Shades of doubt: Measuring and classifying vaccination confidence in Europe.

The anti-vaccination movement, vaccine hesitancy, and wavering vaccination confidence have increasingly become matters of public interest, in parallel with an increasing normalization of representations of vaccination as risky. In this study, we used data on vaccination beliefs and behaviors from two Eurobarometer surveys to classify attitudes towards vaccination and to discuss comparability, acquiescence, and other measurement issues. Through cluster analysis, we found that individuals in the European Union (EU27) can be classified into five opinion types, differentiating the poles ("vaccine-trusting" and "vaccine-distrusting") from the "hesitant & free choice" cluster and from two relatively uncommitted clusters, the "agreeable" (or acquiescent) and the "fence-sitters." Opinion configurations on vaccination were linked to the broader social structures of age, gender, and educational attainment, to experiences of adult vaccination, and trust in different information sources. We found that trust, distrust, and confusion about vaccination have permeated all social strata in EU countries. The pandemic years have amplified uncertainty concerning vaccine safety and its effectiveness. We also noticed a decrease of trust in the voices of mainstream medical experts during the pandemic period, from about 92 % in 2019 to 73 % in 2021, and a significant increase in people who declared that they "don't know" whom to trust about vaccine information, ranging from 1 % to about 13 %. Measurements of vaccination confidence in Europe should control for acquiescence, through positively and negatively formulated items, and ensure comparability in time. We strongly recommend the inclusion of a battery of critical items in all future European Commission-funded surveys on vaccination to allow the monitoring of European public confidence in vaccination and in the relevant information sources, including trust in pharmaceutical companies; this will provide an avenue for re-establishing a broader confidence among citizens, health authorities, and specialists.

The Social Bifurcation of Reality: Symmetrical Construction of Knowledge in Science-Trusting and Science-Distrusting Discourses.

This article proposes a conceptual framework to study the social bifurcation of reality in polarized science-trusting and science-distrusting lay worldviews, by analyzing and integrating five concepts: science work, number work, emotion work, time work, and boundary work. Despite the epistemological asymmetry between accounts relying on mainstream science and science-distrusting or denialist ones, there are symmetrical social processes contributing to the construction of lay discourses. Through conceptual analysis, we synthesize an alternative to the deficit model of contrarian discourses, replacing the model of social actors as "defective scientists" with a focus on their culturally competent agency. The proposed framework is useful for observing the parallel construction of polarized realities in interaction and their ongoing articulation through hinge objects, such as vaccines, seatbelts, guns, or sanitary masks in the Covid-19 context. We illustrate the framework through a comparative approach, presenting arguments and memes from contemporary online media in two controversies: namely, vaccine-trusting versus vaccine-distrusting views and Covid-convinced versus Covid-suspicious discourses.