A recent preprint study by researchers from the University of Bern and partner institutions sheds new light on the public’s willingness to participate in future pandemic preparedness research—and how vaccine-related attitudes and social polarisation may play a key role. The study provides timely insights for public health professionals, epidemiologists, and global health security planners working to build resilient and inclusive research frameworks in anticipation of future infectious disease threats.
The research, conducted in the canton of Bern, Switzerland, surveyed over 3,300 individuals and found that only about half would be willing to participate in a future long-term cohort study on pandemic preparedness. The findings underscore both familiar and emerging barriers to research engagement, especially in a post-COVID-19 landscape marked by political and emotional divisions over public health interventions.
Socioeconomic Status Strongly Predicts Willingness to Participate
The study found that higher levels of education and income were strongly associated with greater willingness to join a pandemic cohort study. Participants with tertiary education were over twice as likely to say they would take part, and those with higher monthly incomes were similarly more inclined.
Older adults and people from larger households were less likely to express interest in participating. These demographic patterns highlight persistent structural inequalities in research participation and point to the need for targeted strategies to improve inclusivity.
COVID-19 Vaccine Opposition Linked to Reluctance
A particularly important finding was the strong association between negative attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines and unwillingness to participate. Respondents who opposed COVID-19 vaccination were about half as likely to agree to future research participation compared to those who supported vaccination.
This trend illustrates how vaccine hesitancy may not only hinder immunization efforts but also impact the ability to gather timely, representative public health data in future emergencies.
Affective Polarisation Influences Research Engagement
The novel concept of affective polarisation—emotional affinity toward people who share one’s views and hostility toward those with differing views—emerged as a key factor.
Among those who supported COVID-19 vaccination, individuals with stronger polarised feelings were more likely to want to participate in a cohort study. Conversely, vaccine opponents with polarised views were the least likely to participate.
These findings suggest that polarisation doesn’t only affect political or health behaviors—it also influences people’s willingness to contribute to public health research.
Motivations and Barriers: Altruism vs. Mistrust
When asked about motivations for participation, respondents most frequently cited altruistic reasons, such as helping others and improving preparedness for future pandemics.
On the flip side, common reasons for refusal included lack of interest, privacy concerns, and mistrust—especially in data handling. This reflects broader trends in declining civic engagement and rising skepticism toward scientific institutions, exacerbated by the COVID-19 experience.
Implications for Public Health and Research
This study offers important lessons for designing more inclusive and resilient research infrastructure for future pandemics:
- Multidisciplinary approaches—bridging epidemiology, sociology, and psychology—are needed to understand and address the emotional and ideological dimensions of research engagement.
- Community engagement should be prioritized, particularly for populations with lower education or income levels, or higher levels of mistrust.
- Technological solutions such as remote participation tools and self-sampling kits may lower practical barriers to participation.
- Ongoing monitoring of public sentiment, including affective polarisation, can inform adaptive recruitment strategies and build trust.
Importantly, as policymakers consider how to implement pandemic preparedness studies like Switzerland’s upcoming BEready cohort, understanding the social and emotional context of participation is as vital as the scientific questions these studies aim to answer.
The COVID-19 pandemic has not only reshaped global health systems—it has also redrawn the emotional and ideological contours of public trust and participation in science. This study is a clear signal that future pandemic preparedness efforts must reckon with these complex dynamics. Without intentional strategies to engage a broad and diverse public, the research foundations we build today may falter when we need them most.
Note: This article is based on a preprint publication which has not been peer-reviewed.