Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 282

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Proactive Approach for Managing COVID-19: The Importance of Understanding the Motivational Roots of Vaccination Hesitancy for SARS-CoV2

Open access
Taylor, Steven, Landry, Caeleigh A., Paluszek, Michelle M., Groenewoud, Rosalind, Rachor, Geoffrey S., Asmundson, Gordon J. G.·2020·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Vaccination hesitancy-the reluctance or refusal to be vaccinated-is a leading global health threat (World Health Organization, 2019). It is imperative to identify the prevalence of vaccination hesitancy for SARS-CoV2 in order to understand the scope of the problem and to identify its motivational roots in order to proactively prepare to address the problem when a vaccine eventually becomes available. OBJECTIVE: To identify (1) the prevalence of vaccination hesitancy for a SARS-CoV2 vaccine, (2) the motivational roots of this hesitancy, and (3) the most promising incentives for improving the likelihood of vaccination uptake when a vaccine does become available. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional sample of 3,674 American and Canadian adults assessed during the COVID-19 pandemic in May 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES: Measures of vaccination intention (i.e., "If a vaccine for COVID-19 was available, would you get vaccinated?"), attitudes toward vaccines in general and specific to SARS-CoV2 using the Vaccination Attitudes Examination Scale, and incentives for getting vaccinated for those who reported they would not get vaccinated. RESULTS: Many American (25%) and Canadian (20%) respondents said that they would not get vaccinated against SARS-CoV2 if a vaccine was available. Non-adherence rates of this magnitude would make it difficult or impossible to achieve herd immunity. Vaccine rejection was most strongly correlated with mistrust of vaccine benefit, and also correlated with worry about unforeseen future effects, concerns about commercial profiteering from pharmaceutical companies, and preferences for natural immunity. When asked about incentives for getting vaccinated, respondents were most likely to report that evidence for rigorous testing and safety of the vaccine were of greatest importance. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Vaccination hesitancy is a major looming problem for COVID-19. To improve vaccine uptake, it is imperative that the vaccine is demonstrated to the public to be rigorously tested and not perceived as rushed or premature in its dissemination.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.575950

Cites

15 of 15 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 15 references

Cited by

See all 282

Metadata

Authors
Taylor, S., Landry, C. A., Paluszek, M. M., Groenewoud, R., Rachor, G. S., & Asmundson, G. J. G.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2020-10-19
Volume
11
Pages
575950-575950
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3093017530
Cited by
282
References
15
FWCI
31.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: A Proactive Approach for Managing COVID-19: The Importance of Understanding the Motivational Roots of Vaccination Hesitancy for SARS-CoV2. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.575950
The paper
Taylor, S., Landry, C. A., Paluszek, M. M., Groenewoud, R., Rachor, G. S., & Asmundson, G. J. G. (2020). A Proactive Approach for Managing COVID-19: The Importance of Understanding the Motivational Roots of Vaccination Hesitancy for SARS-CoV2. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.575950

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.