Back

WEIRD or not: A Cross-Cultural Behavioral Economic Assessment of Demand for HIV and COVID-19 Vaccines

Tewogbola, P.; Jacobs, E. A.; McDaniel, J. T.

2023-07-27 public and global health
10.1101/2023.07.24.23293101 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundDespite empirical evidence supporting vaccine effectiveness, vaccine hesitancy continues to thrive. Demand as a behavioral economic process provides useful indices for evaluating vaccine acceptance likelihood in individuals and groups. Using this framework, our study investigates the dynamics governing vaccine acceptance in two culturally dissimilar countries. MethodsHypothetical purchase tasks (HPTs) assessed how Nigerian and US participants varied vaccine acceptance as a function of hospitalization risks due to vaccination (N = 109). Aggregate and individual demand indices (Q0 and Pmax) were computed with nonlinear regressions. Secondary analyses were conducted using repeated measures ANOVAs with vaccine type (COVID-19 and HIV) as the within-subject factor; country, age, and socioeconomic status as between-subjects factors; demand indices served as dependent variables. ResultsDemand indices varied significantly as a function of vaccine type (F (1, 57) = 17.609, p < .001, [Formula]). Demand for HIV vaccines was higher relative to COVID19 vaccines. Interactions between vaccine type and country of origin (F (1, 56) = 4.001, p = .05, [Formula]) were also significant with demand for HIV vaccines among Nigerian respondents higher than that of COVID-19 vaccines. This was reversed for US participants. Interactions between vaccine type, country of origin and age were also significant (F (2, 51) = 3.506, p < .05, [Formula]). ConclusionsThese findings provide evidence that vaccine type can influence demand. The relationship between demand and vaccine type also varies as a function of country of origin and age. Significance, limitations, and future directions are also discussed.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.