Background: New strategies for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) prevention are available and are in development, but their acceptance is crucial to their effectiveness. Objectives: This systematic review aims to summarize current quantitative and qualitative evidence regarding knowledge and attitudes relating to RSV prevention. Methods: Six databases (PubMed, Scopus, APA PsycArticles; APA PsycInfo; CINAHL Complete; Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection) and two preprint repositories (medRxiv and Preprints) were searched up until 23 December 2024 (PROSPERO: CRD42024602351). Results: Sixty-one articles were included, focusing on vaccination for the elderly and adults at risk (n = 10) or pregnant people (n = 24, of which 8 also examined preferences for maternal vs. infant immunization) and infant immunization (n = 27, of which 16 focused on palivizumab, with 6 focusing on adherence to its monthly administration). Eighteen articles assessed attitudes in healthcare professionals. Overall, findings showed limited knowledge and awareness of RSV but generally positive attitudes towards prevention strategies and moderate to high intentions and uptake rates. Protection against the disease and perceived severity promoted acceptance, whereas concerns about side effects hindered it. Maternal vaccination was more acceptable than infant immunization. Conclusions: Attitudes towards RSV prevention options were generally favorable. Should more options become available, preferences may depend on which options are available, their characteristics, and how they are framed and presented. These insights highlight the importance of education on RSV grounded in decision-making literature, while recognizing the likely favorable reception of preventive measures across target age-populations.

In two experimental studies, we tested the effect of COVID‐19 vaccine scarcity on vaccine hesitancy. Based on extensive scarcity literature, we initially predicted that high (vs. low) scarcity would increase demand for vaccines, operationalized as one's willingness to receive a vaccine. Contrary to this prediction, Study 1 showed that scarcity of vaccines reduced participants’ sense of priority which, in turn, also reduced their vaccination intentions. Trust in doctors moderated the effect of perceived vaccination priority on vaccination intentions such that for individuals with high trust in doctors, reduced perceived priority did not reduce their vaccination intentions as much. Study 2 replicated these effects with a more general population sample, which included at‐risk individuals for COVID‐19 complications. At‐risk participants (vs. low‐risk) had higher perceived vaccination priority, but describing vaccine doses as scarce reduced vaccination intentions similarly across both groups. Moreover, Study 2 demonstrated that compassion for others is a boundary condition of the effect of vaccine scarcity on vaccination intentions. For participants with high compassion, scarcity reduces willingness to receive a vaccine; for participants with low compassion, scarcity increases their willingness to be vaccinated. Our results suggest that health policymakers need to deemphasize the scarcity of vaccines to increase vaccine acceptance.

The Covid pandemic has yielded new insights into psychological vaccine acceptance factors. This knowledge serves as a basis for behavioral and communication interventions that can increase vaccination readiness for other diseases. The Covid pandemic has yielded new insights into psychological vaccine acceptance factors. This knowledge serves as a basis for behavioral and communication interventions that can increase vaccination readiness for other diseases.

The role of parents’ emotional competencies on vaccine hesitancy and decision making has been seldom examined. Two studies investigated the relationship between parents’ attitudes towards childhood vaccines and self-reported behavior (Study 1) and between parents’ emotional competence and attitudes towards vaccines (Study 2). In Study 1, predictors of temporal, partial, or complete vaccine refusal (having voluntarily postponed/forgone some/all vaccines) were examined in 2778 parents. In Study 2, psychological predictors of the attitude towards vaccines were examined in 593 parents, using the Profile of Emotional Competence and the valence of mental images spontaneously associated with the term “vaccine”. In Study 1, attitudes were aggregated in three independent factors (concerns about vaccine safety; diseases prevented by vaccines; and naturalistic views) that independently predicted vaccine refusal. In Study 2, a significant mediational analysis showed a positive indirect effect of intrapersonal emotional competences on attitudes towards vaccines, through mental images associated with the word “vaccine”. Parents’ intrapersonal emotional competences affected all dimensions of attitudes towards vaccines, suggesting that being able to manage, identify, and recognize one’s own emotions is central to vaccine acceptance. These findings suggest that intervention strategies, rather than stressing the pro-social benefits of vaccinating, should focus on aspects related to one’s own emotions.