Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34961635›Full record

ArticleVaccine2022

Predicting vaccine uptake during COVID-19 crisis: A motivational approach.

Mathias Schmitz, Olivier Luminet, Olivier Klein, Sofie Morbée, Omer Van den Bergh, Pascaline Van Oost, Joachim Waterschoot, Vincent Yzerbyt, Maarten Vansteenkiste

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Implications for COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A systematic review.Journal of infection and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Testing autonomous motivation as a mechanism of anticipated regret intervention techniques for seasonal flu vaccination.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2025
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mathias SchmitzPsychological Science Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. Electronic address: mathias.schmitz@uclouvain.be.
Olivier LuminetPsychological Science Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium; Fund for Scientific Research (FRS-FNRS), Brussels, Belgium.
Olivier KleinFaculty of Psychological Sciences and Education, Université libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium.
Sofie MorbéeDepartment of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Omer Van den BerghHealth Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Pascaline Van OostFaculty of Psychological Sciences and Education, Université libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium.
Joachim WaterschootDepartment of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Vincent YzerbytPsychological Science Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Maarten VansteenkisteDepartment of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present research examined which motivational factors contribute to individuals' intention to take a vaccine that protects against SARS-CoV-2-virus and their self-reported vaccine uptake several months later. The role of different types of motivation was investigated (i.e., autonomous and controlled regulation) as well as vaccine distrust and effort to obtain a vaccine. Across two large-scale cross-sectional (N = 8887) and longitudinal (N = 6996) studies and controlling for various covariates, autonomous motivation and distrust-based amotivation contributed positively and negatively, respectively, to a) concurrent vaccination intentions, b) self-reported vaccination and c) subsequent subscription to a waitlist to obtain a vaccine. Participants' infection-related risk perception predicted more positive vaccination outcomes through fostering greater autonomous motivation for vaccination and lower distrust, whereas pandemic-related health concerns failed to yield such adaptive effects. The results emphasize the importance of fostering autonomous motivation for vaccination and handling distrust.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIntentionMotivationSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCOVID-19MotivationPandemic concernsRisk perceptionVaccinationVaccination hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID34961635
PMCPMC8626229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.