Acceptability of mandatory vaccination: a survey experiment on the effects of thresholds and justifications

ABSTRACT

Mandatory vaccination mightseem like a straightforward solution for reaching a sufficient vaccine coverage during a pandemic. However, the effectiveness of mandatory vaccination is undermined if the public does not perceive such a compulsory policy as acceptable. We report a population-based survey experiment (n = 1,131), conducted in Finland, that addresses the effects that different ways of framing a mandatory vaccination program have on three outcome variables: (1) the perceived acceptability of the program, (2) the willingness to take the vaccine voluntarily, and (3) the preparedness to refuse the mandatory vaccine. In the 2 × 3 factorial experiment, the respondents were presented with one of three justification alternatives that stressed the benefits of the program for either the economy, health, or basic rights. The justification was accompanied with one of two thresholds for herd immunity (70 or 90 percent). We found that the justification and the threshold for herd immunity interact when it comes to the acceptability of the program and the willingness to take the vaccine voluntarily. Importantly, justifications drawing on health were ineffective at the lower threshold level but very effective when the threshold was high. The preparedness to refuse a mandatory vaccine was low and reacted weakly with the experimental treatments.

KEYWORDS:

• mandatory vaccination
• pandemics
• health policy
• survey experiment
• vaccine hesitancy

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

This research has been funded by the Academy of Finland project ‘Preparing for the next waves: towards cooperative and legitimate pandemic governance in Europe’ (decision number 335690).