Richard Clarke

Bio: Richard Clarke is an academic researcher from University of London. The author has contributed to research in topics: Adult education & Lifelong learning. The author has an hindex of 7, co-authored 36 publications receiving 394 citations. Previous affiliations of Richard Clarke include Philippine Institute for Development Studies & Birkbeck, University of London.

Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review

Abstract: Vaccine acceptance depends on public trust and confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines and immunization, the health system, healthcare professionals and the wider vaccine research community. This systematic review analyses the current breadth and depth of vaccine research literature that explicitly refers to the concept of trust within their stated aims or research questions. After duplicates were removed, 19,643 articles were screened by title and abstract. Of these 2,779 were screened by full text, 35 of which were included in the final analysis. These studies examined a range of trust relationships as they pertain to vaccination, including trust in healthcare professionals, the health system, the government, and friends and family members. Three studies examined generalized trust. Findings indicated that trust is often referred to implicitly (19/35), rather than explicitly examined in the context of a formal definition or discussion of the existing literature on trust in a health context. Within the quantitative research analysed, trust was commonly measured with a single-item measure (9/25). Only two studies used validated multi-item measures of trust. Three studies examined changes in trust, either following an intervention or over the course of a pandemic. The findings of this review indicate a disconnect between the current vaccine hesitancy research and the wider health-related trust literature, a dearth in research on trust in low and middle-income settings, a need for studies on how trust levels change over time and investigations on how resilience to trust-eroding information can be built into a trustworthy health system.

Are Psychology Journals Anti-replication? A Snapshot of Editorial Practices

Abstract: Recent research in psychology has highlighted a number of replication problems in the discipline, with publication bias – the preference for publishing original and positive results, and a resistance to publishing negative results and replications- identified as one reason for replication failure. However, little empirical research exists to demonstrate that journals explicitly refuse to publish replications. We reviewed the instructions to authors and the published aims of 1151 psychology journals and examined whether they indicated that replications were permitted and accepted. We also examined whether journal practices differed across branches of the discipline, and whether editorial practices differed between low and high impact journals. Thirty three journals (3%) stated in their aims or instructions to authors that they accepted replications. There was no difference between high and low impact journals. The implications of these findings for psychology are discussed.

Nature and landscape conservation in transition in central and south-eastern Europe

Abstract: The collapse of socialism in central and eastern Europe and the transition to market-based democracies has had far-reaching effects on many aspects of environmental policy and management. This paper discusses key issues for nature and landscape conservation in the light of this transition and the likely enlargement of the European Union to include former socialist states. Case studies from two contrasting models of former socialist polities – the Czech Republic and Slovenia – highlight the need to analyse the current transition in the light of specific historic trajectories. Nevertheless, despite clear differences between protected area systems and their management in the two countries, clear commonalities relating to post-socialist transition emerge – notably in relation to issues surrounding land ownership, new structures of state power, and developments in civil society. These issues are then discussed in relation to further likely transitions as the two countries seek to join the European Union.

A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Abstract: Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 48.1% reported that they would accept their employer's recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer's advice to do so.

Attitudes Toward a Potential SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine: A Survey of U.S. Adults.

Abstract: Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly instigated a global pandemic. Vaccine development is proceeding at an unprecedented pace. Once available, it will be important to maximize vaccine uptake and coverage. Objective To assess intent to be vaccinated against COVID-19 among a representative sample of adults in the United States and identify predictors of and reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Design Cross-sectional survey, fielded from 16 through 20 April 2020. Setting Representative sample of adults residing in the United States. Participants Approximately 1000 adults drawn from the AmeriSpeak probability-based research panel, covering approximately 97% of the U.S. household population. Measurements Intent to be vaccinated against COVID-19 was measured with the question, "When a vaccine for the coronavirus becomes available, will you get vaccinated?" Response options were "yes," "no," and "not sure." Participants who responded "no" or "not sure" were asked to provide a reason. Results A total of 991 AmeriSpeak panel members responded. Overall, 57.6% of participants (n = 571) intended to be vaccinated, 31.6% (n = 313) were not sure, and 10.8% (n = 107) did not intend to be vaccinated. Factors independently associated with vaccine hesitancy (a response of "no" or "not sure") included younger age, Black race, lower educational attainment, and not having received the influenza vaccine in the prior year. Reasons for vaccine hesitancy included vaccine-specific concerns, a need for more information, antivaccine attitudes or beliefs, and a lack of trust. Limitations Participants' intent to be vaccinated was explored before a vaccine was available and when the pandemic was affecting a narrower swath of the United States. Questions about specific information or factors that might increase vaccination acceptance were not included. The survey response rate was 16.1%. Conclusion This national survey, conducted during the coronavirus pandemic, revealed that approximately 3 in 10 adults were not sure they would accept vaccination and 1 in 10 did not intend to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Targeted and multipronged efforts will be needed to increase acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine when one becomes available. Primary funding source Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.