Religiosity and University Students’ Attitudes About Vaccination Against COVID-19

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The article would have been suitable for the pandemic time; we are not sure that the research as such and its results are of interest nowadays

Furthermore, the article raises some internal issues that, in our opinion, make its publication in this present form at least disputable

One of the major problems of the paper is the lack of a proper literature review. Normally, the Introduction sets up the context, which is approximatively done, and then we expect a fine-grained discussion of the main concepts used in the paper. It is unclear what these main concepts are, although we believe that attitudes, conspiracy beliefs, and religiosity should be among them. For the article to be considered for publication, a consistent and nuanced literature review is needed, in which to clearly define religiosity and its connections to conspiracy beliefs (and also with other variables, among which education and gender are mandatory)

In what concerns the references – it is commendable that the author(s)  quote authors from Serbia, but it is recommended that they extend their area of investigation (they risk missing out essential references)

The author(s) should also clearly motivate the choice of their sample – why teacher education students? Do they present specific characteristics among students in general? We believe that the motivation already advanced -  that they will be role models for students – is not sufficient. Moreover, are students a specific cohort among the general population that requires particular attention regarding religiosity?

The data gathered raises the question of relevance and also of originality – after all, it is not a timely topic anymore, nor a particularly relevant aspect, to find out what vaccine was chosen by the respondents, or what anti-pandemic measures they observed most.

The design research lacks, in our opinion, a minimum sophistication and the results are predictable.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English language quality is decent but could take advantage of a native proofreading.

Author Response

1. The article would have been suitable for the pandemic time; we are not sure that the research as such and its results are of interest nowadays.

Dear reviewer, we may not agree with this comment for four reasons. The first one is that several papers have already been published with the topic of the connection between religiosity and the COVID-19 pandemic during 2024 in the journal Religions reviewed by you. Those are:

1. Orogun, D., & Koenig, H. G. (2024). Influence of Spirituality on Bitter Kola Consumption Among Pretoria Residents in Response to COVID-19 and Related Illnesses. Religions, 15(12), 1508. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15121508
2. Öhlmann, P., & Sonntag, E. A. (2024). The Religious Leaders’ Perspectives on Corona Survey: Methods and Key Results. Religions, 15(12), 1474. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15121474
3. Przygoda, W., & Chrupek, T. (2024). The Formation of Young People to Faith in God: An Evaluation of the “Youth on the Threshold” Programme Based on a Survey in the Diocese of Tarnów, Poland. Religions, 15(12), 1449. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15121449
4. McLean, J., Laxer, E., & Peker, E. (2024). Taking Alberta Back: Faith, Fuel, and Freedom on the Canadian Far Right. Religions, 15(10), 1250. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15101250
5. Jankowski, P. J., Sandage, S. J., & Wang, D. C. (2024). Latent Profiles of Seminary Students’ Perceptions of Sense of Community Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic. Religions, 15(10), 1235. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15101235
6. Nanthambwe, P. (2024). Public Theology as a Theology of Resilience in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Public Pastoral Care Contribution. Religions, 15(10), 1213. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15101213
7. Iqbal, H. (2024). The Digital Sufi Gaze: Between Love, Longing and Locality in COVID Britain. Religions, 15(9), 1131. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15091131
8. Keul, H. (2024). Creation by Means of Loss and the Paradox of Expenditure—A Contribution of Theology to the Vulnerability Dispositive. Religions, 15(9), 1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15091106
9. Kim, D., & Kim, T. (2024). Applying Daoist Thoughts of Interconnectedness to Disaster Communities: Through the Lenses of Diaspora and Pluralism. Religions, 15(8), 987. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15080987
10. Guizzardi, G. (2024). The Pope of the Rain: The Extraordinary Solitude in the Media. Religions, 15(8), 942. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15080942
11. Geminn, S. (2024). Guidance from Unexpected Places after COVID-19: Learning from Jesus and the Early Christian Communities in Responding to Trauma. Religions, 15(7), 800. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15070800
12. Plante, T. G. (2024). Religious and Spiritual Communities Must Adapt or Die: Surviving and Thriving during Challenging Contemporary Times. Religions, 15(7), 791. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15070791
13. Aftab, A., Jones, B., & Krayem, G. (2024). The Contribution of Muslim Women Australia in the Domestic and Family Violence Space: Victim-Survivor Perspectives from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Religions, 15(7), 772. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15070772
14. Balatonyi, J. F. (2024). Ways to Get and End Marriage: Relationships between Marriage and Divorce Rituals during the Coronavirus. Religions, 15(6), 753. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15060753
15. Lee, B. M. S. (2024). Responses to Climate Change and Natural Disasters in Pre-Modern Korea: Missional Implications for the Korean Church. Religions, 15(6), 691. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15060691
16. Olsman, E., & Israël, R. (2024). Hope during Crises: A Thematic Analysis of a Podcast on Hope in Amsterdam during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Religions, 15(5), 556. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15050556
17. Bodhiprasiddhinand, P. (2024). Buddhist Ethics for Improving Health and Well-Being during Pandemics Like COVID-19 with Special References to Modern Scientific Experiments. Religions, 15(4), 511. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15040511
18. Šoltésová, V., & Harastej, M. (2024). The Impact of Online Theological Studies during the COVID-19 Period on Students’ Religiosity/Spirituality: A Qualitative Analysis. Religions, 15(4), 500. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15040500
19. Igboin, B. O. (2024). “Violent Times Call for Violent Prayers”: “Divine Violence” during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries, Nigeria. Religions, 15(4), 471. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15040471
20. Lawrence, E. (2024). The Algorithm Holy: TikTok, Technomancy, and the Rise of Algorithmic Divination. Religions, 15(4), 435. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15040435
21. Brown, E. M., Chin, E. G., Wang, D. C., Lewis, B. A., Fort, C., Captari, L. E., Crabtree, S. A., & Sandage, S. J. (2024). Adverse Childhood Experiences, Religious Coping, and Congregational Support among Black Clergy and Religious Leaders. Religions, 15(4), 396. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15040396
22. Panagiotopoulos, A., Roussou, E., & Rivadossi, S. (2024). Spiritual Elasticity and Crisis: From Non-Religiosity to Transreligiosity—An Introduction. Religions, 15(3), 373. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030373
23. Kołodziejska, M., Mandes, S., & Rabiej-Sienicka, K. (2024). Cultural and Theological Influences on Religious Engagement with Digital Media during COVID-19: A Comparative Study of Churches in Poland and Ireland. Religions, 15(3), 354. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030354
24. Yong, A. G. (2024). Collective Despair and a Time for Emergence: Proposing a Contemplacostal Spirituality. Religions, 15(3), 349. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030349
25. Kim, S. (2024). Preaching the Ecclesiological Gospel Amidst a Syndemic Context. Religions, 15(3), 347. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030347
26. Kohler, G. Y. (2024). The Talmudic Rabbi as Triage Officer: Decision-Making in Times of COVID-19. Religions, 15(3), 344. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030344
27. Weller, P. G. (2024). COVID-19 and Christian Faith-Based Organizations in Great Britain: A Research and Resource Review of Organizational, Financial and Human Contributions and Impacts in the Context of a Wider “Christian Ecology”. Religions, 15(3), 315. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030315
28. Golan, O., & Mishol-Shauli, N. (2024). Religious Journalists’ Ethics on Communicating Science: The Case of Ultra-Orthodox Reportage in Israel. Religions, 15(3), 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030296
29. Schultz, A. -M., & Maples, C. D. (2024). Plato, C.S. Lewis, and J.R.R. Tolkien Using Literary and Philosophical Texts to Navigate Post-Pandemic and Political Teaching Challenges. Religions, 15(3), 257. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030257
30. Eballo, A. D., & Eballo, M. B. (2024). Religion and Strategic Disaster Risk Management in the Better Normal: The Case of the Pagoda sa Wawa Fluvial Festival in Bocaue, Bulacan, Philippines. Religions, 15(2), 223. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15020223
31. Del Rio, C. M. (2024). Confession Using Audio Visual, Distance Technologies. Religions, 15(2), 214. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15020214
32. Kastanas, I. E. (2024). The Harmonization between Religious Freedom and the Protection of Public Health: Betwixt Self-Regulation and Law. Religions, 15(2), 208. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15020208

The second reason is that the topic in other eminent journals is still current and relevant, and here we have listed only some of the papers dealing with it:

1. Jin, S., Cook, A.R., Kanwagi, R. et al.Comparing role of religion in perception of the COVID-19 vaccines in Africa and Asia Pacific. Commun Med 4, 212 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-024-00628-2
2. Chakhunashvili, K., Kvirkvelia, E. & Chakhunashvili, D.G. Religious belongings and Covid-19 vaccination. BMC Public Health24, 2585 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-20133-4
3. Ejnar Hansen, M., & David Pickering, S. (2024). The role of religion and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in England. Vaccine, 42(13), 3215–3219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.04.006

The third reason is that there is a whole repository of papers dealing with the research into the connection between religiosity and the COVID-19pandemic(Faith and COVID-19: Resource Repository), which we have listed in our paper and which has been formed by the University of Georgetown. It was done for the purpose of prevention because it transpired that religion and religiosity are one of many factors that may be relevant for maintaining public health (and in case of contagious diseases, vaccination is a form of not only primary, but also of secondary and tertiary prevention within the healthcare system). There is not a single reason why scientific discoveries and findings gained during the COVID-19 pandemic could not be used in future pandemics of contagious diseases for overcoming them as successfully as possible.

The fourth reason is that not only medical, but also social, primarily legal and economic consequences of the post-COVID syndrome are still being studied, as well as the repercussions in the area of mental health. The pandemic was a global phenomenon and it brought up certain ever-present and insufficiently resolved issues, specific for some groups of people and social phenomena, such as deficiencies of the healthcare system, family violence, a large number of children whose parents passed away after being infected with the COVID-19 virus etc.

2. Furthermore, the article raises some internal issues that, in our opinion, make its publication in this present form at least disputable

One of the major problems of the paper is the lack of a proper literature review. Normally, the Introduction sets up the context, which is approximatively done, and then we expect a fine-grained discussion of the main concepts used in the paper. It is unclear what these main concepts are, although we believe that attitudes, conspiracy beliefs, and religiosity should be among them. For the article to be considered for publication, a consistent and nuanced literature review is needed, in which to clearly define religiosity and its connections to conspiracy beliefs (and also with other variables, among which education and gender is mandatory).

Thank you for this comment – we have tried to address it by a better systematization of the Introduction in order to make it more comprehensible to readers. Moreover, we have added some elements also asked for by the other reviewer, first of all, a detailed review of religious characteristics of the Republic of Serbia and Religious Instruction as a school subject. We are also grateful to you for recognizing the three main concepts which were the initial idea of the paper, but we must note that the focus of our paper are not conspiracy theories as such, and that is why we have given them less space in comparison to religiosity. It may be a great idea for separate research into connection between religiosity and conspiracy theories in Serbia, and we might conduct such research in the future. However, the problem is that conspiracy theories are a broad social topic which is on the rise and whose knowledge corpus exceeds the framework of this paper, threatening to turn it into a monograph book. Within conspiracy theories, we have tried to present certain concepts we find relevant, in line with the recommendations you so generously gave us. However, if you think it is not sufficient and if you would like to provide more suggestions for improving our paper, we are ready to take them into consideration and accept the in the best possible way.

3. In what concerns the references – it is commendable that the author(s) quote authors from Serbia, but it is recommended that they extend their area of investigation (they risk missing out essential references)

Dear reviewer, since we deal with the presentation of the conditions in Serbia, we must cite Serbian authors, while we would like to point out that religiosityhas not been a thoroughly exploited topic in the Serbian scientific community. Although you may not be familiar with it, there is a very small number of empirical studies dealing with this topic – namely, the papers are mostly of review character or possible based on the authors’ discussions. For fifty years, religionandreligiositywere a rather unpopular topic due to the attempts to make Yugoslavia, and particularly Serbia and Montenegro, with the majority of Christian Orthodox population, as secular as possible, while other confessions were in a somewhat more favourable position – primarily the Catholic Church. Return to religiosity and religion in Serbia did not take place until the last decade of the 20^th century and the first decade of the 21^st century.

4. The author(s) should also clearly motivate the choice of their sample – why teacher education students? Do they present specific characteristics among students in general? We believe that the motivation already advanced - that they will be role models for students – is not sufficient. Moreover, are students a specific cohort among the general population that requires particular attention regarding religiosity?

 

Yes, we believe that the students are the most appropriate group for studying religiosity in Serbia at this moment, since currently at the faculties there are cohorts of those students who had the opportunity to attend Religious Instruction throughout 11 or 12 years of previous formal education. In the paper we present additional empirical data which point to the importance of returning the subject Religious Instruction to the educational system: a drastic increase in the number of children choosing to attend Religious Instruction as an optional subject, not a small number of teachers of Religious Instruction who joined the educational system of the Republic of Serbia, the decreasing number of atheists, but also the key finding that Religious Instruction is chosen most by children in the first cycle of primary school education, when they have only one class teacher. In addition, both parents and children are quite pleased with the outcome of this subject, which leads to the adoption of catechesis itself, but also to the development of social and pro-social values and children’s moral and emotional development. That is why the teachers’ attitude towards Religious Instruction and their experience with religion and Religious Instruction may significantly contribute to the shaping of this social phenomenon in future generations. Of course, we agree with you that it would be great to research the attitudes towards religiosity among students of all faculties and young people in general. We hope that in the future we will have the opportunity to implement it because it has been our plan all this time.

 

5. The data gathered raises the question of relevance and also of originality – after all, it is not a timely topic anymore, nor a particularly relevant aspect, to find out what vaccine was chosen by the respondents, or what anti-pandemic measures they observed most.

We replied to this comment to a larger extent at the beginning. What we would like to add is that the vaccination issue has not been overcome since we cannot pose the question, for example whether vaccination during the Ramadan, which implies strict fasting by Sharia laws, is a violation of this holiday. Moreover, not all vaccines have the same composition and it is possible that long-term side effects will be in the focus of attention of medical public in the future. Many countries had no available vaccines of all manufacturers, no sufficient quantities of vaccines, particularly in the initial days of vaccination, unlike the Republic of Serbia, where vaccines were immediately available and people could make their own decision about the most acceptable vaccine for them. In addition, regardless of the medical effectiveness of the vaccines, many countries made it a condition for foreign citizens for entering not only in terms of the vaccination status, but also the vaccine of a certain manufacturer and the actual vaccine dose. This could also be discussed from moral, legal and economic aspects. Moreover, concerning anti-pandemic measures, we will present only one of many examples: the Catholic Church had no problem when it came to priests serving masses online and using disposable plastic spoons for the communion of every believer separately for the sake of observing anti-pandemic measures. On the other hand, Orthodox Christianity did not readily approve of the digitization of religious rites or of not using the traditional silver spoon during the communion of all believers – in fact, it considered it an impermissible dogmatic violation of the rite. Furthermore, there are also studies showing that members of different nations and confessions differed in their choice of anti-pandemic measures they considered acceptable.

6. The design research lacks, in our opinion, a minimum sophistication and the results are predictable.

We are sorry for not being completely sure what you exactly refer to. At the beginning of the research, we could by no means know the results since there had been no previous research about this topic – not only because of suppressing religiosity of the inhabitants by the state authorities, which we have already written about, but also because previous epidemics in Serbia were not studied from the aspect of religiosity, or only the impact of religious tourism on their outbreak was stated (smallpox in Yugoslavia, 1972).

7. English language quality is decent but could take advantage of a native proofreading.

Thank you for pointing this out. We have tried to improve the quality of the translation. We hope we have succeeded in it.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

This manuscript investigates the impact of religiosity on attitudes toward vaccines among Serbian students in the teacher education field.

 

The early part would benefit from providing more contextual information about the religious landscape in Serbia, especially for readers unfamiliar with this context.

 

The introduction includes mentions social science research but lacks mention of the broader international literature (beyond Balkan region). The early part spends considerable time discussing vaccines but mention of its relation to religion only comes on p. 4. It would be helpful to provide a more complete account of what past research tells us about the influence of religiosity on attitudes toward vaccination and to shorten the more general material on vaccines. In the current version of the write-up, it’s not clear how the present study builds on/departs from existing research.

 

In the methods part, a table summarising the sociodemographics of the sample would be useful. Also, some acknowledgement of the shortcomings of the data (non-representative) would be useful. Although the statistical analysis is interesting, it is at a quite basic descriptive level.

 

In the discussion part, the manuscript doesn’t really engage with why religion appears to have a dampening impact on vaccination (which seems to be the major finding of the study).

 

Also, some of the findings called for more attention e.g., religion didn’t feature as significant reason for not taking up vaccines (figure 4) but it seems relevant to vaccination status (figure 6)

 

Writing: there are quite a lot of typos in the text e.g., ‘levelof’.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript would benefit from editing to eliminate typos.

Author Response

1. The early part would benefit from providing more contextual information about the religious landscape in Serbia, especially for readers unfamiliar with this context.

Thank you very much for this suggestion. We have tried to add as many exact data as possible in order to provide a more complete insight to the scientific public that is interested in the paper, but is not sufficiently familiar with the circumstances in our country. We hope you will be pleased with the improvements introduced in the text of the paper.

2. The introduction includes mentions social science research but lacks mention of the broader international literature (beyond Balkan region). The early part spends considerable time discussing vaccines but mention of its relation to religion only comes on p. 4. It would be helpful to provide a more complete account of what past research tells us about the influence of religiosity on attitudes toward vaccination and to shorten the more general material on vaccines. In the current version of the write-up, it’s not clear how the present study builds on/departs from existing research.

Thank you for this suggestion. In the first version of the paper, we placed the greatest emphasis on religiosity as such, and we may have neglected the medical aspect of the paper. This is certainly an important item and we hope you will be pleased with the changes. Unfortunately, we are not able to shorten the paper as you propose because of the suggestions of the other reviewer.

3. In the methods part, a table summarising the sociodemographics of the sample would be useful. Also, some acknowledgement of the shortcomings of the data (non-representative) would be useful. Although the statistical analysis is interesting, it is at a quite basic descriptive level.

We have accepted your suggestion about the organization of the sociodemographic data and we have made a table, including some further clarifications. Having in mind that this topic appears for the first time in the Republic of Serbia, our intention was to conduct descriptive research as an introduction to future research we are planning.

4. In the discussion part, the manuscript doesn’t really engage with why religion appears to have a dampening impact on vaccination (which seems to be the major finding of the study).Also, some of the findings called for more attention e.g., religion didn’t feature as significant reason for not taking up vaccines (figure 4) but it seems relevant to vaccination status (figure 6).

We have already discussed this result, but having in mind that you asked for further clarifications of the obtained results, we have tried to extend the discussion and to pay more attention to your suggestions. We hope that we have succeeded in it and that you will be pleased with the improvements.

5. Writing: there are quite a lot of typos in the text e.g., ‘levelof’.

You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, it is because of different WORD versions we have used. In the initial version of the paper there were no typos. In the document we have downloaded, we can see that there are many typos and we have tried to correct them all. However, because of the inconsistencies of the program versions, it is quite possible that these mistakes may appear again. They will all be corrected in the process of final proofreading of the paper.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript highly improved from its previous version, The literature review is now solid and the whole argument has gained in clarity and soundness.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I think that another round of proofreading would benefit the paper. Some phrases are too long and some others lack a verb.