Reducing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among African Americans: the effects of narratives, character's self-persuasion, and trust in science

Communication Strategies to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: How Effective are Source, Appeal, Framing, and Evidence Type Approaches?

This systematic review analyzed the effectiveness of key persuasive strategies - source, appeal, framing, and evidence (SAFE) - on COVID-19 vaccination intention. Quantitative studies were searched in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed following the PRISMA guidelines. From the 61 studies that met inclusion criteria, source and framing are the most commonly applied SAFE strategies. However, source characteristics are a more consistent influence on vaccine intentions than message framing strategies, with expert sources and general practitioners emerging as the key sources contributing to greater vaccine intentions. In addition, a range of mediators and moderators influence the process through which SAFE message strategies impact vaccine intentions. Framing effects, in particular, are moderated by political identity, source characteristics, and vaccine perceptions. Tests of mediating processes highlight how health behavior judgments (e.g. perceived vaccine benefits, risks, trust in vaccination, perceived severity) and message response/perceptions (e.g. counterarguing, perceived similarity/empathy) operate as key intervening factors between SAFE message strategies and vaccine intentions. Overall, when practitioners apply various structural approaches (narrative elements, fear appeals, framing cues) to vaccine promotion campaigns, they should be cognizant of who is providing that appeal. Targeted populations may benefit most from different structural elements if they are integrated with sources that resonate with the audience.

COVID-19 Vaccination Messengers, Communication Channels, and Messages Trusted Among Black Communities in the USA: a Review

Black and African American adults exhibited higher levels of mistrust and vaccine hesitancy and lower levels of vaccination throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination and booster uptake remains disproportionately low among Black adults. We conducted a systematic review of empirical research published between February 2021 and July 2022 from five electronic databases and the grey literature. We screened studies that assessed COVID-19 vaccination information needs and preferences as well as communication strategies among Black adults in the USA. We extracted data, then analyzed and synthesized results narratively. Twenty-two articles were included: 2 interventions, 3 experimental surveys, 7 observational surveys, 8 qualitative inquiries, and 2 mixed methods studies. Studies reported credible and preferred COVID-19 vaccination information sources/messengers, channels, and content. Commonly trusted messengers included personal health care providers, social network connections, and church/faith leaders. Electronic outreach (e.g., email, text messages), community events (e.g., forums, canvassing), and social media were popular. Black communities wanted hopeful, fact-based messages that address racism and mistrust; persuasive messages using collective appeals about protecting others may be more influential in changing behavior. Future communication strategies aiming to increase vaccine confidence and encourage COVID-19 booster vaccination among Black communities should be developed in partnership with community leaders and local health care providers to disseminate trauma-informed messages with transparent facts and collective action appeals across multiple in-person and electronic channels.

Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Under-Vaccination among Marginalized Populations in the United States and Canada: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Amid persistent disparities in Covid-19 vaccination and burgeoning research on vaccine hesitancy (VH), we conducted a scoping review to identify multilevel determinants of Covid-19 VH and under-vaccination among marginalized populations in the U.S. and Canada.

METHODS

Using the scoping review methodology developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute, we designed a search string and explored 7 databases to identify peer-reviewed articles published from January 1, 2020-October 25, 2022. We combine frequency analysis and narrative synthesis to describe factors influencing Covid-19 VH and under-vaccination among marginalized populations.

RESULTS

The search captured 11,374 non-duplicated records, scoped to 103 peer-reviewed articles. Among 14 marginalized populations identified, African American/Black, Latinx, LGBTQ+, American Indian/Indigenous, people with disabilities, and justice-involved people were the predominant focus. Thirty-two factors emerged as influencing Covid-19 VH, with structural racism/stigma and institutional mistrust (structural)(n = 71) most prevalent, followed by vaccine safety (vaccine-specific)(n = 62), side effects (vaccine-specific)(n = 50), trust in individual healthcare provider (social/community)(n = 38), and perceived risk of infection (individual)(n = 33). Structural factors predominated across populations, including structural racism/stigma and institutional mistrust, barriers to Covid-19 vaccine access due to limited supply/availability, distance/lack of transportation, no/low paid sick days, low internet/digital technology access, and lack of culturally- and linguistically-appropriate information.

DISCUSSION

We identified multilevel and complex drivers of Covid-19 under-vaccination among marginalized populations. Distinguishing vaccine-specific, individual, and social/community factors that may fuel decisional ambivalence, more appropriately defined as VH, from structural racism/structural stigma and systemic/institutional barriers to vaccination access may better support evidence-informed interventions to promote equity in access to vaccines and informed decision-making among marginalized populations.

Vaccine hesitancy: a structured review from a behavioral perspective (2015-2022)

Vaccine hesitancy, a complex behavioral phenomenon, poses a significant global health threat and has gained renewed attention amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper scrutinized peer-reviewed literature on vaccine hesitancy published from 2015 to 2022, with a specific focus on behavioral perspectives, utilizing a Theories-Constructs-Variables-Contexts-Methods (TCVCM) framework. The study highlighted prominent theoretical approaches, abstract concepts, research variables, global contexts and academic techniques employed across a selected sample of 138 studies. The result is a consolidated overview of research and schematization of the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behaviors. These include individual-level, contextual, vaccine-specific, organizational, and public-policy-related dynamics. The findings corroborated the complexity of vaccine hesitancy and emphasized the difficulties of pursuing vaccine advocacy. The analysis also identified several directions for future research, and the need to conduct more contextual studies in low- and middle-income nations to bring out the cross-cultural nuances of vaccine hesitancy.

Interventions employed to address vaccine hesitancy among Black populations outside of African and Caribbean countries: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Black people are disproportionately affected by structural and social determinants of health, resulting in greater risks of exposure to and deaths from COVID-19. Structural and social determinants of health feed vaccine hesitancy and worsen health disparities.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review explored interventions that have been employed to address vaccine hesitancy among Black population outside of African and Caribbean countries. This review provides several strategies for addressing this deep-rooted public health problem.

METHODS

The scoping review followed the five-step framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley. It complies with reporting guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Research studies that examined interventions utilized to promote vaccine confidence within Black populations living outside of African and Caribbean countries were reviewed.

FINDINGS

A total of 20 articles met the inclusion criteria for this study: 17 were quantitative studies and three were mixed-method studies. This scoping review highlighted six themes: educational advancement, messaging, multi-component approaches, outreach efforts, enhancing healthcare access, and healthcare provider leadership.

CONCLUSION

The review identified effective interventions for addressing vaccine hesitancy among Black populations outside Africa and the Caribbean, emphasizing education, multidimensional approaches, and healthcare provider recommendations. It calls for more qualitative research and interventions in countries like Canada and the UK to enhance vaccine confidence and reduce mistrust.

"Let's get back to normal": emotions mediate the effects of persuasive messages on willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19

Objective

We examined the effectiveness of three different messages for persuading individuals to get vaccinated against COVID-19, and the role that emotions play in persuasion.

Methods

Four hundred-thirty-six participants reported their concern about the COVID-19 pandemic and confidence/hesitancy toward vaccines. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three text conditions: (1) self-interest: a persuasive message that focused on how much of a "serious threat COVID-19 is to you," and to get vaccinated to "protect yourself"; (2) self-interest + altruistic: a persuasive message that focused on the "threat to you and your community" and to get vaccinated to "protect you and your loved ones"; (3) self-interest + altruistic + normal: a persuasive message that included (2) but added "This is the only way we can get back to a normal life."; and, (4) a baseline control: no text. After reading, participants reported their emotions toward COVID-19 vaccines and their willingness to get vaccinated.

Results

Individuals in the self-interest + altruistic + normal condition were more willing to get vaccinated compared to the control condition and self-interest + altruistic condition. However, there were no differences in willingness between the self-interest + altruistic + normal condition and the self-interest condition. Moreover, emotions mediated relations between vaccine confidence/hesitancy and willingness.

Conclusion

A message that focuses on "getting back to normal" can achieve important public health action by increasing vaccine uptake to protect the population. Future work is needed across multiple countries and contexts (i.e., non-pandemic) to assess message effectiveness.

Didactic and narrative persuasion: An experiment to promote colorectal cancer screening

We tested whether a didactic and a narrative video (i.e. educational content and personal stories versus irrelevant information) could boost colorectal cancer (CRC) screening intention directly and through cognitive predictors of CRC screening behavior. We also tested whether exposure to a story changed participants' affective forecasting, reducing the perception of negative emotions associated with CRC screening (disgust, embarrassment, and fear). The study was conducted online with a between-participants design and recruiting a convenience sample (N = 375). We found that, compared with watching the control video, being exposed to the narrative video about CRC screening was indirectly associated with greater screening intention via vicarious experience and positive attitudes, whereas watching the didactic video was positively associated with CRC screening intention only among participants who had received an invitation letter but did not get screened, and among those yet to receive an invitation to screen. In the latter group, screening intention was boosted through positive attitudes. Our findings do not confirm that stories change affective forecasting, but narration likely fosters messages acceptance through vicarious experience. We also found support for the effectiveness of physicians' recommendations in promoting CRC screening, an intervention that might be effectively administered through a generalized, cost-effective video.

Meaningful Media Experiences and Vaccination Message Communication: An Experimental Study with Vaccine-Hesitant Individuals

Guided by the eudaimonic media and the health persuasion literature, the current study explores how meaningful emotions elicited from entertainment media exposure decreases anti-vaccination attitudes among vaccine-hesitant individuals. Results of a between-subjects experiment (N = 409) showed that participants who viewed meaningful music videos (vs. neutral videos) and vaccination messages embedded in the user-generated comments reported more empathy, less reactance, and less anti-vaccination attitudes. Multigroup analysis revealed that this association was held for participants who were hesitant about whether they would get fully vaccinated, but not for participants who were determined to not get vaccinated. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Controversies of COVID-19 vaccine promotion: lessons of three randomised survey experiments from Hungary

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate vaccine promotion messages, examine the heterogeneous effects of these messages and provide experimental evidence to help evaluate the efficiency of COVID-19 vaccine promotion campaigns in Hungary.

STUDY DESIGN

This study presents the results of three randomised survey experiments that were embedded in cross-sectional, representative, public opinion studies of Hungarian adults based on in-person interviews. Simple randomisation and blinding were applied to assign participants into the control group (no message) or treatment groups (vaccine promotion messages).

METHODS

The first experiment (March 2021) aimed to test vaccination promotion messages from politicians (N = 331) and medical experts (N = 342) by comparing experimental groups' trust in vaccines and conspiratorial beliefs with the control group (N = 327). The second experiment (September 2022) tested the impact of two communication strategies ([1] highlighting the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, N = 104; and [2] highlighting the wide variety of vaccines available, N = 110) on increasing vaccine uptake among those who were still unvaccinated (control group, N = 89). The third experiment (September 2022) tested one message aiming to increase COVID-19 booster uptake among those who received only the first round of vaccination (N = 172; control group, N = 169). The outcome variable in the second and third experiments was intent to get vaccinated. Robust regressions, logit models, Mann-Whitney U-tests and model-based recursive partitioning were run. The inference criteria (p < 0.05) was set in pre-registration of the experiments.

RESULTS

All treatment effects were insignificant, but exploratory research found significant conditional treatment effects. Exposure to vaccine promotion by medical professionals was associated with a higher level of trust in Russian and Chinese COVID-19 vaccines in older age cohorts (weighted robust regressions, 50-59 years old, Russian vaccine: +0.769, interaction term [i.t.] p = 0.010; Chinese vaccine: +0.326, i.t. p = 0.044; and ≥60 years old, Russian vaccine +0.183, i.t. p = 0.040; Chinese vaccine +0.559, i.t. p = 0.010) and with a lower level of trust in these vaccines among younger adults (<30 years old, Russian vaccine: -1.236, i.t. p = 0.023; Chinese vaccine: -1.281, i.t. p = 0.022). Receiving a vaccine promotion message from politicians led to a higher level of trust in Chinese vaccines among the oldest respondents (≥60 years: +0.634, i.t. p = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term persuasion attempts that aimed to convince respondents about COVID-19 vaccination were ineffective. Booster hesitancy, similar to primary vaccine hesitancy, was resistant to vaccine promotion messages. Significant conditional effects suggest that COVID-19 vaccine promotion by medical experts and politicians may have had adverse effects for some demographic groups in Hungary.

Understanding Low Vaccine Uptake in the Context of Public Health in High-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has caused the need for the largest mass vaccination campaign ever undertaken to date, African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) populations have shown both a disproportionately high degree of negative impacts from the pandemic and the lowest willingness to become vaccinated. This scoping review aims to investigate low vaccine uptake in ACB populations relative to public health in high-income countries. A search was conducted in MEDLINE(R) ALL (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOHost), APA PsycInfo (OvidSP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (OvidSP), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (OvidSP), the Allied and Complimentary Medicine Database (Ovid SP), and the Web of Science following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework for scoping reviews, supplemented by PRISMA-ScR. Theoretical underpinnings of the intersectionality approach were also used to help interpret the complexities of health inequities in the ACB population. The eligibility criteria were based on the population, concept, context (PCC) framework, and publications from 2020-19 July 2022 which discussed vaccine uptake amongst ACB people in high-income countries were included. Analysis was carried out through thematic mapping and produced four main themes: (1) racism and inequities, (2) sentiments and behaviors, (3) knowledge and communication, and (4) engagement and influence. This study has contributed to the identification and definition of the issue of low vaccine uptake in ACB populations and has illustrated the complexity of the problems, as vaccine access is hampered by knowledge, psychological, socioeconomic, and organizational barriers at the individual, organizational, and systemic levels, leading to structural inequities that have manifested as low vaccine uptake.

Broad perspectives in understanding vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence: an introduction to the special issue

The World Health Organization has designated vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence among the most pressing issues in global health. The COVID-19 pandemic has made vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence particularly salient and urgent. The purpose of this special issue is to highlight a broad range of perspectives on these critical issues. We have included a total of 30 papers that address issues related to vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence across multiple levels of the Socio-Ecological Model. We have organized the empirical papers into the following sections: individual-level beliefs, minority health and health disparities, social media and conspiracy beliefs, and interventions. In addition to the empirical papers, three commentaries are included in this special issue.

The vaccine hesitancy continuum among hesitant adopters of the COVID-19 vaccine

Vaccination is a strategy for mitigating the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at both the individual and population levels. Vaccine hesitancy is identified as a significant threat to global health by the World Health Organization (WHO). Vaccine hesitancy has been theorized as a continuum encompassing a range of attitudes, beliefs, emotional orientations, ideologies, and health-seeking behaviors. Individuals who received the COVID-19 vaccine but also indicated some level of hesitancy about vaccination, or "hesitant adopters," remain an understudied group. This study uses a qualitative descriptive design to understand motivations to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among hesitant adopters at various self-reported levels of hesitancy. We conducted interviews with hesitant adopters (n = 49) to analyze the elements of vaccine hesitancy corresponding to reported levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (i.e., "little hesitant," "somewhat hesitant," and "very hesitant"). Concerns about side effects are shared across the continuum but are articulated differently at each level of hesitancy. The "little hesitant" relate fears of side effects to their health and a lack of clear information to inform their health decision making, whereas the "very hesitant" articulate the risks of side effects within the frame of conspiracies related to the development, approval, and economics of the COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, conspiracy theories generally increase in salience across the continuum, with the "very hesitant" reporting conspiracy theories as the most salient element of vaccine hesitancy. This research presents opportunities for developing targeted interventions for different levels of vaccine hesitancy.