Social media and vaccine hesitancy

Steven Lloyd Wilson, Charles Wiysonge, Steven Lloyd Wilson, Charles Wiysonge

Abstract

Background: Understanding the threat posed by anti-vaccination efforts on social media is critically important with the forth coming need for world wide COVID-19 vaccination programs. We globally evaluate the effect of social media and online foreign disinformation campaigns on vaccination rates and attitudes towards vaccine safety.

Methods: Weuse a large-n cross-country regression framework to evaluate the effect ofsocial media on vaccine hesitancy globally. To do so, we operationalize social media usage in two dimensions: the use of it by the public to organize action(using Digital Society Project indicators), and the level of negative lyoriented discourse about vaccines on social media (using a data set of all geocoded tweets in the world from 2018-2019). In addition, we measure the level of foreign-sourced coordinated disinformation operations on social media ineach country (using Digital Society Project indicators). The outcome of vaccine hesitancy is measured in two ways. First, we use polls of what proportion ofthe public per country feels vaccines are unsafe (using Wellcome Global Monitor indicators for 137 countries). Second, we use annual data of actual vaccination rates from the WHO for 166 countries.

Results: We found the use of social media to organise offline action to be highly predictive of the belief that vaccinations are unsafe, with such beliefs mounting as more organisation occurs on social media. In addition, the prevalence of foreign disinformation is highly statistically and substantively significant in predicting a drop in mean vaccination coverage over time. A 1-point shift upwards in the 5-point disinformation scale is associated with a 2-percentage point drop in mean vaccination coverage year over year. We also found support for the connection of foreign disinformation with negative social media activity about vaccination. The substantive effect of foreign disinformation is to increase the number of negative vaccine tweets by 15% for the median country.

Conclusion: There is a significant relationship between organisation on social media and public doubts of vaccine safety. In addition, there is a substantial relationship between foreign disinformation campaigns and declining vaccination coverage.

Keywords: vaccines.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Model estimated effect of foreign disinformation on mean vaccination rate.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Relationship between disbelief in vaccine safety and use of social media to organise offline action.

References

    1. Dubé E, Laberge C, Guay M, et al. . Vaccine hesitancy: an overview. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2013;9:1763–73. 10.4161/hv.24657
    1. Dubé E, Gagnon D, Nickels E, et al. . Mapping vaccine hesitancy--country-specific characteristics of a global phenomenon. Vaccine 2014;32:6649–54. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.09.039
    1. MacDonald NE, Eskola J, Liang X, SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy . Vaccine hesitancy: definition, scope and determinants. Vaccine 2015;33:4161–4. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036
    1. Mesch GS, Schwirian KP. Social and political determinants of vaccine hesitancy: lessons learned from the H1N1 pandemic of 2009-2010. Am J Infect Control 2015;43:1161–5. 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.06.031
    1. Larson HJ, de Figueiredo A, Xiahong Z, et al. . The state of vaccine confidence 2016: global insights through a 67-country survey. EBioMedicine 2016;12:295–301. 10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.08.042
    1. Marti M, de Cola M, MacDonald NE, et al. . Assessments of global drivers of vaccine hesitancy in 2014 –looking beyond safety concerns. PLoS One 2017;12:e0172310–2. 10.1371/journal.pone.0172310
    1. Lane S, MacDonald NE, Marti M, et al. . Vaccine hesitancy around the globe: analysis of three years of WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form data-2015-2017. Vaccine 2018;36:3861–7. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.03.063
    1. Dubé E, Gagnon D, MacDonald N, et al. . Underlying factors impacting vaccine hesitancy in high income countries: a review of qualitative studies. Expert Rev Vaccines 2018;17:989–1004. 10.1080/14760584.2018.1541406
    1. Davies P, Chapman S, Leask J. Antivaccination activists on the world wide web. Arch Dis Child 2002;87:22–5. 10.1136/adc.87.1.22
    1. Keelan J, Pavri-Garcia V, Tomlinson G, et al. . YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA 2007;298:2481–4. 10.1001/jama.298.21.2482
    1. Ache KA, Wallace LS. Human papillomavirus vaccination coverage on YouTube. Am J Prev Med 2008;35:389–92. 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.06.029
    1. Keelan J, Pavri V, Balakrishnan R, et al. . An analysis of the human papilloma virus vaccine debate on MySpace blogs. Vaccine 2010;28:1535–40. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.11.060
    1. Tafuri S, Gallone MS, Cappelli MG, et al. . Addressing the anti-vaccination movement and the role of HCWs. Vaccine 2014;32:4860–5. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.11.006
    1. Mitra T, Counts S, Pennebaker JW. Understanding anti-vaccination attitudes in social media. Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 2016.
    1. Evrony A, Caplan A. The overlooked dangers of anti-vaccination groups’ social media presence. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2017;13:1475–6. 10.1080/21645515.2017.1283467
    1. Smith N, Graham T. Mapping the anti-vaccination movement on Facebook. Inf Commun Soc 2019;22:1310–27. 10.1080/1369118X.2017.1418406
    1. Hoffman BL, Felter EM, Chu K-H, et al. . It's not all about autism: the emerging landscape of anti-vaccination sentiment on Facebook. Vaccine 2019;37:2216–23. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.03.003
    1. Horowitz DL. Ethnic groups in conflict, 1985.
    1. Broniatowski DA, Jamison AM, Qi S, et al. . Weaponized health communication: Twitter bots and Russian trolls amplify the vaccine debate. Am J Public Health 2018;108:1378–84. 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304567
    1. Kirk K. How Russia sows confusion in the US vaccine debate, 2019. Foreign Policy [Internet]. Available:
    1. Fidler D. Disinformation and disease: social media and the ebola epidemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2019. Council on Foreign Relations [Internet]. Available:
    1. MacKinnon A. Russian disinformation takes on coronavirus, pointing a finger at the United States, 2020. Foreign policy. Available:
    1. Thomson A, Robinson K, Vallée-Tourangeau G. The 5As: a practical taxonomy for the determinants of vaccine uptake. Vaccine 2016;34:1018–24. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.11.065
    1. Wilson SL. Geocoded twitter archive for the social sciences, 2020.
    1. Wilson SL. Social media as social science data (forthcoming), 2020.
    1. Al-Rfou R Polyglot, 2020. Available:
    1. Chen Y, Skiena S. Building sentiment lexicons for all major languages. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Short Papers), 2014:383–9.
    1. Mechkova V, Pemstein D, Seim B, et al. . Digital Society Project dataset V2, 2020. Available:
    1. Coppedge M, Gerring J, Knutsen CH, et al. . V-Dem [country–year/country–date] dataset v10. Varieties of Democracy Project 2020.
    1. Pemstein D, Marquardt KL, Tzelgov E. The V-Dem measurement model: latent variable analysis for cross-national and cross-temporal expert-coded data. V-Dem Working Paper Series 2020.
    1. Wellcome Wellcome Global Monitor, 2018. Available:
    1. WHO Reported estimates of vaccine coverage, 2019. Available:
    1. Teorell J, Dahlberg S, Holmberg S. The quality of government standard dataset. The Quality of Government Institute, 2020.
    1. UNESCO Human development data (1990-2018); human development reports. Available:
    1. Hadenius A, Teorell J. Pathways from authoritarianism. J Democr 2007;18:143–57. 10.1353/jod.2007.0009
    1. WDI World Development Indicators, 2020.
    1. Mosser JF, Gagne-Maynard W, Rao PC, et al. . Mapping diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus vaccine coverage in Africa, 2000-2016: a spatial and temporal modelling study. Lancet 2019;393:1843–55. 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30226-0
    1. Oyo-Ita A, Wiysonge CS, Oringanje C, et al. . Interventions for improving coverage of childhood immunisation in low- and middle-income countries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;7:CD008145. 10.1002/14651858.CD008145.pub3

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel