Pressured or Voluntary? Motivations for Vaccination during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Future Health-Protective Behaviors

Abstract

Purpose

This research investigates how individuals’ perceived motivations for receiving the COVID-19 vaccine—specifically, feeling pressured versus vaccinating voluntarily—relate to future health-protective behaviors and perceived risk of the vaccine and the virus.

Methods

In 2 studies, with a total of N = 1,252 respondents, participants self-reported their past vaccination motivation and completed measures assessing willingness to receive future vaccines, engage in general health-protective behaviors, and perceived risks associated with the virus and the vaccine.

Results

Findings consistently show that individuals who felt pressured to vaccinate are positioned between unvaccinated individuals and those who vaccinated voluntarily in their perceptions and intentions. Compared with voluntary vaccinators, they reported lower willingness to receive future vaccines and engage in protective behaviors and greater perceived vaccine risk. However, their willingness to engage in these behaviors was still greater than that of unvaccinated individuals.

Limitations

The studies are mainly cross-sectional and do not track the same individuals over time.

Conclusions

Perceived motivation for past vaccination significantly predicts vaccinated individuals’ attitudes and future intentions related to health behaviors, even unrelated to COVID-19.

Implications

Treating all vaccinated individuals as a uniform group can be overly simplistic. Public health messaging and interventions may be more effective when considering individuals’ vaccination motivation.

Highlights

Treating all vaccinated individuals the same can be simplistic.

The perception of the vaccine and virus risks differ depending on whether vaccination felt voluntary or coerced.

Different motivations behind vaccination can shape future medical decisions beyond the pandemic.

Keywords

medical decision making motivation preventive behaviors risk perceptions vaccinations

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lazarus

Ratzan

Palayew

, et al. A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Nat Med. 2021;27(2):225–8.

Bendau

Plag

Petzold

Ströhle

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and related fears and anxiety. Int Immunopharmacol. 2021;97:107724.

Loewenstein

Weber

Hsee

Welch

Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2001;127(2):267–86.

Slovic

Peters

Finucane

MacGregor

DG.

Affect, risk, and decision-making. Health Psychol. 2005;24(4S):35.

Anraad

Lehmann

Visser

, et al. Social-psychological determinants of maternal pertussis vaccination acceptance during pregnancy among women in the Netherlands. Vaccine. 2020;38(40):6254–66.

Caserotti

Girardi

Rubaltelli

Tasso

Lotto

Gavaruzzi

Associations of COVID-19 risk perception with vaccine hesitancy over time for Italian residents. Social Sci Med. 2021;272:113688.

Nguyen

Pham

, et al. Fear of COVID-19 scale—associations of its scores with health literacy and health-related behaviors among medical students. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(11):4164.

Ritov

Baron

Reluctance to vaccinate: omission bias and ambiguity. J Behav Decis Making. 1990;3(4):263–77.

Rubaltelli

Pittarello

Negative emotion and trait emotional intelligence in reaction to terrorist attacks. Personality and Individual Differences. 2018;123:247–52.

10.

Slovic

Fischhoff

Lichtenstein

Why study risk perception?

Risk Anal. 1982;2(2):83–93.

11.

MacDonald

NE.

Vaccine hesitancy: definition, scope and determinants. Vaccine. 2015;33(34):4161–4.

12.

Orenstein

Ahmed

Simply put, vaccines save lives. Proc Nat Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(16):4031–3.

13.

Festinger

A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press; 1957.

14.

Attwell

Wiley

Waddington

Leask

Snelling

Midwives’ attitudes, beliefs and concerns about childhood vaccination: a review of the global literature. Vaccine. 2018;36(44):6531–9.

15.

Betsch

Böhm

Chapman

GB.

Using behavioral insights to increase vaccination policy effectiveness. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci. 2015;2(1):61–73.

16.

Brehm

JW.

A Theory of Psychological Reactance. New York: Academic Press; 1966.

17.

Gunningham

Sinclair

Environmental Partnerships: Combining Sustainability and Commercial Advantage in the Agriculture Sector. Wagga Wagga (Australia): Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation; 2002.

18.

Albarracín

Wyer

Jr.

The cognitive impact of past behavior: influences on beliefs, attitudes, and future behavioral decisions. J Personality Soc Psychol. 2000;79(1):5–22.

19.

Falsetta

Spilker

BC.

Psychological reactance theory and tax evasion intentions. J Bus Ethics. 2025;1–18.

20.

Sprengholz

Betsch

Böhm

Reactance revisited: consequences of mandatory and scarce vaccination in the case of COVID-19. Appl Psychol Health Well-Being. 2021;13(4):986–95.

21.

Pearce

Cooper

Fostering COVID-19 safe behaviors using cognitive dissonance. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. 2021;43(5):267–82.

22.

Freedman

Fraser

SC.

Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique. J Personality Soc Psychol. 1966;4(2):195–202.

23.

Pittarello

Kogut

To ask or not to ask: enhancing donations to nonprofits by soliciting opinions upfront, rather than donations. J Bus Psychol. 2022;37:759–73.

24.

Kogut

Ritov

Protective donation: when refusing a request for a donation increases the sense of vulnerability. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2011;47(6):1059–69.

25.

Nikolova

Lamberton

Haws

KL.

Haunts or helps from the past: understanding the effect of recall on current self-control. J Consum Psychol. 2016;26(2):245–56.

26.

Brisbois

Schmitz

Vansteenkiste

, et al. Attitudes toward mandatory vaccination and the COVID certificate as a function of vaccination status and risk perception: a vignette-based study. Analy Soc Issues Public Policy. 2024;25(1):12435.

27.

Betsch

Böhm

Detrimental effects of introducing partial compulsory vaccination: experimental evidence. Eur J Public Health. 2016;26(3):378–81.

28.

Sprengholz

Korn

Eitze

, et al. Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany. Vaccine. 2022;40(51):7370–7.

29.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

Buchner

G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175–91.

30.

Man

Wen

Zhao

BCL

. Role of trust, risk perception, and perceived benefit in COVID-19 vaccination intention of the public. Healthcare. 2023;11(18):2589.

31.

Moore

Purvis

Hallgren

, et al. Motivations to vaccinate among hesitant adopters of the COVID-19 vaccine. J Community Health. 2022;47(2):237–45.

32.

Kühlbrandt

McGowan

Stuart

, et al. COVID-19 vaccination decisions among Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities: a qualitative study moving beyond “vaccine hesitancy.” Vaccine. 2023;41(26):3891–7.

33.

Tyler

TR.

Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57(1):375–400.

34.

Sønderskov

Dinesen

PT.

Trusting the state, trusting each other? The effect of institutional trust on social trust. Polit Behav. 2016;38(1):179–202.

35.

Hayes

Rockwood

NJ.

Regression-based statistical mediation and moderation analysis in clinical research: observations, recommendations, and implementation. Behav Res Ther. 2017;98:39–57.

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.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB