Framing vaccination as a collective responsibility increases intentions to vaccinate

Aims: The decision to vaccinate may be motivated by self-protection or community protection, and people may to varying degrees feel a personal responsibility or a collective obligation to vaccinate. In two preregistered survey experiments during the COVID-19 pandemic, we examined how a benefit framing (personal vs . collective) and a responsibility framing (personal vs . collective) influence vaccine intention. Methods: We used a 2×2 survey experiment design to manipulate vaccine promotion framing systematically. The experiments were conducted on large, overlapping representative samples of Norwegian adults. Separate survey experiments were performed before ( N =5474) and after ( N =1789) the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Norway. Results: Both experiments showed that framing vaccination choice as a collective ( vs . personal) responsibility increased vaccine intention. In the first experiment there was no effect of benefit framing, while in the second experiment emphasising personal ( vs . collective) benefit increased vaccine intentions. There was no interaction between the factors in either experiment. We also observed a considerable increase in vaccine intention between the first and second experiment. Conclusions: These findings indicate that highlighting collective responsibility may boost vaccine uptake, whereas it is more difficult to conclude about emphasising personal versus collective benefits. Message framing may be worth considering when designing health communication strategies during infectious disease outbreaks.