» Articles » PMID: 36992170

Not All Conservatives Are Vaccine Hesitant: Examining the Influence of Misinformation Exposure, Political Ideology, and Flu Vaccine Acceptance on COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

Overview
Date 2023 Mar 30
PMID 36992170
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Despite the mass availability of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, many Americans are still reluctant to take a vaccine as an outcome from exposure to misinformation. Additionally, while scholars have paid attention to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, the influence of general vaccine hesitancy for important viruses such as the flu has largely been ignored. Using nationally representative data from Pew Research Center's American Trends Panel survey (Wave 79), this study examined the relationship between perceived misinformation exposure, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, flu vaccine acceptance, political ideology, and demographic trends. The findings suggest that those who accepted the flu vaccine were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine-hesitant. In addition, moderation analyses showed that perceived misinformation exposure increases COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy for conservatives and moderates but not for liberals. However, perceived misinformation exposure influences COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among conservatives only if they are also flu vaccine-hesitant. Perceived misinformation exposure has no role in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy if individuals (irrespective of political ideology) are regular with their flu vaccine. The results suggest that the effect of misinformation exposure on negative attitudes toward COVID-19 may be associated with generalized vaccine hesitancy (e.g., flu). The practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Citing Articles

COVID-19 Vaccination and Public Health: Addressing Global, Regional, and Within-Country Inequalities.

Santangelo O, Provenzano S, Di Martino G, Ferrara P Vaccines (Basel). 2024; 12(8).

PMID: 39204011 PMC: 11360777. DOI: 10.3390/vaccines12080885.


Incivility in COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Discourse and Moral Foundations: Natural Language Processing Approach.

Tin J, Stevens H, Rasul M, Taylor L JMIR Form Res. 2023; 7:e50367.

PMID: 38019581 PMC: 10719818. DOI: 10.2196/50367.


Evaluation of the reliability and validity of the health regulatory focus scale in Chinese samples.

Lyu X, Yang T, Fan Y, Hong H, Fu C Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1215209.

PMID: 37941753 PMC: 10628087. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1215209.


Predicting COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination Confidence and Uptake in the United States.

Shen L, Lee D Vaccines (Basel). 2023; 11(10).

PMID: 37896999 PMC: 10611394. DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11101597.

References
1.
Allcott H, Boxell L, Conway J, Gentzkow M, Thaler M, Yang D . Polarization and public health: Partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic. J Public Econ. 2020; 191:104254. PMC: 7409721. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104254. View

2.
Kreps S, Goldfarb J, Brownstein J, Kriner D . The Relationship between US Adults' Misconceptions about COVID-19 Vaccines and Vaccination Preferences. Vaccines (Basel). 2021; 9(8). PMC: 8402532. DOI: 10.3390/vaccines9080901. View

3.
Gostin L, Salmon D . The Dual Epidemics of COVID-19 and Influenza: Vaccine Acceptance, Coverage, and Mandates. JAMA. 2020; 324(4):335-336. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.10802. View

4.
Stevens H, Rasul M, Oh Y . Emotions and Incivility in Vaccine Mandate Discourse: Natural Language Processing Insights. JMIR Infodemiology. 2022; 2(2):e37635. PMC: 9511016. DOI: 10.2196/37635. View

5.
MacDonald N . Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants. Vaccine. 2015; 33(34):4161-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036. View