Emphasising herd immunity in vaccine advocacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Emphasising herd immunity in vaccine communication may affect vaccine uptake by eliciting prosocial or selfish motivations. While experimental evidence has accumulated, quantitative syntheses are lacking. We conducted a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis to estimate how emphasising herd immunity affects vaccination motivation. Literature up to April 2025 was searched across seven databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) without restrictions. Non-experimental studies or those not assessing vaccination motivation were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using JBI checklists. From 5,862 records, 3,676 underwent title/abstract screening; 278 were assessed, yielding 43 included studies (67 effects), totalling 101,720 participants (51,725 vs. 49,995 for intervention vs. control groups). The pooled effect size (Hedges g = 0.12, 95% CI [0.08, 0.17], p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Reiter, L., Voracek, M., Betsch, C., & Böhm, R. (2026). Emphasising herd immunity in vaccine advocacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Psychology Review. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2025.2562841

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free