Results revealed that reactance was stronger when a priori vaccination intentions were low and a mandate was introduced or when vaccination intentions were high and vaccines were scarce. In both cases, reactance increased intentions to take actions against the restriction. Further, reactance due to a mandate was positively associated with intentions to avoid the COVID-19 vaccination and an unrelated chickenpox vaccination; it was negatively associated with intentions to show protective behaviors limiting the spread of the coronavirus. Opposite intentions were observed when vaccination was scarce. The findings can help policy-makers to curb the spread of infectious diseases such as COVID-19.
These two papers, only weeks old, indicate public policy issues that were either overridden or ignored over the last two and a half years during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is expected that many more research studies will emerge over the next few months putting new perspectives on the public policy decisions made by politicians and public officials during 2020-2022.
It's hoped that the institution of public policy and administration across the world studies how mandates were formulated and implemented in the light of perspectives coming out from academic research.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
9 posts so far.