Vaccine hesitancy as indecision: Creation and evaluation of the Unidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale.

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL British Journal of Health Psychology Pub Date : 2024-09-26 DOI:10.1111/bjhp.12753
Matt C Howard
{"title":"Vaccine hesitancy as indecision: Creation and evaluation of the Unidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale.","authors":"Matt C Howard","doi":"10.1111/bjhp.12753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Several authors have argued that vaccine hesitancy should be conceptualized as indecision in the vaccination decision-making process, but no established measure with support for its psychometric properties and validity has been created from this operational definition.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To resolve this tension, this article undergoes a four-study scale development process to create the 4-item Unidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (UVHS).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conduct four survey studies utilizing a total sample size of 884.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In Studies 1 (n = 297) and 2 (n = 298), we provide psychometric support for the measure via exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In Studies 3 (n = 193) and 4 (n = 106), we support the concurrent and discriminant validity of the measure by assessing its relations with relevant constructs, such as vaccination readiness and acceptance, and we also provide initial indicators of the scale's possible predictive qualities by testing its time-separated effects with vaccination willingness, receipt and word-of-mouth.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>We leverage these results to provide a number of theoretical insights and suggestions for future practice. Of note, we highlight that different conceptualizations and operationalizations for the same construct can produce notably differing empirical findings, and vaccine hesitancy is no different.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our cumulative efforts indicate that the UVHS is an appropriate measure to assess vaccine hesitancy as indecision.</p>","PeriodicalId":48161,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Health Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12753","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Several authors have argued that vaccine hesitancy should be conceptualized as indecision in the vaccination decision-making process, but no established measure with support for its psychometric properties and validity has been created from this operational definition.

Aims: To resolve this tension, this article undergoes a four-study scale development process to create the 4-item Unidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (UVHS).

Materials and methods: We conduct four survey studies utilizing a total sample size of 884.

Results: In Studies 1 (n = 297) and 2 (n = 298), we provide psychometric support for the measure via exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In Studies 3 (n = 193) and 4 (n = 106), we support the concurrent and discriminant validity of the measure by assessing its relations with relevant constructs, such as vaccination readiness and acceptance, and we also provide initial indicators of the scale's possible predictive qualities by testing its time-separated effects with vaccination willingness, receipt and word-of-mouth.

Discussion: We leverage these results to provide a number of theoretical insights and suggestions for future practice. Of note, we highlight that different conceptualizations and operationalizations for the same construct can produce notably differing empirical findings, and vaccine hesitancy is no different.

Conclusion: Our cumulative efforts indicate that the UVHS is an appropriate measure to assess vaccine hesitancy as indecision.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
疫苗犹豫不决:创建和评估单维疫苗犹豫量表。
背景:一些作者认为,疫苗犹豫不决应被概念化为疫苗接种决策过程中的犹豫不决,但目前还没有根据这一操作性定义创建出具有心理测量学特性和有效性的既定量表。目的:为解决这一矛盾,本文通过四项研究量表的开发过程,创建了4项单维疫苗犹豫不决量表(UVHS):我们进行了四项调查研究,样本总数为 884 人:在研究 1(n = 297)和研究 2(n = 298)中,我们通过探索性和确认性因素分析为该量表提供了心理测量学支持。在研究 3(n = 193)和研究 4(n = 106)中,我们通过评估该量表与疫苗接种准备度和接受度等相关结构的关系,支持了该量表的并发效度和判别效度;我们还通过测试该量表与疫苗接种意愿、接受度和口碑的时间分离效应,提供了该量表可能具有的预测性的初步指标:我们利用这些结果为今后的实践提供了一些理论见解和建议。值得注意的是,我们强调同一概念的不同概念化和操作化会产生明显不同的实证结果,疫苗犹豫不决也不例外:我们的累积努力表明,UVHS 是评估疫苗犹豫不决的适当方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Health Psychology
British Journal of Health Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
1.30%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The focus of the British Journal of Health Psychology is to publish original research on various aspects of psychology that are related to health, health-related behavior, and illness throughout a person's life. The journal specifically seeks articles that are based on health psychology theory or discuss theoretical matters within the field.
期刊最新文献
Personalized interventions for behaviour change: A scoping review of just-in-time adaptive interventions. Issue Information Determinants of child body weight categorization in parents and health care professionals: An experimental study. Online support groups for family caregivers: A qualitative exploration of social support and engagement. Self-compassion and psychological distress in chronic illness: A meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1