The role of conspiracy mindset in reducing support for child vaccination for COVID-19 in the United States

Health Decisions Under Uncertainty: The Roles of Conspiracy Beliefs and Institutional Trust

Research on vaccination hesitancy has been extensive, but the role of information processing in decision making still needs to be explored. The study examines the alignment between parents' COVID-19 vaccination intentions and actual behavior, focusing on the impact of different kinds of information processing on the consistency or inconsistency of these behaviors. It analyzes parents' reliance on health information sources, and education levels, with institutional trust, ability to critically evaluate conspiracy theories and scientific knowledge as moderators. A total of 1118 Israeli parents participated in digital surveys and were classified into the following 4 groups based on their initial vaccination intentions and actual behaviors: (1) consistent-pro-vaccine and vaccinated; (2) inconsistent-pro-vaccine but unvaccinated; (3) inconsistent-anti-vaccine but vaccinated; and (4) consistent-anti-vaccine and unvaccinated). The results show that consistent parents process information using system 1, i.e., heuristic information processing, reliance on health information sources, moderated by institutional trust and education. However, inconsistent parents used systems 1 and 2, namely heuristic-systematic information processing, influenced by knowledge of COVID-19 and the ability to assess conspiracy theories critically.

What Caused the Narrowing of Black-White COVID-19 Vaccination Disparity in the US? A Test of 5 Hypotheses

Despite differential uptake of COVID-19 vaccination between Black and non-Hispanic White Americans early in the pandemic, the gap narrowed over time. We tested five hypotheses that could explain the reduction in the disparity. Using a national probability panel of over 1800 individuals surveyed from April 2021 to July 2022, we assessed receipt of recommended doses of COVID-19 vaccines along with (a) reported exposure to deaths due to COVID-19, (b) trust in US health authorities, such as the CDC, (c) knowledge about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination, (d) media use as a source of information, and (e) access to COVID-19 vaccines. Only increases in knowledge about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines uniquely mediated the increase in vaccination uptake among non-Hispanic Black compared to White, Asian and Hispanic panelists. While trust in CDC and exposure to COVID-19 deaths were related to vaccination acceptance at baseline, those factors were not associated with change in reported vaccination coverage. In addition, neither differential access nor media use explained the increase. Enhanced knowledge about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination transmitted from within the Black community likely helped to increase vaccination relative to other racial-ethnic groups.

Influence of COVID-19 on trust in routine immunization, health information sources and pandemic preparedness in 23 countries in 2023

It is unclear how great a challenge pandemic and vaccine fatigue present to public health. We assessed perspectives on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and routine immunization as well as trust in pandemic information sources and future pandemic preparedness in a survey of 23,000 adults in 23 countries in October 2023. The participants reported a lower intent to get a COVID-19 booster vaccine in 2023 (71.6%), compared with 2022 (87.9%). A total of 60.8% expressed being more willing to get vaccinated for diseases other than COVID-19 as a result of their experience during the pandemic, while 23.1% reported being less willing. Trust in 11 selected sources of vaccine information each averaged less than 7 on a 10-point scale with one's own doctor or nurse and the World Health Organization, averaging a 6.9 and 6.5, respectively. Our findings emphasize that vaccine hesitancy and trust challenges remain for public health practitioners, underscoring the need for targeted, culturally sensitive health communication strategies.

[Mis- and disinformation in social media: mitigating risks in digital health communication]

Misinformation and disinformation in social media have become a challenge for effective public health measures. Here, we examine factors that influence believing and sharing false information, both misinformation and disinformation, at individual, social, and contextual levels and discuss intervention possibilities.At the individual level, knowledge deficits, lack of skills, and emotional motivation have been associated with believing in false information. Lower health literacy, a conspiracy mindset and certain beliefs increase susceptibility to false information. At the social level, the credibility of information sources and social norms influence the sharing of false information. At the contextual level, emotions and the repetition of messages affect belief in and sharing of false information.Interventions at the individual level involve measures to improve knowledge and skills. At the social level, addressing social processes and social norms can reduce the sharing of false information. At the contextual level, regulatory approaches involving social networks is considered an important point of intervention.Social inequalities play an important role in the exposure to and processing of misinformation. It remains unclear to which degree the susceptibility to belief in and share misinformation is an individual characteristic and/or context dependent. Complex interventions are required that should take into account multiple influencing factors.

When I feel that I am better off, science seems to make the world better off too: inequality, perceived standard of living and perceptions toward science

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored that divisive views on science and technology span both the Global North and South. This study posits that an individual's perception of their current living standard acts as a mediating factor linking income inequality to attitudes towards scientific and technological advancements. It contends that rising income disparities shape perceptions, making individuals feel their current living conditions have not surpassed those of prior generations. Consequently, such perceptions diminish the likelihood of recognizing the positive impacts of science and technology on societal progress and future prospects. This paper sheds light on how escalating inequality fosters societal rifts concerning science and technology.