ReviewCurrent opinion in psychology2022
Public policy and conspiracies: The case of mandates.
Review in Current opinion in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Development of a Conceptual Framework of Health Misinformation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review of Reviews.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Pooled it
- Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Protocol: a systematic review+ (SR+) to combine associative and mechanistic evidence on the efficacy of face masks in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Prevalence, nature, and determinants of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories among healthcare workers: a scoping review.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025Article
- Article
- Determinants of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance based on the novel Omale INDEPT FORCIS Framework and recommendations for subsequent pandemics: a qualitative study among community members in Ebonyi state, Nigeria.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Article
- Estimated public health impact of concurrent mask mandate and vaccinate-or-test requirement in Illinois, October to December 2021.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Vaccine conspiracy association with higher COVID-19 vaccination side effects and negative attitude towards booster COVID-19, influenza and monkeypox vaccines: A pilot study in Saudi Universities.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023Article
- Lessons from COVID-19 for behavioural and communication interventions to enhance vaccine uptake.Communications psychology · 2023Article
- Healthcare professionals' attitudes to mandatory COVID-19 vaccination: Cross-sectional survey data from four European countries.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although conspiracy theories are only endorsed by a minority, conspiracy theories can nonetheless compromise public health measures to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Individuals who endorse conspiracy theories were less likely to wear masks, comply with social distancing, or get vaccinated. This poses a challenge to public health policy, in particular because vaccine uptake lags behind targets because of resistance from a relatively small, but highly vocal, number of people. One policy tool is to enact vaccine mandates, which, while controversial, have successfully increased vaccination uptake. In this article, we review the evidence about whether mandates can be successful, and whether they trigger increased opposition and conspiracy beliefs. We discuss the implications for using mandates in public health policy and argue that decisions about mandates need to be weighed against the consequences of alternative measures-which may also increase conspiracy beliefs albeit for different reasons.
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.