Browsing by Author "Shook, Natalie J."

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Is disgust proneness prospectively associated with influenza vaccine hesitancy and uptake?
(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2022-05) Shook, Natalie J.; Fitzgerald, Holly N.; Oosterhoff, Benjamin; MacFarland, Eva; Sevi, Barış
Although various demographic and psychosocial factors have been identified as correlates of influenza vaccine hesitancy, factors that promote infectious disease avoidance, such as disgust proneness, have been rarely examined. In two large national U.S. samples (Ns = 475 and 1007), we investigated whether disgust proneness was associated with retrospective accounts of influenza vaccine uptake, influenza vaccine hesitancy, and eventual influenza vaccine uptake, while accounting for demographics and personality. Across both studies, greater age, higher education, working in healthcare, and greater disgust proneness were significantly related to greater likelihood of previously receiving an influenza vaccine. In Study 2, which was a year-long longitudinal project, disgust proneness prospectively predicted influenza vaccine hesitancy and eventual vaccine uptake during the 2020–2021 influenza season. Findings from this project expand our understanding of individual-level factors associated with influenza vaccine hesitancy and uptake, highlighting a psychological factor to be targeted in vaccine hesitancy interventions.
A longitudinal assessment of variability in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and psychosocial correlates in a national United States sample
(Elsevier BV, 2023-02) Shook, Natalie J.; Oosterhoff, Benjamin; Sevi, Barış
Recent evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is not static. In order to develop effective vaccine uptake interventions, we need to understand the extent to which vaccine hesitancy fluctuates and identify factors associated with both between- and within-person differences in vaccine hesitancy. The goals of the current study were to assess the extent to which COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy varied at an individual level across time and to determine whether disgust sensitivity and germ aversion were associated with between- and within-person differences in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. A national sample of U.S. adults (N = 1025; 516 woman; Mage = 46.34 years, SDage = 16.56, range: 18 to 85 years; 72.6 % White) completed six weekly online surveys (March 20 – May 3, 2020). Between-person mean COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rates were relatively stable across the six-week period (range: 38–42 %). However, there was considerable within-person variability in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Approximately, 40 % of the sample changed their vaccine hesitancy at least once during the six weeks. There was a significant between-person effect for disgust sensitivity, such that greater disgust sensitivity was associated with a lower likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine hesitance. There was also a significant within-person effect for germ aversion. Participants who experienced greater germ aversion for a given week relative to their own six week average were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant that week relative to their own six-week average. This study provides important information on rapidly changing individual variability in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy on a weekly basis, which should be taken into consideration with any efforts to decrease vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccine uptake. Further, these findings identify-two psychological factors (disgust sensitivity and germ aversion) with malleable components that could be leveraged in developing vaccine uptake interventions.
Understanding the costs and benefits of politics among adolescents within a sociocultural context
(Wiley, 2022-03) Oosterhoff, Benjamin; Poppler, Ashleigh; Hill, Ryan M.; Fitzgerald, Holly; Shook, Natalie J.
Politics entails personal costs and benefits, which may differ for youth from different sociocultural backgrounds. The at-stake hypothesis proposes that politically marginalized youth experience greater costs (e.g., stress, conflict) and benefits (e.g., empowerment) related to politics, whereas the at-risk hypothesis proposes that politically marginalized youth experience greater costs but lower benefits. In Study 1, we examined the factor structure of a new political costs and benefits measure among youth (N = 1,056, Mage = 15.91 years) and tested mental health and demographic correlates. Consistent with the at-stake hypothesis, marginalized youth experienced greater political costs and benefits than non-marginalized youth, although findings were nuanced. In Study 2, a sub-sample of participants (N = 191, Mage = 16.05 years) were recontacted from Study 1 to provide written explanations for why specific findings emerged. Adolescents' reasons indicated that laws and policies disproportionately affect youth from marginalized populations, thus producing both negative and positive political experiences