Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 300

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Coronavirus conspiracy suspicions, general vaccine attitudes, trust and coronavirus information source as predictors of vaccine hesitancy among UK residents during the COVID-19 pandemic

Open access
Allington, Daniel, McAndrew, Siobhan, Moxham-Hall, Vivienne, Duffy, Bobby·2023·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: Vaccine hesitancy presents an obstacle to the campaign to control COVID-19. It has previously been found to be associated with youth, female gender, low income, low education, low medical trust, minority ethnic group membership, low perceived risk from COVID-19, use of certain social media platforms and conspiracy beliefs. However, it is unclear which of these predictors might explain variance associated with others. Methods: An online survey was conducted with a representative sample of 4343 UK residents, aged 18–75, between 21 November and 21 December 2020. Predictors of vaccine hesitancy were assessed using linear rank-order models. Results: Coronavirus vaccine hesitancy is associated with youth, female gender, low income, low education, high informational reliance on social media, low informational reliance on print and broadcast media, membership of other than white ethnic groups, low perceived risk from COVID-19 and low trust in scientists and medics, as well as (to a much lesser extent) low trust in government. Coronavirus conspiracy suspicions and general vaccine attitudes appear uniquely predictive, jointly explaining 35% of variance. Following controls for these variables, effects associated with trust, ethnicity and social media reliance largely or completely disappear, whereas the effect associated with education is reversed. Conclusions: Strengthening positive attitudes to vaccination and reducing conspiracy suspicions with regards to the coronavirus may have a positive effect on vaccine uptake, especially among ethnic groups with heightened vaccine hesitancy. However, vaccine hesitancy associated with age and gender does not appear to be explained by other predictor variables tested here.

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 · 10.1017/s0033291721001434

Cites

44 of 44 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 44 references

Cited by

See all 300

Metadata

Authors
Allington, D., McAndrew, S., Moxham-Hall, V., & Duffy, B.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2021-04-12
Volume
53
Issue
1
Pages
236-247
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W3154248945
Cited by
300
References
44
FWCI
32.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Coronavirus conspiracy suspicions, general vaccine attitudes, trust and coronavirus information source as predictors of vaccine hesitancy among UK residents during the COVID-19 pandemic. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0033291721001434
The paper
Allington, D., McAndrew, S., Moxham-Hall, V., & Duffy, B. (2023). Coronavirus conspiracy suspicions, general vaccine attitudes, trust and coronavirus information source as predictors of vaccine hesitancy among UK residents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291721001434

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.