of vaccine hesitancy in the relations of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and vaccination outcomes: Which dimensions matter?Journal of Health Psychology, 135910532210960. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053221096013.
23.
IyengarS.SimonA. F. (2000). New perspectives and evidence on political communication and campaign effects. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 149–169. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.149
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR. T. (2000). Civil political discourse in a democracy: The contribution of psychology. Peace and Conflict. Journal of Peace Psychology, 6(4), 291–317. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327949pac0604_01
KannanV. D.VeazieP. J. (2018). Political orientation, political environment, and health behaviors in the United States. Preventive Medicine, 114, 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.06.011.
28.
LandollR. R.VargasS. E.SamardzicK. B.ClarkM. F.GuastaferroK. (2022). The preparation phase in the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST): A systematic review and introduction of a reporting checklist. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 12(2), 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibab146
LovariA.MartinoV.RighettiN. (2021). Blurred shots: Investigating the information crisis around vaccination in Italy. American Behavioral Scientist, 65(2), 351–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764220910245
31.
MichaudK. E.CarlisleJ. E.SmithE. R. (2009). The relationship between cultural values and political ideology, and the role of political knowledge. Political Psychology, 30(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00679.x
32.
MillsapR. E. (1989). Sampling variance in the correlation coefficient under range restriction: A Monte Carlo study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(3), 456–461. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.456
33.
PerezS.TatarO.ShapiroG. K.DubéE.OgilvieG.GuichonJ.GilcaV.RosbergerZ. (2016). Psychosocial determinants of parental human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine decision-making for sons: Methodological challenges and initial results of a pan-Canadian longitudinal study. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3828-9
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ. Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
RuizJ. B.BellR. A. (2021). Predictors of intention to vaccinate against COVID-19: Results of a nationwide survey. Vaccine, 39(7), 1080–1086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.01.010
SamoreT.FesslerD. M.SparksA. M.HolbrookC. (2021). Of pathogens and party lines: Social conservatism positively associates with COVID-19 precautions among US Democrats but not Republicans. PloS One, 16(6), e0253326. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253326
40.
SchimmackU. (2021). The implicit association test: A method in search of a construct. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(2), 396–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619863798
41.
ShapiroG. K.HoldingA.PerezS.AmselR.RosbergerZ. (2016). Validation of the vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale. Papillomavirus Research, 2, 167–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pvr.2016.09.001.
42.
SharfsteinJ. M.CallaghanT.CarpianoR. M.SgaierS. K.BrewerN. T.GalvaniA. P.LakshmananR.McFaddenS. M.ReissD. R.SalmonD. A.HotezP. J. (2021). Uncoupling vaccination from politics: A call to action. The Lancet, 398(10307), 1211–1212. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)02099-7
43.
SimonovA.SacherS.DubéJ. P.BiswasS. (2022). Frontiers: The persuasive effect of Fox News: Noncompliance with social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Marketing Science, 41(2), 230–242. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2021.1328
Toth-ManikowskiS. M.SwirskyE. S.GandhiR.PiscitelloG. (2022). COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among health care workers, communication, and policy-making. American Journal of Infection Control, 50(1), 20–25.
46.
Van DijkT. A. (2002). Political discourse and political cognition. Politics As Text and Talk: Analytic Approaches to Political Discourse, 203, 203–237.
47.
ZyphurM. J.AllisonP. D.TayL.VoelkleM. C.PreacherK. J.ZhangZ.HamakerE. L.ShamsollahiA.PieridesD. C.KovalP.DienerE. (2020). From data to causes I: Building a general cross-lagged panel model (GCLM). Organizational Research Methods, 23(4), 651–687. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428119847278
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
