Using Rhetorical Situations to Examine and Improve Vaccination Communication

Opinion polls have documented a considerable public skepticism towards a COVID-19 vaccine. Seeking to address the vaccine skepticism challenge this essay surveys the research on vaccine hesitancy and trust building through the lens of the rhetorical situation and points towards five broad principles for a content strategy for public health communicators in regards to vaccination: 1) vaccine hesitancy is not irrational per se; 2) messages should be tailored to the various hesitancy drivers; 3) what is perceived as trustworthy is situational and constantly negotiated; 4) in areas of uncertainty where no exact knowledge exists, the character of the speaker becomes more important; and 5) the trustworthiness of the speaker can be strengthened through finding some common ground—such as shared feelings or accepted premises—with the audience. Such common insights are on offer in the literature on rhetoric and persuasion and linked here with the research on vaccine communication and trust focusing specifically on the latter and character.

Download Full-text

COVID-19 Pandemic Optimism and Vaccine Willingness among an Online Sample of US Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines9070745 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (7) ◽

pp. 745

Author(s):

Rob Stephenson ◽

Stephen P. Sullivan ◽

Renee A. Pitter ◽

Alexis S. Hunter ◽

Tanaka MD Chavanduka

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Three Dimensions ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Binary Outcomes ◽

Sex Partners ◽

Black African ◽

Factors Associated ◽

Public Health Messages ◽

Sex With Men ◽

Living With Hiv

This paper presents data from an online sample of U.S gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), to explore the factors associated with three dimensions of vaccine beliefs: perception of the likelihood of a COVID-19 vaccine becoming available, perception of when a COVID-19 vaccine would become available, and the likelihood of taking a COVID-19 vaccine. Data are taken from the Love and Sex in the Time of COVID-19 study, collected from November 2020 to January 2021. A sample of 290 GBMSM is analyzed, modeling three binary outcomes: belief that there will be a COVID-19 vaccine, belief that the COVID-19 vaccine will be available in 6 months, and being very likely to take the COVID-19 vaccine. In contrast to other studies, Black/African Americans and GBMSM living with HIV had higher levels of pandemic optimism and were more likely to be willing to accept a vaccine. Men who perceived a higher prevalence of COVID-19 among their friends and sex partners, and those who had reduced their sex partners, were more likely to be willing to take a COVID-19 vaccine. There remained a small percentage of participants (14%) who did not think the pandemic would end, that there would not be a vaccine and were unlikely to take a vaccine. To reach the levels of vaccination necessary to control the pandemic, it is imperative to understand the characteristics of those experiencing vaccine hesitancy and then tailor public health messages to their unique set of barriers and motivations.

Download Full-text

The Language of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Public Health Misinformation: Distrust, Unwillingness, and Uncertainty

Review of Contemporary Philosophy ◽

10.22381/rcp2020217 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 20 (0) ◽

pp. 117

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy

Download Full-text

Understanding vaccine hesitancy: the evidence

Practice Nursing ◽

10.12968/pnur.2021.32.7.282 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 32 (7) ◽

pp. 282-287

Author(s):

Alison While

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Health Professionals ◽

Herd Immunity ◽

Public Health Intervention ◽

Health Intervention ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Important Public Health ◽

Positive Attitudes ◽

The Uk

Vaccine hesitancy is a concern both globally and within the UK. Alison While reviews the evidence relating to vaccine hesitancy, its underlying factors and the sociodemographic variations Vaccination is an important public health intervention, but its effectiveness depends upon the uptake of vaccination reaching sufficient levels to yield ‘herd’ immunity. While the majority of the UK hold positive attitudes about vaccination, some people, including health professionals, decline vaccinations. This article reviews the evidence relating to vaccine hesitancy, its underlying factors and the sociodemographic variations.

Download Full-text

Balancing benefits and potential risks of vaccination: the precautionary principle and the law of unintended consequences

BMJ evidence-based medicine ◽

10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111773 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. bmjebm-2021-111773

Author(s):

David Robert Grimes

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Precautionary Principle ◽

Unintended Consequences ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Public Health Issue ◽

Public Confidence ◽

The Precautionary Principle ◽

Life Saving ◽

Potential Risks ◽

Risk And Benefit

Vaccination is a life-saving endeavour, yet risk and uncertainty are unavoidable in science and medicine. Vaccination remains contentious in the public mind, and vaccine hesitancy is a serious public health issue. This has recently been reignited in the discussion over potential side effects of COVID-19 vaccines, and the decision by several countries to suspend measures such as the AstraZeneca vaccine. In these instances, the precautionary principle has often been invoked as a rationale, yet such heuristics do not adequately weigh potential harms against real benefits. How we analyse, communicate and react to potential harms is absolutely paramount to ensure the best decisions and outcomes for societal health, and maintaining public confidence. While balancing benefits and risks is an essential undertaking, it cannot be achieved without due consideration of several other pertinent factors, especially in the context of vaccination, where misguided or exaggerated fears have in the past imperilled public health. While well meaning, over reactions to potential hazards of vaccination and other health interventions can have unintended consequences, and cause lingering damage to public trust. In this analysis, we explore the challenges of assessing risk and benefit, and the limitations of the precautionary principle in these endeavours. When risk is unclear, cautious vigilance might be a more pragmatic and useful policy than reactionary suspensions.

Download Full-text

Antecedents of Vaccine Hesitancy in WEIRD and East Asian Contexts

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.747721 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Daniel S. Courtney ◽

Ana-Maria Bliuc

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Social Media ◽

Science Communication ◽

East Asian ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Mmr Vaccine ◽

Specific Context ◽

Vaccination Rates ◽

Key Factor ◽

Effective Science

Following decreasing vaccination rates over the last two decades, understanding the roots of vaccine hesitancy has become a public health priority. Vaccine hesitancy is linked to scientifically unfounded fears around the MMR vaccine and autism which are often fuelled by misinformation spread on social media. To counteract the effects of misinformation about vaccines and in particular the falling vaccination rates, much research has focused on identifying the antecedents of vaccine hesitancy. As antecedents of vaccine hesitancy are contextually dependent, a one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to be successful in non-WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich, and Democratic) populations, and even in certain (non-typical) WEIRD sub-populations. Successful interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy must be based on understanding of the specific context. To identify potential contextual differences in the antecedents of vaccine hesitancy, we review research from three non-WEIRD populations in East Asia, and three WEIRD sub-populations. We find that regardless of the context, mistrust seems to be the key factor leading to vaccine hesitancy. However, the object of mistrust varies across WEIRD and non-WEIRD populations, and across WEIRD subgroups suggesting that effective science communication must be mindful of these differences.

Download Full-text

The fallacy of placing confidence in confidence intervals - A commentary

10.31234/osf.io/kvxc4 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Jose D. Perezgonzalez

Keyword(s):

Confidence Intervals ◽

Common Ground ◽

Posterior Distributions ◽

Correct Interpretation ◽

Psychonomic Bulletin ◽

Credible Intervals ◽

Per Se

‘The fallacy of placing confidence in confidence intervals’ (Morey et al., 2016, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, doi: 10.3758/s13423-015-0947-8) delved into a much needed technical and philosophical dissertation regarding the differences between typical (mis)interpretations of frequentist confidence intervals and the typical correct interpretation of Bayesian credible intervals. My contribution here partly strengthens the authors’ argument, partly closes some gaps they left open, and concludes with a note of attention to the possibility that there may be distinctions without real practical differences in the ultimate use of estimation by intervals, namely when assuming a common ground of uninformative priors and intervals as ranges of values instead of as posterior distributions per se.

Download Full-text

Occupational Health: Common Ground in the Fields of Occupational Medicine, Public Health and Epidemiology

Hygiena ◽

10.21101/hygiena.a1314 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 59 (3) ◽

pp. 95-96

Author(s):

Milan Tuček

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Occupational Health ◽

Occupational Medicine ◽

Common Ground

Download Full-text

Public Engagement and Policy Entrepreneurship on Social Media in the Time of Anti-Vaccination Movements

Using New Media for Citizen Engagement and Participation - Advances in Public Policy and Administration ◽

10.4018/978-1-7998-1828-1.ch004 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 60-80

Author(s):

Melodie Yunju Song

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Public Space ◽

Public Engagement ◽

Public Discourse ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Public Health Issue ◽

Competing Values ◽

Mmr Vaccine ◽

The Public ◽

Coverage Rates

North America has experienced a resurgence of measles outbreak due to unprecedentedly low Mumps-Measles and Rubella vaccination coverage rates facilitated by the anti-vaccination movement. The objective of this chapter is to explore the new online public space and public discourse using Web 2.0 in the public health arena to answer the question, ‘What is driving public acceptance of or hesitancy towards the MMR vaccine?' More specifically, typologies of online public engagement will be examined using MMR vaccine hesitancy as a case study to illustrate the different approaches used by pro- and anti-vaccine groups to inform, consult with, and engage the public on a public health issue that has been the subject of long-standing public debate and confusion. This chapter provides an overview of the cyclical discourse of anti-vaccination movements. The authors hypothesize that anti-vaccination, vaccine hesitant, and pro-vaccination representations on the online public sphere are reflective of competing values (e.g., modernism, post-modernism) in contemporary society.

Download Full-text

Legitimising a ‘Zombie idea’: childhood vaccines and autism

European Journal of Public Health ◽

10.1093/eurpub/ckaa165.807 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽

Author(s):

M Rizzi ◽

K Attwell ◽

V Casigliani ◽

J Taylor ◽

F Quattrone ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Decision Making ◽

Media Coverage ◽

Economic Benefits ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Strategic Decision ◽

Childhood Vaccination ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Scientific Authority ◽

Immunization Rates

Abstract Background In June 2017 the Italian government made childhood vaccination mandatory following a drop in immunization rates. In the years preceding, two court judgments affirmed a causal link between vaccines and autism. Studies have linked these decisions to internet searches about vaccine-autism, the popularity of 'no-vax' theories, and drops in immunization rates. This paper provides an in-depth case study of both decisions and their impact. Methods We use a synthetic research design reliant on: (i) a systematic collection of primary sources (publicly available and obtained via official access to information requests); (ii) interviews with key actors prominently involved in the two cases or privy to the Italian vaccine-injury compensation regime (iii) a systematic analysis of media coverage. Results Circumstantial and systemic flaws enabled these decisions. Poor trial strategies, insufficient resources and laborious communication practices between arms of government were facilitators. Lack of awareness of the social sensitivity of vaccine issues, underestimation of the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy, and a tendency to 'think in silos' informed the lack of attention dedicated to the cases. The decisions created false expectations of economic benefits and vindication for families with autistic children, resulting in increased litigation. Systemic flaws exist in the process of appointment of expert consultants acting for the court leading to judicial reliance on false data. Conclusions Lessons learned include greater levels of attention to vaccine cases by the administration and a matured attitude of adjudicating bodies. Two issues remain: (i) the inability of government lawyers to disseminate positive results to counteract unfounded narratives; (ii) flaws in the process of appointing expert consultants advising courts, which remains focused on the fiduciary nature of the relationship, rather than scientific authority. Key messages The Milan and Rimini decisions that directly affected vaccine governance stemmed from a combination of circumstantial decision-making and systemic flaws that still lurk in public health governance. Strategic decision-making that overlooks lower levels of the adjudicative system can lead to significant public health consequences as courts of law and courts of public opinion obey different logics.

Download Full-text