Correcting vaccine misinformation on social media: Effect of social correction methods on vaccine skeptics' intention to take COVID-19 vaccine

This study identifies the effect of six social correction methods on vaccine skeptics' intention to take COVID-19 vaccine. In April–May 2021, we conducted a 3 (corrector on Twitter: ordinary person vs medical doctor vs nurse) × 2 (correction strategy: priming vs rebuttal) + 1 (control: misinformation only) between-subjects online experiment with 569 vaccine skeptics in the United States. Results show that exposure to priming-based corrections performed by a corrector, regardless of their expertise, is positively associated with intention to take COVID-19 vaccine if the information shared by the corrector is perceived to be trustworthy. This is evident among those with high or moderate vaccine skepticism. What is only evident among those with moderate vaccine skepticism is that exposure to corrections using priming (any corrector) or rebuttal (ordinary person or medical doctor) is positively associated with intention to take COVID-19 vaccine if the respondents perceived that the corrector was an expert. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of New Media & Society is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Taking a Shot: The Impact of Information Frames and Channels on Vaccination Willingness in a Pandemic.

The reluctance of people to receive safe and recommended available vaccines is a well-documented public health challenge. As information and communication technologies evolve, this challenge gets more complex and even harder to manage during complex public health situations. In this experimental study, we examine the relationship between vaccine information frames (with scientific information vs. without scientific information) and channels (through government vs. religious organizations) and vaccination willingness in the U.S. in the context of a pandemic. Additionally, we evaluate the interaction between vaccine skepticism, vaccine information frames, and vaccine information channels on vaccination willingness. This experimental study uses data from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTURK) to evaluate the relationships between vaccine skepticism, vaccine information frames, and channels on vaccination willingness. We find that contrary to our hypothesis, a vaccine advisory framed with scientific information decreases people's vaccination willingness compared to one framed without scientific information. Additionally, the impact of framing on vaccination willingness is conditioned on participants' skepticism-participants who hold skepticism toward the vaccine but received information framed with scientific information score significantly higher in vaccination willingness compared to participants who do not hold skepticism toward a vaccine. The results suggest that the factors impacting vaccination willingness are complex and nuanced. Thus, policymakers should be more strategic with the delivery of vaccination information, especially during complex health crises.

Vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy theories: a Jungian perspective

Introduction: Endorsing conspiracy theories seems to constitute a major feature of contemporary collective anti-vaccine movements (Vignaud & Salvadori, 2019). As revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic, this contributes to increased worldwide vaccine hesitancy (de Figueiredo et al., 2020). Objective(s): The present work aims at providing novel insight into the collective psychological underpinnings of conspiracy-based vaccine discourses. Method(s): Our approach is inspired by Jung's view that human groups produce narratives to project their collective conflicts (e.g., social, religious, political) onto reality. Weanalyze these projections in relation to the "halo effect" phenomenon, namely taking metaphorical extensions of (scientific) concepts at face value (e.g. Keller, 1995). Accordingly, we discuss one version of "the Great Reset" theory, claiming that COVID-19 vaccines are used by "the elite" to control behavior and abolish fundamental freedoms. Result(s): Our analysis suggests that Western societies are manifesting some of their existential concerns through anti-vaccine discourse. In "the Great Reset" narrative, characters (people, vaccines, elites, immune systems, etc.) and plot can be read as symbols of, respectively, structural elements of the collective psyche (sociocultural values, aggressive drives, death anxiety, psychic defenses, etc.), and dynamic interrelations among these elements. Conclusion(s): Conspiracy theories can be understood as shared narratives serving the purpose of giving shape to collective fears. Within such a framework, references to "vaccines" and "immunity" are the manifestations of a state of crisis of collective psychic defenses.

The Role of Denial in Vaccine Skeptics and "Anti-vax" Blame: A Psychodynamic Approach.

In this paper, we propose to account for the blame addressed to vaccine skeptics and "anti-vax" (VS and AV) by considering their attitude as the result of the psychological mechanism of denial, understood in a psychodynamic manner. To that effect, we draw on a secondary account of our clinical experience in two hospital units (psychiatry and intensive care unit), and on openly available media material. First, we lay out how VS and AV can be understood as the result from fetishist risk denial, a specific psychological transaction with an object by which VS and AV people feel intimately protected; this object is viewed as so powerful that its protection makes the vaccine appear irrelevant. Second, we show how this mechanism can explain the specific content of the blame frequently addressed to VS and AV, who are reproached with being selfish by vaccinated people and caregivers. We contend that, contrary to common belief, they are thus blamed because they force others (and especially caregivers) to compensate their lack of self-protection and preservation, which derives from their exclusive relation to an almighty object. While such a relation accounts for the unwillingness to consider vaccination, it also explains the harshness of the blame voiced by caregivers, who feel helpless in most situations as they cannot effectively force VS and AV to take care of themselves and others.

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among people with chronic neurological disorders: A position paper.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Health risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection are undisputed. Moreover, the capability of vaccination to prevent symptomatic, severe, and fatal COVID-19 is recognized. There is also early evidence that vaccination can reduce the chance for long COVID-19. Nonetheless, the willingness to get vaccinated and receive booster shots remains subpar among people with neurologic disorders. Vaccine scepticism not only jeopardizes collective efforts to end the COVID-19 pandemic but puts individual lives at risk, as some chronic neurologic diseases are associated with a higher risk for an unfavorable COVID-19 course. METHODS: In this position paper, the NeuroCOVID-19 Task Force of the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) summarizes the current knowledge on the prognosis of COVID-19 among patients with neurologic disease, elucidates potential barriers to vaccination coverage, and formulates strategies to overcome vaccination hesitancy. A survey among the Task Force members on the phenomenon of vaccination hesitancy among people with neurologic disease supports the lines of argumentation. RESULTS: The study revealed that people with multiple sclerosis and other nervous system autoimmune disorders are most skeptical of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The prevailing concerns included the chance of worsening the pre-existing neurological condition, vaccination-related adverse events, and drug interaction. CONCLUSIONS: The EAN NeuroCOVID-19 Task Force reinforces the key role of neurologists as advocates of COVID-19 vaccination. Neurologists need to argue in the interest of their patients about the overwhelming individual and global benefits of COVID-19 vaccination. Moreover, they need to keep on eye on this vulnerable patient group, its concerns, and the emergence of potential safety signals.

The correlates and dynamics of COVID-19 vaccine-specific hesitancy.

Most work on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has focused on its attitudinal and demographic correlates among individuals, but the characteristics of vaccines themselves also appear to be important. People are more willing to take vaccines with higher reported levels of efficacy and safety. Has this dynamic sparked comparative hesitancy towards specific COVID-19 vaccines? We conduct a series of cross-sectional survey experiments to test for brand-based differences in perceived effectiveness, perceived safety, and vaccination intention. Examining more than 6,200 individuals in a series of cross-sectional surveys, we find considerably more reluctance to take the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines compared to those from Pfizer and Moderna if offered, despite all vaccines being approved and deemed safe and effective by a federal regulator. Comparative hesitancy towards these vaccines grew over the course of fielding as controversy arose over their link to extremely rare, but serious side effects. Comparative vaccine-specific hesitancy is strongest among people who are usually most open to mass vaccination efforts. Its effects are substantial: most respondents reported a willingness to wait months for their preferred vaccine rather than receive either the AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson vaccine immediately. Our findings call for additional research on the determinants and consequences of COVID-19 vaccine-specific hesitancy and communication strategies to minimize this challenge.

Sources of Vaccine Hesitancy: Pregnancy, Infertility, Minority Concerns, and General Skepticism.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic continues to evolve, with variants of concern and new surges of COVID-19 noted over the past months. The limited data and evolving recommendations regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy have led to some understandable hesitancy among pregnant individuals. On social media, misinformation and unfounded claims linking COVID-19 vaccines to infertility are widespread, leading to vaccine skepticism among many men and women of reproductive age. The disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on communities of color, coupled with the unfortunate and troubled history of abuses of African Americans by the biomedical research community in the US, has also led to hesitancy and skepticism about the COVID-19 vaccines among some of our most vulnerable. The complex nature of vaccine hesitancy is evidenced by further divides between different demographic, political, age, geographical, and socioeconomic groups. Better understanding of these concerns is important in the individualized approaches to each patient.

How does information overload about COVID-19 vaccines influence individuals' vaccination intentions? The roles of cyberchondria, perceived risk, and vaccine skepticism.

This research proposes and tests an integrated model to explain how information overload influence vaccine skepticism and vaccination intention. In addition, this research investigates the effectiveness of using a celebrity endorsement strategy in promoting vaccination and compares its effectiveness with other endorsement types. A survey study (Study 1) was conducted to examine the mechanism underlying the impact of the COVID-19 vaccine information overload on vaccine skepticism that, subsequently, affects vaccination intention. It also examined the moderating role of celebrity endorsement trustworthiness. The results indicate that information overload positively influenced vaccine skepticism through cyberchondria and perceived risk of the vaccine, which subsequently reduces vaccination intention. The negative effect of vaccine skepticism on vaccination intention was weakened by the celebrity endorsement that was considered trustworthy. A follow-up experimental study (Study 2) was performed to compare the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement with other endorsement types (i.e., government official and medical expert endorsements). The results showed that the celebrity endorsement was more effective in mitigating the negative effect of vaccine skepticism on vaccination intention compared to government official and medical expert. The findings provide practical insights into how governments can minimize people's vaccine skeptical views and increase their vaccination intentions.

Becoming skeptical towards vaccines: How health views shape the trajectories following health-related events.

Recent studies on skepticism towards childhood vaccination urge scholars to analyse vaccination trajectories. Focusing on a social group that recent studies point out as being especially relevant because of its relatively high level of skepticism toward childhood vaccination, we use in-depth interviews resembling open conversations to explore how more-educated parents' views on vaccination came about. Providing an in-depth understanding of these vaccine-skepticism trajectories, we additionally analyse 1) how health-related events play a role in parents' trajectories, and 2) how these trajectories are shaped by parents' pre-existing health views. Interviews with 31 more-educated Dutch parents reveal that different types of events incite respondents to start questioning vaccinations. Next to more commonly studied events that directly involve parents' or their children's health (e.g., (perceived) adverse effects of treatments), events that are also related to the topic of health or vaccination but do not involve parents' or their children's health (e.g., when health issues come up in a conversation) may incite parents to start questioning vaccination. Moreover, how respondents experience (different types of) health-related events, and how they go through distinct stages after this, proves shaped by their pre-existing health views: parents with nature-oriented health views came to doubt the fundamental principles of vaccination, turning instead to 'alternative' resources and practices; parents with science-oriented views queried the potential risks of vaccination and sought out what they viewed as the most scientifically sound information. We discuss the implications of our findings for scholarly debates and provide suggestions for further research.

Beyond politics: additional factors underlying skepticism of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Even before it had been developed there had already been skepticism among the general public concerning a vaccine for COVID-19. What are the factors that drive this skepticism? While much has been said about how political differences are at play, in this article I draw attention to two additional factors that have not received as much attention: witnessing the fallibility of the scientific process play out in real time, and a perceived breakdown of the distinction between experts and non-experts.

Survey data for COVID-19 vaccine preference analysis in the United Arab Emirates.

In response to the call for interdisciplinary research on the potential effects of the coronavirus pandemic [1], this article presents a novel data set on individuals' COVID-19 vaccine preferences in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The menu of our stated preference survey questionnaire is framed based on the World Health Organization's (WHO) SAGE working group on immunization developed matrix of vaccine determinants [2], which was itself informed by a systematic review of peer reviewed and grey literature, and by the expertise of the working group. Our survey was designed in a bilingual (Arabic and English) format, using Google Forms platform and delivered to respondents aged 18 years and older using the snowball sampling method between July 4th and August 4th 2020, gathering a total of 1109 responses. Study participants were recruited across all seven emirates of the UAE (see Fig. 1). As presented in the conceptual framework (see Fig. 2), the data set comprises (i) respondents socio-economic and demographic information, (ii) respondents willingness to spend time, and money to get the Covid-19 vaccine, and (iii) the vaccine determinants identified by the WHO's SAGE working group on immunization.