adrianke

• Antonini, Marcello; Singh, Renu; Torbica, Alessia Melegaro Aleksandra; Ward, Jeremy Keith; Berardi, Chiara & Attwell, Katie [Vis alle 15 forfattere av denne artikkelen] (2026). Democracy, Trust, and Political Orientation: Disentangling Mechanisms Shaping Individuals’ Vaccine Attitudes. Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law. ISSN 0361-6878. 51(1), s. 45–82. doi: 10.1215/03616878-12166725. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv Vis sammendrag

  Context: In recent decades, many countries experienced a reduction in the quality and functioning of democratic institutions and norms accompanied by rising social distrust and opposing political views. The decline in vaccine confidence might be linked to these trends. This study explores the political factors influencing individual attitudes toward vaccination across 22 upper-middleincome and high-income countries, examining the interaction between political orientation, trust in public health authorities, and levels of democracy. Methods: The authors used the VaxPref database, encompassing demographically representative data from 50,242 respondents collected between July 2022 and June 2023, to conduct an analysis on three levels: pooled sample, democracy groups, and country-specific analyses. Results: The authors found that higher democracy scores generally correlated with lower levels of vaccine skepticism. People in the political center and on the political right expressed more skepticism toward vaccines overall. However, trust in public health authorities emerged as the determinant that explains the largest variation in vaccine attitudes. Conclusions: These findings suggest a greater effectiveness of democratic systems in fostering vaccine confidence and the need to depoliticize vaccination efforts. Building and maintaining trust in scientific information and technical expertise is critical. Blunt measures like vaccination mandates may not sustain long-term confidence, particularly in democratic contexts. Effective interventions should prioritize comprehensive school-based education to promote preventive health behaviors coupled with targeted trust-enhancing communication strategies.

• Antonini, Marcello; Genie, M. G.; Attwell, Katie; Attema, Arthur E; Ward, Jeremy K & Melegaro, Alessia [Vis alle 19 forfattere av denne artikkelen] (2025). Are we ready for the next pandemic? Public preferences and trade-offs between vaccine characteristics and societal restrictions across 21 countries. Social Science and Medicine. ISSN 0277-9536. 366. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117687. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv Vis sammendrag

  In vaccination decisions, individuals must weigh the benefits against the risks of remaining unvaccinated and potentially facing social restrictions. Previous studies have focused on individual preferences for vaccine characteristics and societal restrictions separately. This study aims to quantify public preferences and the potential trade-offs between vaccine characteristics and societal restrictions, including lockdowns and vaccine mandates, in the context of a future pandemic. We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) involving 47,114 respondents from 21 countries between July 2022 and June 2023 through an online panel. Participants were presented with choices between two hypothetical vaccination programs and an option to opt-out. A latent class logit model was used to estimate trade-offs among attributes. Despite some level of preference heterogeneity across countries and respondents’ profiles, we consistently identified three classes of respondents: vaccine refusers, vaccine-hesitant, and pro-vaccine individuals. Vaccine attributes were generally deemed more important than societal restriction attributes. We detected strong preferences for the highest levels of vaccine effectiveness and for domestically produced vaccines across most countries. Being fully vaccinated against COVID-19 was the strongest predictor of pro-vaccine class preferences. Women and younger people were more likely to be vaccine refusers compared to men and older individuals. In some countries, vaccine hesitancy and refusal were linked to lower socioeconomic status, whereas in others, individuals with higher education and higher income were more likely to exhibit hesitancy. Our findings emphasize the need for tailored vaccination programs that consider local contexts and demographics. Building trust in national regulatory authorities and international organizations.

• Antonini, Marcello; Genie, Mesfin; Attema, Arthur; Attwell, Katie; Balogh, Zsolt & Behmane, Daiga [Vis alle 24 forfattere av denne artikkelen] (2024). Public preferences for vaccination campaigns in the COVID-19 endemic phase: insights from the VaxPref database. Health Policy and Technology. ISSN 2211-8837. 13(1). doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100849. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv Vis sammendrag

  Objective Despite widespread perceptions that SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is no longer a significant threat, the virus continues to loom, and new variants may require renewed efforts to control its spread. Understanding how individual preferences and attitudes influence vaccination behaviour and policy compliance in light of the endemic phase is crucial in preparation for this scenario. Method This paper presents descriptive data from a global stated choice survey conducted in 22 countries across 6 different continents between July 2022 and August 2023, and reports the methodological work developed to address the need for comparable data. Results This study included 50,242 respondents. Findings indicated significant heterogeneity across countries in terms of vaccination status and willingness to accept boosters. Vaccine hesitancy and refusal were driven by lower trust in public health bodies, younger age, and lower educational levels. Refusers and hesitant people reported lower willingness to take risks compared to those fully vaccinated (p<0.05). Lower mental health levels were found for the hesitant cohort (p<0.05). Conclusions Insights from this database can help public health authorities to gain a new understanding of the vaccine hesitancy phenomenon, support them in managing the transition from the pandemic to the endemic phase, and favour a new stream of research to maximise behavioural response to vaccination programs in preparation of future pandemics.

• Kellner, Adrian; Martinussen, Pål Erling & Feiring, Eli (2023). Don't stand so close to me: Perceptions of others’ compliance with COVID-19 recommendations and support for strict policy measures in Norway. Health Policy. ISSN 0168-8510. 136. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2023.104899. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv

Se alle arbeider i NVA

• Kellner, Adrian (2025). Balancing Freedom and Health. Understanding Attitudes Toward Freedom-Restricting Public Health Policies Aimed at Preventing Severe Disease. Universitetet i Oslo. ISSN 9788234806834. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv Vis sammendrag

  Effective public health policy requires more than medical arguments. This thesis examines when and why people support freedom-restricting measures, such as vaccination passports or regulations on lifestyle-related diseases, and the conditions under which support increases. The dissertation addresses four central questions: how perceptions of legitimacy shape public acceptance of COVID-19 pandemic policies; how do theories of political authoritarianism help explain variation in public support for authoritarian pandemic measures; what is the association between perceived norm violations by others and support for strict public health interventions; and how are appeals to responsibility used to justify restrictions on or support for individual freedom. Three empirical studies provide the basis for the analysis. Paper I uses cross-sectional survey data from 22 countries (n = 50,242) to examine the association between political orientation and support for vaccination passports. Paper II analyses Norwegian survey data (n = 935) to explore the link between perceived rule-breaking and support for stricter pandemic measures. Paper III uses qualitative inductive thematic analysis of open-text responses from a U.S. experiment with healthcare personnel (n = 245) to examine fairness-based justifications for favouring one receiver. The findings show that legitimacy, fairness, and trust in decision-making influence acceptance of restrictions. Right-leaning respondents were more likely than left-leaning to endorse authoritarian measures, though this pattern does not generalise across countries. Support was higher when others were perceived to neglect health recommendations. Overall, the results demonstrate that the effectiveness of freedom-restricting policies depends on public support shaped by legitimacy, political orientation, norm compliance, and responsibility attributions. These insights are valuable for pandemic preparedness and addressing challenges such as chronic disease.

Se alle arbeider i NVA