Cited by 325Vaccine Coverage and HesitancyExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesRisk Perception and Management

On the benefits of explaining herd immunity in vaccine advocacy

Betsch, Cornelia, Böhm, Robert, Korn, Lars, Holtmann, Cindy·2017·Nature Human Behaviour

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41562-017-0056

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Betsch, C., Böhm, R., Korn, L., & Holtmann, C.
Affiliations
University of Erfurt (DE)
Corresponding author
Betsch, Cornelia
Venue
Nature Human Behaviour
Published
2017-03-06
Volume
1
Issue
3
ISSN
2397-3374 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2591813817
Cited by
325
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 72 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 8 · 2014: 1
FWCI
19.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Human Behaviour (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
Keywords
herd immunity, vaccine advocacy, vaccine willingness, prosocial behavior, free-riding, cultural values, collective benefit, vaccine communication, cross-cultural comparison

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