Abstract
In January 2022, several vaccination policies were debated to address the Omicron outbreak in Belgium. Considering variability in risk perception and vaccine uptake, this study aimed to understand differences in support and expectations for four scenarios, ranging from relaxed to restrictive vaccination policies, to inform policymakers. Using an online survey, 12,670 participants (46% female; M
age = 45.9, SD = 13.38) reported their risk perception, number of vaccination doses (0/1, 2, 3 doses) as well as their support and several anticipated psychological outcomes for each scenario. Mixed model ANCOVA showed a pattern of preferential support for the relaxed scenario and more positive anticipated outcomes (general well-being and government appraisals) compared to the restrictive policies, that were treated equivalently. An exception to this pattern was found when people were vaccinated with three doses and perceived high risk. Taken separately, risk perception and vaccination status were not sufficient to drive positive attitudes toward restrictive policies; only their interaction had an effect. Limitations include the self-selected sample and the vignette methodology. The conjunct role of risk perception and vaccination status should be considered when discussing the introduction of restrictive vaccination policies. These findings inform vaccination strategies management during pandemics.
Public significance statement
Encouraging people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 has been crucially challenging in times of crisis. In a vignette-based study, we found that people tended to prefer a relaxed policy over three restrictive vaccination policies, including mandatory vaccination, except when they were vaccinated with a booster dose, and perceived high risk of getting ill. This study provided empirical evidence to inform the debate about mandatory vaccination.