Thread by @DrMaximVoronov

As many jurisdictions are debating the merits of mandating COVID vaccines, vaccine proof to enter certain high-risk spaces, and so on, I think an important thing is being missed that is directly relevant to my research. So a thread here. 1)

I will not touch the "right" to avoid getting vaccinated, which has been debunked by lots of smart folks as an intellectually dishonest argument. I will focus on the argument whether mandates of various sort will get the job done of getting the remaining people vaccinated. 2)

The arguments I see assume that it is the requirements themselves -- laws or rules imposed by certain organizations -- that "cause" the uptick in vaccinations. Basically you require people to do X, so people will do X. But that is not why most of us do things. 3)

The thing that keeps most of us from committing crimes and various transgressions is not constantly thinking about the "rules" that we are following and the punishments we may suffer for failing to do so. We do things that feel normal pretty automatically. 4)

Regulations have not only a substantive function ("you are required to do X") but also a symbolic function (signaling that "doing X is a natural thing to do"). Think about the cliché seatbelt example. Most of us wear them not because we are afraid of the law, 5)

but because it has become "natural" to do so. Yet, laws and regulations help VERY MUCH, because it is the various societal institutions, including legal frameworks, governments, schools, businesses that collectively construct the world we take-for-granted. 6)

The foundation of this thinking (for me at least) is in the classic book, "The Social Construction of Reality".
Here is a pretty good summary of its key points: linkedin.com/pulse/review-s…

And the full book here: perflensburg.se/Berger%20socia… 7)

So institutions, in essence help to create a world where certain things become unquestionable. My colleagues and I have extended this line of argument by suggesting that institutions basically help us to determine how to feel about things:

cambridge.org/core/elements/… 8)

Applying these arguments to the vaccine debate, when institutions mandate vaccines, they make them feel natural. When something feels natural, then people are more likely to do it. This is why most of us don't deliberate the merits of seatbelts or traffic lights. 9)

Conversely, when institutions refuse to mandate vaccines, they raise more questions, elevate ambiguity and hesitancy among the people who are already uncertain. So rather than giving vaccine-hesitant people space to come around, they prompt them to wait and deliberate more. 10)

To be blunt, failure to #MandateVaccines signals an institutional lack of confidence to the public. It suggests that there is still debate about the merits of getting the jab, and that waiting might be prudent. This is NOT the message that institutions should be sending. 11)

In sum, vaccine mandates are important not because they will coerce people into doing something they are uncomfortable doing. They will make more people feel OK to do it. This will not convert the hardcore anti-vaxxer people, of course. But they are not our target. 12)

Ultimately, the job of the governments and other institutions is not to create a system of rewards and punishments but to help create a world in which most people will do the right thing for themselves and others. And that is why it is important to #MandateVaccines 13)

cc (please share): @DFisman @SabiVM @heysciencesam @NathanStall @ASPphysician @SharkawyMD @LaurenPelley @NaheedD @KashPrime @deonandan @BogochIsaac @DGBassani @Kartik79202984 14)