Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 389

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding the Dimensions of Anti-Vaccination Attitudes: the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale

Martin, Leslie R., Petrie, Keith J.·2017·Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anti-vaccination attitudes are important predictors of vaccination behavior. Existing measures of vaccination attitudes focus on specific age groups and/or particular vaccines; a more comprehensive measure would facilitate comparisons across studies. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop a short measure of general vaccination attitudes and establish its reliability and validity. METHODS: Two studies were conducted using the VAX scale. For Study 1, participants were 409 individuals (53% female), with a mean age of 34.5 years. For Study 2, participants were 92 individuals (67% female) with a mean age of 28.6. Participants answered paper-and-pencil questions about their attitudes toward vaccines, prior and expected-future vaccination behaviors, perceived sensitivity to medicines, online behavior, and basic demographic information. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted with correlations and t tests then used to assess the scale's reliability and validity. RESULTS: Four distinct but correlated vaccine attitudes were identified: (1) mistrust of vaccine benefit, (2) worries about unforeseen future effects, (3) concerns about commercial profiteering, and (4) preference for natural immunity. These factors were significantly related to prior vaccination behavior, future intentions to obtain recommended vaccinations, perceived sensitivity to medicines, and the tendency to obtain health information online. CONCLUSIONS: The VAX scale provides an efficient method for identifying those with vaccination resistance, and the four subscales enable a more nuanced understanding of the nature of those views. It should be noted, however, that the strong correlations amongst the four subscales suggest that interventions should target all four attitude areas, and it remains to be seen whether differential emphasis across the four areas is warranted.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12160-017-9888-y

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 33 references

Metadata

Authors
Martin, L. R., & Petrie, K. J.
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2017-03-02
Volume
51
Issue
5
Pages
652-660
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
OpenAlex
W2593261701
Cited by
389
References
33
FWCI
5.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding the Dimensions of Anti-Vaccination Attitudes: the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s12160-017-9888-y
The paper
Martin, L. R., & Petrie, K. J. (2017). Understanding the Dimensions of Anti-Vaccination Attitudes: the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale. Annals of Behavioral Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-017-9888-y

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.