Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Message Effects Lab, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2023 Mar 17;18(3):e0282518. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282518. eCollection 2023.
Experts continue to debate how to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates. Some experts advocate for financial incentives. Others argue that financial incentives, especially large ones, will have counterproductive psychological effects, reducing the percent of people who want to vaccinate. Among a racially and ethnically diverse U.S. sample of lower income adults, for whom vaccine uptake has lagged compared with higher income adults, we empirically examine such claims about relatively large and small guaranteed cash payments.
In 2021, we conducted a randomized, controlled experiment among U.S. residents with incomes below $80,000 who reported being unvaccinated against COVID-19. Study participants were randomized to one of four study arms. In two arms, respondents first learned about a policy proposal to pay $1,000 or $200 to those who received COVID-19 vaccination and were then asked if, given that policy, they would want to vaccinate. In the two other arms, respondents received either an educational message about this vaccine or received no vaccine information and were then asked if they wanted to vaccinate for COVID-19. The primary analyses estimated and compared the overall percentage in each study arm that reported wanting to vaccinate for COVID-19. In other analyses, we estimated and compared these percentages for subgroups of interest, including gender, race/ethnicity, and education.
Among 2,290 unvaccinated adults, 79.7% (95%CI, 76.4-83.0%) of those who learned about the proposed $1,000 payment wanted to get vaccinated, compared with 58.9% (95%CI, 54.8-63.0%) in the control condition without vaccine information, a difference of 20 percentage points. Among those who learned of the proposed $200 payment, 74.8% (95% CI, 71.3-78.4%) wanted to vaccinate. Among those who learned only about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, 68.9% (95% CI, 65.1-72.7%) wanted to vaccinate. Findings were consistent across various subgroups.
Despite several study limitations, the results do not support concerns that the financial incentive policies aimed to increase COVID-19 vaccination would have counterproductive effects. Instead, those who learned about a policy with a large or small financial incentive were more likely than those in the control condition to report that they would want to vaccinate. The positive effects extended to subgroups that have been less likely to vaccinate, including younger adults, those with less education, and racial and ethnic minorities. Financial incentives of $1,000 performed similarly to those offering only $200.
专家们一直在争论如何提高 COVID-19 疫苗接种率。一些专家主张提供经济激励。另一些人则认为,经济激励,尤其是大额激励,会产生适得其反的心理效应,降低愿意接种疫苗的人数。在一个种族和民族多样化的美国低收入成年人样本中,与高收入成年人相比,疫苗接种率滞后,我们实证研究了这种关于相对较大和较小的有保障现金支付的说法。
在 2021 年,我们在美国收入低于 80000 美元且报告未接种 COVID-19 疫苗的居民中进行了一项随机对照试验。研究参与者被随机分配到四个研究组之一。在两组中,受访者首先了解了一项向接种 COVID-19 疫苗的人支付 1000 美元或 200 美元的政策提案,然后询问他们,如果有了这项政策,他们是否愿意接种疫苗。在另外两组中,受访者要么收到关于这种疫苗的教育信息,要么没有收到疫苗信息,然后询问他们是否愿意接种 COVID-19 疫苗。主要分析估计并比较了每个研究组中报告愿意接种 COVID-19 疫苗的总体百分比。在其他分析中,我们针对包括性别、种族/族裔和教育程度在内的感兴趣的亚组估计并比较了这些百分比。
在 2290 名未接种疫苗的成年人中,与没有疫苗信息的对照组相比,得知拟议的 1000 美元付款的人中,有 79.7%(95%CI,76.4-83.0%)表示愿意接种疫苗,而对照组为 58.9%(95%CI,54.8-63.0%),相差 20 个百分点。在得知拟议的 200 美元付款的人中,有 74.8%(95%CI,71.3-78.4%)表示愿意接种疫苗。在仅了解 COVID-19 疫苗安全性和有效性的人中,有 68.9%(95%CI,65.1-72.7%)表示愿意接种疫苗。调查结果在各个亚组中一致。
尽管存在一些研究限制,但结果并不支持有关旨在提高 COVID-19 疫苗接种率的经济激励政策会产生适得其反效果的担忧。相反,那些了解有或没有大额经济激励政策的人比对照组更有可能表示他们愿意接种疫苗。这种积极影响扩展到了不太愿意接种疫苗的亚组,包括年轻人、受教育程度较低的人和少数族裔。1000 美元的经济激励与仅提供 200 美元的激励效果相似。