5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination

📜
Abstract

The 5C Scale of psychological antecedents of Vaccination represents a significant advancement in the psychometric assessment of health behaviors, specifically targeting the complex phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy. Developed to move beyond unidimensional measures of trust, this instrument operationalizes five distinct cognitive and motivational drivers that influence an individual's decision to vaccinate. By providing a nuanced psychological profile, the scale equips public health officials and researchers with a standardized tool to diagnose specific barriers to immunization within diverse populations.

The instrument evaluates Confidence, Complacency, Constraints, Calculation, and Collective Responsibility. This multidimensional framework acknowledges that non-vaccination is rarely a simple issue of refusal; rather, it can stem from structural barriers, an underestimation of disease threat, or even extensive, albeit misguided, information-seeking behaviors. The inclusion of prosocial motivations via the Collective Responsibility dimension further enriches the scale's utility in understanding community-level health dynamics.

Available in both a comprehensive 15-item format and a rapid 5-item version, the 5C scale offers exceptional flexibility for various research and clinical applications. Its development aligns with global health initiatives, such as those by the World Health Organization, providing a robust metric for longitudinal monitoring of vaccine attitudes and facilitating the design of highly targeted, evidence-based public health interventions.

🏷
Keywords
vaccine hesitancy
psychological antecedents
immunization
health behavior
psychometrics
5C model

📊 Psychometric Scorecard

Items Count
15
Structure
Multidimensional

Authors

👤 Cornelia Betsch
✉ [email protected]
🏛 University of Erfurt

👤 Philipp Schmid
🏛 University of Erfurt

👤 Dorothee Heinemeier
🏛 University of Erfurt

👤 Lars Korn
🏛 University of Erfurt

👤 Cindy Holtmann
🏛 University of Erfurt

👤 Robert Böhm
🏛 RWTH Aachen University

Purpose

Historically, the measurement of vaccine hesitancy has been conceptually fragmented, often relying on overly broad definitions or focusing disproportionately on a lack of trust in medical institutions. The 5C scale was engineered to fill this critical psychometric gap by providing a comprehensive, theoretically grounded taxonomy of vaccination determinants. By shifting the focus from a generic label of 'hesitancy' to specific psychological antecedents, the instrument allows for a more precise behavioral diagnosis.

For researchers and clinicians, this granularity is invaluable. Instead of merely identifying that a population is hesitant, practitioners can use the 5C scale to determine whether the primary barrier is structural (Constraints), motivational (Complacency), or informational (Calculation). This diagnostic capability is essential for tailoring public health campaigns, ensuring that interventions directly address the specific psychological mechanisms driving non-compliance in a given community.

Construct

The theoretical architecture of the 5C scale is built upon established health behavior models, expanding the World Health Organization's original 3C framework into a more comprehensive five-factor model. The first dimension, Confidence, captures the degree of trust in vaccine efficacy, safety, and the broader healthcare infrastructure. Complacency measures the individual's risk perception, specifically the tendency to underestimate the severity of vaccine-preventable diseases, thereby reducing the perceived need for preventive action.

The scale introduces critical refinements with its remaining dimensions. Constraints replaces the older concept of 'convenience' to more accurately reflect the physical, financial, and psychological barriers that impede access to vaccination. Calculation assesses the extent of deliberate, system-2 information processing and risk-benefit analysis, which can paradoxically increase hesitancy when individuals are exposed to prevalent misinformation. Finally, Collective Responsibility taps into prosocial constructs, measuring the individual's willingness to participate in herd immunity and protect vulnerable members of society.

Validity

The psychometric validation of the 5C scale was rigorously established through a series of three studies encompassing nearly 2,800 participants. The developers prioritized content validity by systematically mapping each of the five subscales to established psychological constructs. For instance, convergent validity was supported by anticipated correlations between the Confidence subscale and general trust in healthcare, as well as between Collective Responsibility and measures of communal orientation and empathy.

Furthermore, the instrument demonstrated strong concurrent validity by successfully linking the measured psychological antecedents to actual vaccination status. This behavioral anchoring is crucial, as it proves the scale does not merely capture abstract attitudes, but effectively predicts tangible health outcomes. By differentiating between various profiles of non-vaccinators, the scale also exhibited robust discriminant validity, confirming that the five dimensions operate as distinct psychological pathways rather than a single, monolithic construct.

Reliability

During its development, the 5C scale underwent extensive reliability testing to ensure stable and consistent measurement across diverse samples. The psychometric evaluation confirmed that both the comprehensive 15-item version and the abbreviated 5-item version possess strong internal consistency. This indicates that the items within each specific subscale reliably converge on their target construct without excessive redundancy.

The robust reliability of the instrument is particularly important for its intended use in longitudinal public health monitoring. By providing stable metrics over time, the scale allows researchers and global health organizations to confidently track shifts in the psychological antecedents of vaccination, ensuring that observed changes reflect true shifts in public sentiment rather than measurement error.

Factor Analysis

The structural validity of the 5C scale was confirmed through rigorous factor analytic procedures, which empirically supported the theoretical expansion from earlier models. The analysis clearly delineated the five proposed dimensions, validating the inclusion of Calculation and Collective Responsibility as distinct and necessary factors in understanding vaccination behavior.

The resulting factor structure demonstrates that the psychological drivers of immunization are multidimensional and orthogonal in nature. Items loaded strongly onto their respective hypothesized factors, confirming that constructs like structural barriers (Constraints) and information-seeking behaviors (Calculation) operate independently from general trust (Confidence). This clean factor structure ensures that researchers can confidently use the subscale scores to generate precise, differentiated psychological profiles of their target populations.

Subscales

Subscale Items Description
Confidence Trust in the effectiveness and safety of vaccines, the healthcare system, and policy-makers.
Complacency Low perceived risk of vaccine-preventable diseases and the belief that vaccination is unnecessary.
Constraints Physical, financial, and psychological barriers that impede the ability to get vaccinated.
Calculation The degree of extensive information searching and deliberate risk-benefit analysis regarding vaccination.
Collective Responsibility The willingness to protect others by contributing to herd immunity through one's own vaccination.

Instrument

Test Type Self-report questionnaire
Format 15 items (long version) or 5 items (short version)
Language English
Population General population, Adults
Administration Self-administered

5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination Items

📋 Items are currently not available

The individual items of this scale are not publicly available. Researchers interested in using this instrument should contact the original authors directly to request the scale materials.

Sample

Three studies comprising nearly 2,800 participants to test convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity.

📄
Cite This Paper

Cornelia Betsch, Philipp Schmid, Dorothee Heinemeier, Lars Korn, Cindy Holtmann, Robert Böhm (2018). 5C Scale of psychological antecedents of Vaccination. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208601

📄 Download Full-Text PDF

📚
References
96 references
  1. (2017). Assessment Report of the Global Vaccine Action Plan Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization.
  2. SB Omer (2013). Go big and go fast—vaccine refusal and disease eradication. N Engl J Med, 368 1374. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1300765
  3. E Dubé (2014). Mapping vaccine hesitancy—Country-specific characteristics of a global phenomenon. Vaccine, 32 6649. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.09.039
  4. HJ Larson (2016). The State of Vaccine Confidence 2016: Global Insights Through a 67-Country Survey. EBioMedicine, 12 295. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.08.042
  5. NE MacDonald (2015). vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants. Vaccine, 33 4161. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036
  6. W Orenstein (2015). Assessing the State of Vaccine Confidence in the United States: Recommendations from the National Vaccine Advisory Committee: Approved by the National Vaccine Advisory Committee on June 10, 2015. Public Health Rep, 130 573. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/003335491513000606
  7. C Betsch (2015). Using behavioral insights to increase vaccination policy effectiveness. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci, 2 61. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215600716
  8. R Butler (2015). Diagnosing the determinants of vaccine hesitancy in specific subgroups: The Guide to Tailoring immunization Programmes (TIP). Vaccine, 33 4176. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.038
  9. M Marti (2017). Assessments of global drivers of vaccine hesitancy in 2014—Looking beyond safety concerns. PLOS ONE, 12 e0172310. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172310
  10. S Lane (2018). vaccine hesitancy around the globe: Analysis of three years of WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form data-2015–2017. Vaccine,
  11. P Schmid (2017). Barriers of Influenza Vaccination Intention and Behavior–A Systematic Review of Influenza vaccine hesitancy, 2005–2016. PLOS ONE, 12 e0170550. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170550
  12. NT Brewer (2018). Increasing Vaccination: Putting Psychological Science Into Action. Psychol Sci Public Interest,
  13. HJ Larson (2014). Understanding vaccine hesitancy around vaccines and vaccination from a global perspective: A systematic review of published literature, 2007–2012. Vaccine, 32 2150. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.081
  14. A Thomson (2016). The 5As: A practical taxonomy for the determinants of vaccine uptake. Vaccine, 34 1018. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.11.065
  15. The SAGE vaccine hesitancy Working Group. Report of the SAGE working group on vaccine hesitancy. 2014; <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/sage_wg_vaccine_hesitancy_apr12/en/index.html" xlink:type="simple">http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/sage_wg_vaccine_hesitancy_apr12/en/index.html</ext-link>
  16. European Commission. Report on the Conference on childhood immunisation: progress, challenges and priorities for further action; 2012; <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/vaccination/docs/ev_20121016_mi_en.pdf" xlink:type="simple">https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/vaccination/docs/ev_20121016_mi_en.pdf</ext-link>
  17. DJ Opel (2013). The relationship between parent attitudes about childhood vaccines survey scores and future child immunization status: a validation study. JAMA Pediatr, 167 1065. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.2483
  18. MB Gilkey (2016). Validation of the vaccination confidence scale: a brief measure to identify parents at risk for refusing adolescent vaccines. Acad Pediatr, 16 42. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2015.06.007
  19. GK Shapiro (2016). Validation of the vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale. Papillomavirus Res, 2 167. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pvr.2016.09.001
  20. D Sarathchandra (2018). A survey instrument for measuring vaccine acceptance. Prev Med, 109 1. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.01.006
  21. Frew PM, Murden R, Mehta C, Chamberlain A, Hinman A, Nowak G, et al. Development of an Index for Measurement of Parents’ Vaccine Confidence and Linkage to Pediatric immunization Acceptance; undated; <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/Frew_Development%20of%20a%20Vaccine%20Confidence%20Index%20to%20Measure%20Parental%20Confidence%20in%20Childhood%20Vaccinations_remediated.pdf" xlink:type="simple">https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/Frew_Development%20of%20a%20Vaccine%20Confidence%20Index%20to%20Measure%20Parental%20Confidence%20in%20Childhood%20Vaccinations_remediated.pdf</ext-link>
  22. C Betsch (2015). Using behavioral insights to increase vaccination policy effectiveness. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci, 2 61. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215600716
  23. I Ajzen (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process, 50 179. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  24. CJ Carpenter (2010). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of health belief model variables in predicting behavior. Health Commun, 25 661. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2010.521906
  25. C Betsch Increasing influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake in the elderly: Study protocol for the multi-methods prospective intervention study Vaccination60+. BMC Public Health,
  26. KE Stanovich (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?. Behav Brain Sci, 23 645. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00003435
  27. P Fine (2011). “Herd Immunity”: A Rough Guide. Clin Infect Dis, 52 911. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cir007
  28. H Bedford (2017). vaccine hesitancy, refusal and access barriers: The need for clarity in terminology. Vaccine,
  29. MB Gilkey (2014). The Vaccination Confidence Scale: a brief measure of parents’ vaccination beliefs. Vaccine, 32 6259. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.09.007
  30. HJ Larson (2015). Measuring vaccine hesitancy: the development of a survey tool. Vaccine, 33 4165. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.037
  31. GK Shapiro (2018). The vaccine hesitancy scale: Psychometric properties and validation. Vaccine, 36 660. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.12.043
  32. NM Askelson (2010). Using the theory of planned behavior to predict mothers’ intentions to vaccinate their daughters against HPV. J Sch Nurs, 26 194. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/1059840510366022
  33. A Zingg (2012). Measuring people’s knowledge about vaccination: developing a one-dimensional scale. Vaccine, 30 3771. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.03.014
  34. LE Egede (2008). Development and testing of the multidimensional trust in health care systems scale. J Gen Intern Med, 23 808. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0613-1
  35. R Horne (1999). The beliefs about medicines questionnaire: The development and evaluation of a new method for assessing the cognitive representation of medication. Psychol Health, 14 1. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449908407311
  36. M Bruder (2013). Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire. Front Psychol, 4 225. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225
  37. Schwarzer R, Fuchs R. Self-efficacy and health behaviours. Predict Health Behav Res Pract Soc Cogn Models. 1996; 163–196.
  38. P Fischer (2011). Threat and selective exposure: the moderating role of threat and decision context on confirmatory information search after decisions. J Exp Psychol Gen, 140 51. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021595
  39. NM Askelson (2010). Using the theory of planned behavior to predict mothers’ intentions to vaccinate their daughters against HPV. J Sch Nurs, 26 194. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/1059840510366022
  40. NT Brewer (2007). Risk compensation and vaccination: Can getting vaccinated cause people to engage in risky behaviors?. Ann Behav Med, 34 95. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02879925
  41. JV Petrocelli (2003). Factor validation of the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale: evidence for a short version. J Soc Psychol, 143 405. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540309598453
  42. Johnson JG, Wilke A, Weber EU. DOSPERT-G Bereichsspezifische Risikoskala–Deutsche Version Domain-specific Risk-taking Scale–German version; 2004; <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=A4AE81167DD98377ED644D86F23F6946?doi=10.1.1.372.4920&rep=rep1&type=pdf" xlink:type="simple">http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=A4AE81167DD98377ED644D86F23F6946?doi=10.1.1.372.4920&rep=rep1&type=pdf</ext-link>
  43. DK Lapsley (2010). Subjective invulnerability, optimism bias and adjustment in emerging adulthood. J Youth Adolesc, 39 847. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9409-9
  44. A Luszczynska (2005). The General Self-Efficacy Scale: Multicultural Validation Studies. J Psychol, 139 439. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3200/JRLP.139.5.439-457
  45. M Fadda (2017). Validation of a scale to measure parental psychological empowerment in the vaccination decision. J Public Health Res, 6 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2017.955
  46. EJ Holm (1992). The Daily Hassles Scale (Revised): Does it measure stress or symptoms?. Behav Assess, 14 465.
  47. J Cylus (2015). An analysis of perceived access to health care in Europe: How universal is universal coverage?. Health Policy, 119 1133. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.07.004
  48. A Kata (2012). Anti-vaccine activists, Web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm–An overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement. Vaccine, 30 3778. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.11.112
  49. E Dubé (2013). vaccine hesitancy: An overview. Hum Vaccines Immunother, 9 1763. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.24657
  50. G Dixon (2013). The effect of falsely balanced reporting of the autism-vaccine controversy on vaccine safety perceptions and behavioral intentions. Health Educ Res, 28 352. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cys110
  51. C Betsch (2004). Präferenz für Intuition und Deliberation (PID). Z Für Differ Diagn Psychol, 25 179.
  52. R Wiseman (2004). Measuring superstitious belief: Why lucky charms matter. Personal Individ Differ, 37 1533. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.02.009
  53. ET Cokely (2012). Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test. Judgm Decis Mak, 7 25. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500001819
  54. C Betsch (2013). Inviting free-riders or appealing to prosocial behavior? Game-theoretical reflections on communicating herd immunity in vaccine advocacy. Health Psychol, 32 978. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031590
  55. C Betsch (2017). On the benefits of explaining herd immunity in vaccine advocacy. Nat Hum Behav,
  56. B Shulruf (2007). Development of a new measurement tool for individualism and collectivism. J Psychoeduc Assess, 25 385. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282906298992
  57. MS Clark (1987). Recipient’s mood, relationship type, and helping. J Pers Soc Psychol, 53 94. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.94
  58. RN Spreng (2009). The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: Scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. J Pers Assess, 91 62. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890802484381
  59. LJ Simms (2008). Classical and Modern Methods of Psychological Scale Construction. Soc Personal Psychol Compass, 2 414. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00044.x
  60. Greiner B. The Online Recruitment System ORSEE—A Guide for the Organization of Experiments in Economics [Internet]. Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group; 2004. <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:esi:discus:2003-10" xlink:type="simple">https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:esi:discus:2003-10</ext-link>
  61. LA Clark (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychol Assess, 7 309. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309
  62. F Faul (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods, 41 1149. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
  63. Ajzen I. Constructing a Theory of Planned Behavior Questionnaire. 2006; 1–12. <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235913732_Constructing_a_Theory_of_Planned_Behavior_Questionnaire" xlink:type="simple">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235913732_Constructing_a_Theory_of_Planned_Behavior_Questionnaire</ext-link>
  64. ET Cokely (2012). Measuring Risk Literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test. Judgm Decis Mak, 7 25. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500001819
  65. C Betsch (2015). The narrative bias revisited: What drives the biasing influence of narrative information on risk perceptions?. Judgm Decis Mak, 10 241. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500004654
  66. Kemper CJ, Beierlein C, Bensch D, Kovaleva A, Rammstedt B. Eine Kurzskala zur Erfassung des Gamma-Faktors sozial erwünschten Antwortverhaltens: die Kurzskala Soziale Erwünschtheit-Gamma (KSE-G). 2012;2012/25. <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/33958/ssoar-2012-kemper_et_al-Eine_Kurzskala_zur_Erfassung_des.pdf?sequence=1" xlink:type="simple">https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/33958/ssoar-2012-kemper_et_al-Eine_Kurzskala_zur_Erfassung_des.pdf?sequence=1</ext-link>
  67. B Rammstedt (2013). Eine kurze Skala zur Messung der fünf Dimensionen der Persönlichkeit: Big-Five-Inventory-10 (BFI-10) [A Short Scale for Assessing the Big Five Dimensions of Personality—10 Item Big Five Inventory (BFI-10)]. Methoden–Daten–Anal, 7 233.
  68. KJ Preacher (2003). Repairing Tom Swift’s Electric Factor Analysis Machine. Underst Stat, 2 13. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328031US0201_02
  69. CT Bauch (2004). Vaccination and the theory of games. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 101 13391. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403823101
  70. GB Chapman (2012). Using game theory to examine incentives in influenza vaccination behavior. Psychol Sci, 23 1008. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612437606
  71. M Quadri-Sheriff (2012). The Role of Herd Immunity in Parents’ Decision to Vaccinate Children: A Systematic Review. PEDIATRICS, 130 522. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-0140
  72. R Böhm (2016). Selfish-rational non-vaccination: Experimental evidence from an interactive vaccination game. J Econ Behav Organ, 131 183. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2015.11.008
  73. B Strelitz (2015). Parental vaccine hesitancy and acceptance of seasonal influenza vaccine in the pediatric emergency department. Vaccine, 33 1802. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.02.034
  74. SE Williams (2016). Screening Tool Predicts Future Underimmunization Among a Pediatric Practice in Tennessee. Clin Pediatr (Phila), 55 537. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/0009922815615823
  75. JM Glanz (2017). Web-based Social Media Intervention to Increase Vaccine Acceptance: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Pediatrics, 140.
  76. NB Henrikson (2015). Physician Communication Training and Parental vaccine hesitancy: A Randomized Trial. PEDIATRICS, 136 70. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-3199
  77. SE Williams (2013). A randomized trial to increase acceptance of childhood vaccines by vaccine-hesitant parents: a pilot study. Acad Pediatr, 13 475. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2013.03.011
  78. AB Amin (2017). Association of moral values with vaccine hesitancy. Nat Hum Behav, 1 873. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0256-5
  79. F Napolitano (2018). Investigating Italian parents’ vaccine hesitancy: A cross-sectional survey. Hum Vaccines Immunother, 14 (7), 1558. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2018.1463943
  80. FS Mohd Azizi (2017). vaccine hesitancy among parents in a multi-ethnic country, Malaysia. Vaccine, 35 2955. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.010
  81. A-L McRee (2010). The Carolina HPV immunization attitudes and beliefs scale (CHIAS): scale development and associations with intentions to vaccinate. Sex Transm Dis, 37 234. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181c37e15
  82. MB Gilkey (2016). Vaccination Confidence and Parental Refusal/Delay of Early Childhood Vaccines. PLOS ONE, 11 e0159087. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159087
  83. RD Hays (2001). The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life. Ann Med, 33 350. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002089
  84. JP Tangney (2004). High Self-Control Predicts Good Adjustment, Less Pathology, Better Grades, and Interpersonal Success. J Pers, 72 271. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x
  85. Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung. Impfkalender 2017/2018—Welche Impfungen sind empfohlen? Empfehlungen der Ständigen Impfkommission (STIKO), Stand: August 2017. 2017; <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.impfen-info.de/fileadmin/impfen-info.de/Downloads/Impfkalender_2017-2018.pdf" xlink:type="simple">https://www.impfen-info.de/fileadmin/impfen-info.de/Downloads/Impfkalender_2017-2018.pdf</ext-link>
  86. AJ Berinsky (2014). Separating the Shirkers from the Workers? Making Sure Respondents Pay Attention on Self-Administered Surveys. Am J Polit Sci, 58 739. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12081
  87. S Perez (2016). Development and Validation of the Human Papillomavirus Attitudes and Beliefs Scale in a National Canadian Sample. Sex Transm Dis, 43 626. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000506
  88. J Moeller (2015). A word on standardization in longitudinal studies: don’t. Front Psychol, 6 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01389
  89. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). immunization Schedules | CDC. 2018. <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/index.html" xlink:type="simple">https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/index.html</ext-link>
  90. J Henrich (2010). The weirdest people in the world?. Behav Brain Sci, 33 61. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
  91. C Bartneck (2015). Comparing the Similarity of Responses Received from Studies in Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to Studies Conducted Online and with Direct Recruitment. PLOS ONE, 10 e0121595. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121595
  92. S Cooper (2018). vaccine hesitancy–a potential threat to the achievements of vaccination programmes in Africa. Hum Vaccines Immunother,
  93. JD Grabenstein (2013). What the World’s religions teach, applied to vaccines and immune globulins. Vaccine, 31 2011. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.02.026
  94. C Rossmann The Routledge Handbook of Strategic Communication. 409.
  95. S Michie (2011). The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci, 6 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42
  96. PM Frew (2017). Interventions to increase pediatric vaccine uptake: An overview of recent findings. Hum Vaccines Immunother, 13 2503. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2017.1367069

Cite this article

(2026). 5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Retrieved from https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/5c-scale-of-psychological-antecedents-of-vaccination/

. "5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 12 Aug. 2026, https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/5c-scale-of-psychological-antecedents-of-vaccination/.

. "5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 2026. https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/5c-scale-of-psychological-antecedents-of-vaccination/.

(2026) '5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination', PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Available at: https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/5c-scale-of-psychological-antecedents-of-vaccination/.

[1] , "5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination," PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, vol. X, no. Y, ص Z-Z, August, 2026.

. 5C Scale of Psychological Antecedents of Vaccination. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. 2026;vol(issue):pages.

Related terms:

  1. Antecedents of Consumer Acceptance Technology Agency–Model
  2. Antecedents of Consumer Brand Engagement and Brand Equity of Apps–Measurement Model
  3. Antecedents of Consumer Online Apparel Purchase Intention via Virtual Try On Technology–Model
  4. Antecedents of Sexual and Reproductive Health Misperceptions–Model
  5. Antecedents and Consequences of Conspicuous Green Behavior on Social Media–Model Questionnaire
  6. Antecedents and Consequences of Endorsers’ Participation in Marketing and Communication Strategies–Model Questionnaire
  7. Antecedents and Outcomes of Nation Brand Love–Model Questionnaire
  8. Antecedents and Outcomes of Purchase Justification in a Hedonic Online Context–Model Questionnaire
  9. Antecedents of Risk Perception and Compliance With Public Health Guidance During COVID-19–Model Questionnaire
  10. Antecedents of Work-From-Home Adjustment–Model Questionnaire
× Figure
PDF
Scroll to Top