Objectives: Development of a vaccine against COVID‐19 will be key to controlling the pandemic. We need to understand the barriers and facilitators to receiving a future COVID‐19 vaccine so that we can provide recommendations for the design of interventions aimed at maximizing public acceptance. Design: Cross‐sectional UK survey with older adults and patients with chronic respiratory disease. Methods: During the UK’s early April 2020 ‘lockdown’ period, 527 participants (311 older adults, mean age = 70.4 years; 216 chronic respiratory participants, mean age = 43.8 years) completed an online questionnaire assessing willingness to receive a COVID‐19 vaccine, perceptions of COVID‐19, and intention to receive influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations. A free text response ( n = 502) examined barriers and facilitators to uptake. The Behaviour Change Wheel informed the analysis of these responses, which were coded to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were identified. Results: Eighty‐six per cent of respondents want to receive a COVID‐19 vaccine. This was positively correlated with the perception that COVID‐19 will persist over time, and negatively associated with perceiving the media to have over‐exaggerated the risk. The majority of barriers and facilitators were mapped onto the ‘beliefs about consequences’ TDF domain, with themes relating to personal health, health consequences to others, concerns of vaccine safety, and severity of COVID‐19. Conclusions: Willingness to receive a COVID‐19 vaccination is currently high among high‐risk individuals. Mass media interventions aimed at maximizing vaccine uptake should utilize the BCTs of information about health, emotional, social and environmental consequences, and salience of consequences.

Background: Adolescent self-harm is a major public health concern, yet little is known about the factors that distinguish adolescents who think about self-harm but do not act on these thoughts from those who act on such thoughts.Aims: Within a new theoretical model, the integrated motivational–volitional model, we investigated factors associated with adolescents having thoughts of self-harm (ideators)v.those associated with self-harm enaction (enactors).Method: Observational study of school pupils employing an anonymous self-report survey to compare three groups of adolescents: self-harm enactors (n= 628)v.self-harm ideators (n= 675)v.those without any self-harm history (n= 4219).Results: Enactors differed from ideators on all of the volitional factors. Relative to ideators, enactors were more likely to have a family member/close friend who had self-harmed, more likely to think that their peers engaged in self-harm and they were more impulsive than the ideators. Enactors also reported more life stress than ideators. Conversely, the two self-harm groups did not differ on any of the variables associated with the development of self-harm thoughts.Conclusions: As more adolescents think about self-harm than engage in it, a better understanding of the factors that govern behavioural enaction is crucial in the effective assessment of the risk of self-harm.