CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 306Vaccine Coverage and HesitancyDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

Monetary incentives increase COVID-19 vaccinations

Open access
Campos-Mercade, Pol, Meier, Armando N., Schneider, Florian H., Meier, Stephan, Pope, Devin, Wengström, Erik·2021·Science
DOI 10.1126/science.abm0475PMC PMC10765478
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Valuing vaccination Using money as a motivation for the public to get vaccinated is controversial and has had mixed results in studies, few of which have been randomized trials. To test the effect of money as an incentive to obtain a vaccine, Campos-Mercade et al . set up a study in Sweden in 2021, when various age groups were first made eligible to receive the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 vaccine (see the Perspective by Jecker). The effect of a small cash reward, around US $24, was compared with the effect of several behavioral nudges. The outcome of this preregistered, randomized clinical trial was that money had the power to increase participation by about 4 percentage points. Nudging and reminding didn’t seem to be deleterious and even had a small positive effect. Of course, the question of whether it is ethical to pay people to be vaccinated like this needs to be addressed. —CA

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 · 10.1126/science.abm0475

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A study in Sweden offering monetary rewards of $24 to receive a COVID-19 vaccine increased the vaccination rate by an extra 4 percentage points (from 72 to 76%).

    “A study in Sweden21 offered monetary rewards of $24 to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, and this increased the vaccination rate by an extra 4 percentage points (from 72 to 76%).”

    From Last-mile delivery increases vaccine uptake in Sierra Leone (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

  • The only other COVID-19 vaccine study in the review to provide cost information offered $24 as a financial incentive to get vaccinated in Sweden.

    “The only other COVID-19 vaccine study in our review to provide cost information21 offered $24 as a financial incentive to get vaccinated in Sweden.”

    From Last-mile delivery increases vaccine uptake in Sierra Leone (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. [1]B. S. Graham, Rapid COVID-19 vaccine development. Science 368, 945– 946 (2020). 10.1126/science.abb8923 32385100 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [2]D. Skegg, P. Gluckman, G. Boulton, H. Hackmann, S. S. A. Karim, P. Piot, C. Woopen, Future scenarios for the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet 397, 777– 778 (2021). 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00424-4 33607000 PMC7906624 · DOI
  3. [3]E. Callaway, Delta coronavirus variant: Scientists brace for impact. Nature 595, 17– 18 (2021). 10.1038/d41586-021-01696-3 34158664 · DOI
  4. [4]K. L. Milkman, J. Beshears, J. J. Choi, D. Laibson, B. C. Madrian, Using implementation intentions prompts to enhance influenza vaccination rates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 10415– 10420 (2011). 10.1073/pnas.1103170108 21670283 PMC3127912 · DOI
  5. [5]T. Rogers, K. L. Milkman, L. K. John, M. I. Norton, Beyond good intentions: Prompting people to make plans improves follow-through on important tasks. Behav. Sci. Policy 1, 33– 41 (2015). 10.1353/bsp.2015.0011 · DOI
  6. [6]K. M. Harris, J. Maurer, A. L. Kellermann, Influenza vaccine—Safe, effective, and mistrusted. N. Engl. J. Med. 363, 2183– 2185 (2010). 10.1056/NEJMp1012333 21105831 · DOI
  7. [7]A. Oza, Studies probe how payouts affect U.S. vaccination rates. Science 373, 611 (2021). 10.1126/science.373.6555.611 34353934 · DOI
  8. [10]J. Haushofer, C. J. E. Metcalf, Which interventions work best in a pandemic? Science 368, 1063– 1065 (2020). 10.1126/science.abb6144 32439658 · DOI
  9. [11]G. Charness, U. Gneezy, Incentives to exercise. Econometrica 77, 909– 931 (2009). 10.3982/ECTA7416 · DOI
  10. [12]K. G. Volpp, L. K. John, A. B. Troxel, L. Norton, J. Fassbender, G. Loewenstein, Financial incentive-based approaches for weight loss: A randomized trial. JAMA 300, 2631– 2637 (2008). 10.1001/jama.2008.804 19066383 PMC3583583 · DOI · Paper page
  11. [13]K. G. Volpp, A. B. Troxel, M. V. Pauly, H. A. Glick, A. Puig, D. A. Asch, R. Galvin, J. Zhu, F. Wan, J. DeGuzman, E. Corbett, J. Weiner, J. Audrain-McGovern, A randomized, controlled trial of financial incentives for smoking cessation. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 699– 709 (2009). 10.1056/NEJMsa0806819 19213683 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [14]A. V. Banerjee, E. Duflo, R. Glennerster, D. Kothari, Improving immunisation coverage in rural India: Clustered randomised controlled evaluation of immunisation campaigns with and without incentives. BMJ 340, c2220 (2010). 10.1136/bmj.c2220 20478960 PMC2871989 · DOI · Paper page
  13. [15]N. Lacetera, M. Macis, R. Slonim, Economic rewards to motivate blood donations. Science 340, 927– 928 (2013). 10.1126/science.1232280 23704557 · DOI
  14. [19]C. Mellström, M. Johannesson, Crowding out in blood donation: Was Titmuss right? J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 6, 845– 863 (2008). 10.1162/JEEA.2008.6.4.845 · DOI
  15. [20]U. Gneezy, S. Meier, P. Rey-Biel, When and why incentives (don’t) work to modify behavior. J. Econ. Perspect. 25, 191– 210 (2011). 10.1257/jep.25.4.191 · DOI
  16. [21]E. A. Largent, F. G. Miller, Problems with paying people to be vaccinated against COVID-19. JAMA 325, 534– 535 (2021). 10.1001/jama.2020.27121 33404585 · DOI
  17. [22]K. G. Volpp, G. Loewenstein, A. M. Buttenheim, Behaviorally informed strategies for a national COVID-19 vaccine promotion program. JAMA 325, 125– 126 (2021). 33315079 PMC9014824
  18. [23]J. Savulescu, Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk? J. Med. Ethics 47, 78– 85 (2021). 10.1136/medethics-2020-106821 33154088 PMC7848060 · DOI
  19. [24]N. S. Jecker, What money can’t buy: An argument against paying people to get vaccinated. J. Med. Ethics 10.1136/medethics-2021-107235 (2021). 10.1136/medethics-2021-107235 33811111 · DOI
  20. [25]R. Thaler, C. Sunstein, Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Penguin Books, 2008).
  21. [26]M. S. Patel, K. G. Volpp, D. A. Asch, Nudge units to improve the delivery of health care. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 214– 216 (2018). 10.1056/NEJMp1712984 29342387 PMC6143141 · DOI · Paper page
  22. [27]K. L. Milkman, M. S. Patel, L. Gandhi, H. N. Graci, D. M. Gromet, H. Ho, J. S. Kay, T. W. Lee, M. Akinola, J. Beshears, J. E. Bogard, A. Buttenheim, C. F. Chabris, G. B. Chapman, J. J. Choi, H. Dai, C. R. Fox, A. Goren, M. D. Hilchey, J. Hmurovic, L. K. John, D. Karlan, M. Kim, D. Laibson, C. Lamberton, B. C. Madrian, M. N. Meyer, M. Modanu, J. Nam, T. Rogers, R. Rondina, S. Saccardo, M. Shermohammed, D. Soman, J. Sparks, C. Warren, M. Weber, R. Berman, C. N. Evans, C. K. Snider, E. Tsukayama, C. Van den Bulte, K. G. Volpp, A. L. Duckworth, A megastudy of text-based nudges encouraging patients to get vaccinated at an upcoming doctor’s appointment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2101165118 (2021). 10.1073/pnas.2101165118 33926993 PMC8157982 · DOI
  23. [29]H. Dai, S. Saccardo, M. A. Han, L. Roh, N. Raja, S. Vangala, H. Modi, S. Pandya, M. Sloyan, D. M. Croymans, Behavioural nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations. Nature 597, 404– 409 (2021). 10.1038/s41586-021-03843-2 34340242 PMC8443442 · DOI · Paper page
  24. [31]C. Jarrett, R. Wilson, M. O’Leary, E. Eckersberger, H. J. Larson; SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy, Strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy - A systematic review. Vaccine 33, 4180– 4190 (2015). 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.040 25896377 · DOI · Paper page
  25. [32]G. B. Chapman, M. Li, H. Colby, H. Yoon, Opting in vs opting out of influenza vaccination. JAMA 304, 43– 44 (2010). 10.1001/jama.2010.892 20606147 · DOI
  26. [33]L. Korn, R. Böhm, N. W. Meier, C. Betsch, Vaccination as a social contract. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 14890– 14899 (2020). 10.1073/pnas.1919666117 32541033 PMC7334515 · DOI
  27. [35]P. Campos-Mercade, A. Meier, F. H. Schneider, S. Meier, D. Pope, E. Wengström, Data and code for “Monetary incentives increase COVID-19 vaccinations,” Version 1, Zenodo (2021); 10.5281/zenodo.5529625. 10.5281/zenodo.5529625 PMC10765478 34618594 · DOI
  28. [36]P. Campos-Mercade, A. Meier, F. Schneider, S. Meier, D. Pope, E. Wengström, “Behavioral interventions, economic preferences and vaccination uptake,” RCT ID AEARCTR-0007652, AEA RCT Registry (2021); 10.1257/rct.7652-2.0. 10.1257/rct.7652-2.0 · DOI
  29. [37]A. Falk, A. Becker, T. Dohmen, B. Enke, D. Huffman, U. Sunde, Global evidence on economic preferences. Q. J. Econ. 133, 1645– 1692 (2018). 10.1093/qje/qjy013 · DOI · Paper page
  30. [38]B. W. Tuckman, The development and concurrent validity of the procrastination scale. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 51, 473– 480 (1991). 10.1177/0013164491512022 · DOI · Paper page
  31. [39]C. R. Wells, A. Huppert, M. C. Fitzpatrick, A. Pandey, B. Velan, B. H. Singer, C. T. Bauch, A. P. Galvani, Prosocial polio vaccination in Israel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 13138– 13144 (2020). 10.1073/pnas.1922746117 32457142 PMC7293608 · DOI
  32. [43]S. Gupta, J. Cantor, K. I. Simon, A. I. Bento, C. Wing, C. M. Whaley, Vaccinations against COVID-19 may have averted up to 140,000 deaths in the United States. Health Aff. 40, 1465– 1472 (2021). 10.1377/hlthaff.2021.00619 34406840 PMC9937640 · DOI
  33. [44]A. Galvani, S. M. Moghadas, E. C. Schneider, “Deaths and hospitalizations averted by rapid U.S. vaccination rollout” (Commonwealth Fund, 2021);. 10.26099/wm2j-mz32 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Campos-Mercade, P., Meier, A. N., Schneider, F. H., Meier, S., Pope, D., & Wengström, E.
Affiliations
  • Department of Economics, Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  • University of Basel (CH)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
  • Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
  • Meier, Armando N.
  • Schneider, Florian H.
  • Meier, Stephan
  • Pope, Devin
  • Wengström, Erik
ORCID
Venue
Science
Publisher
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Published
2021-11-12
Volume
374
Issue
6569
Pages
879-882
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
DOI
10.1126/science.abm0475
PMC
PMC10765478
OpenAlex
W3203168613
Cited by
306
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 86 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 1
FWCI
33.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • edoc (University of Basel) (acceptedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • Knowledge@UChicago (University of Chicago) (submittedVersion)
  • edoc (University of Basel)
  • University of Chicago (cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • University of Chicago
  • Universität Basel
  • National Research Foundation
  • Public Health Agency
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (185176, 201956, 100018)
  • Danmarks Grundforskningsfond (#DNRF134)
  • Lunds Universitet
  • Riksbankens Jubileumsfond
  • Université de Lausanne
  • Universität Zürich (CC BY 4.0)
  • Folkhälsomyndigheten
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
COVID-19 vaccination, financial incentives, monetary rewards, nudging, reminders, vaccine uptake, randomized controlled trials
MeSH terms
COVID-19, COVID-19 Vaccines, Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Records, Reimbursement, Incentive, Sweden, Vaccination, Intention, Young Adult

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