ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2022
Vaccine nationalism among the public: A cross-country experimental evidence of own-country bias towards COVID-19 vaccination.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Infographics on risks associated with COVID-19 and the willingness to get the AstraZeneca vaccine: two randomized online experiments.BMC public health · 2024Trial
- The influence of national origin cues in HPV vaccination advertising: An eye-tracking study of visual attention and vaccine perception using quantitative and qualitative analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Joint consensus on reducing the burden of invasive meningococcal disease in the Asia-Pacific region.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Review
- Association of National Identity and Trust in Government with COVID-19 Vaccination and Brand Choice in Taiwan.Journal of community health · 2024Article
- Assessing vaccinated persons' intention to take the COVID-19 boosters using a combined theoretical framework: an online survey in Egypt.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Heritage and hesitancy: how preference for traditional Chinese medicine influences vaccine attitudes.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Assessing How Risk Communication Surveillance Prompts COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among Internet Users by Applying the Situational Theory of Problem Solving: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- The political component of COVID-19 vaccine choice: Results from a conjoint experiment.Public health · 2023Article
- A cross-national study of multilevel determinants on public fully vaccination against COVID-19.Health & place · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
What types of vaccines are citizens most likely to accept? We argue that citizens' identification with their nation may lead them to prefer vaccines developed and produced within their national borders, to the exclusion and/or detriment of vaccines from other nations. We administered a conjoint experiment requesting 15,000 adult citizens across 14 individual countries from around the world to assess 450,000 profiles of vaccines that randomly varied on seven attributes. Beyond vaccine fundamentals such as efficacy rate, number of doses, and duration of the protection, we find that citizens systematically favor vaccines developed and produced in their own country of residence. The extent of preference in favor of vaccines developed and produced within the national borders is particularly large among citizens who identify more strongly with their nation, suggesting nationalism plays a role in explaining the bias in favor of vaccines developed and produced locally. This public opinion bias on vaccine preferences has significant theoretical and practical implications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.