Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects

Abstract

ObjectiveTreatment expectations alter the probability of experiencing unpleasant side effects from an intervention, including vaccinations. To date, expectations have mostly been assessed explicitly bearing the risk of bias. This study aims to compare implicit expectations of side effects from COVID-19 and flu vaccinations and to examine their relationships with vaccine attitudes and intentions. MethodsN = 248 participants took part in a cross-sectional online survey assessing explicit and implicit expectations, as well as vaccine-related attitudes and personal characteristics. A Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) was developed to assess implicit side effect expectations. Explicit side effect expectations were measured with the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q). ResultsWhereas explicit and implicit expectations regarding COVID-19 vaccine were significantly correlated (r = −0.325, p < .001), those correlations could not be found regarding flu vaccine (r = −0.072, p = .32). Explicit measures (COVID-19: β = −0.576, p < .001; flu: β = −0.301, p < .001) predicted the intention to receive further vaccinations more than implicit measures (COVID-19: β = −0.005, p = .93; flu: β = 0.004, p = .96). Explicit measures (COVID-19: OR = 0.360, p < .001; flu: OR = 0.819, p = .03) predicted vaccination status, while implicit measures did not (COVID- 19: OR = 2.643, p = .35; flu: OR = 0.829, p = .61). ConclusionExpectations to experience side effects from vaccinations can be measured implicitly, in addition to explicit measures. Further investigation needs to determine the relative contribution and additive value of using implicit measures to assess treatment expectations.