Table 5. Mediation analyses with Complacency as the mediator and vaccination intention as the dependent variable (N = 1128).
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Indirect effect | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variable | Vaccination Intention | Complacency | Vaccination Intention | ||||
| Paths | c (total effect) | a | b and c’ (direct effect) | a*b | |||
| Coefficient | β | p | β | p | β | p | Indirect effect [95% BC-CI] |
| Predictors | |||||||
| Perceived risk of C-19: self | 0.03 | .33 | -0.15 | < .001 | -0.03 | .33 | 0.05 [0.03, 0.08] |
| Perceived risk of C-19: others | 0.04 | .13 | -0.12 | < .001 | 0.0003 | .99 | 0.05 [0.02, 0.07) |
| Normative beliefs | 0.60 | < .001 | -0.33 | < .001 | 0.49 | < .001 | 0.12 [0.09, 0.15] |
| C-19 Infection | -0.03 | .24 | 0.06 | .02 | -0.01 | .76 | -0.05 [-0.11, -0.003] |
| Risk attitude | -0.07 | .003 | 0.15 | < .001 | -0.02 | .40 | -0.05 [-0.08, -0.03] |
| Delay discounting | -0.02 | .47 | 0.09 | < .001 | 0.01 | .51 | -0.03 [-0.05, -0.01] |
| Control variables | |||||||
| Female (= 1) | -0.05 | .08 | -0.04 | .18 | -0.06 | .01 | |
| Belgium dummy (= 1) | 0.02 | .60 | -0.11 | .003 | -0.02 | .49 | |
| Portugal dummy (= 1) | -0.01 | .75 | -0.15 | < .001 | -0.06 | .05 | |
| Mediator | |||||||
| Complacency | -0.35 | < .001 | |||||
| R2 | 0.38 | 0.23 | 0.48 | ||||
Note: The indirect effects that are bold printed do not contain zero in their 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals (95% BC-CI) and are interpreted as being statistically significant. β is a standardized coefficient. The indirect effect is completely standardized for continuous variables and partially standardized for binary variables.