See the below research associated with narrative and policy forming opinions on social aspects of the vaccine:
VERY IMPORTANT (Nudging in the pandemic) – Ethics of Nudging in the COVID-19 Crisis and the Necessary Return to the Principles of Shared Decision Making: A Critical Review https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38601812/
Nudging, a controversial technique for modifying people’s behavior in a predictable way, is claimed to preserve freedom of choice while simultaneously influencing it. Nudging had been largely confined to situations such as promoting healthy eating choices but has been employed in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis in a shift towards measures that involve significantly less choice, such as shoves and behavioral prods. Shared decision making (SDM), a method for direct involvement and autonomy, is an alternative approach to communicate risk. Predominantly peer-reviewed scientific publications from standard literature databases like PubMed, PsycInfo, and Psyndex were evaluated in a narrative review. The so-called fear nudges, as well as the dissemination of strongly emotionalizing or moralizing messages can lead to intense psycho-physical stress. The use of these nudges by specialized units during the COVID-19 pandemic generated a societal atmosphere of fear that precipitated a deterioration of the mental and physical health of the population. Major recommendations of the German COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) study, which are based on elements of nudging and coercive measures, do not comply with ethical principles, basic psychological principles, or evidence-based data. SDM was misused in the COVID-19 crisis, which helped to achieve one-sided goals of governments. The emphasis on utilitarian thinking is criticized and the unethical behavior of decision makers is explained by both using the concept of moral disengagement and the maturity level of coping strategies. There should be a return to an open-ended, democratic, and pluralistic scientific debate without using nudges. It is therefore necessary to return to the origins of SDM.
VERY IMPORTANT (Censorship) – Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11024-022-09479-4
The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views.
The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views.
Our findings point to the central role played by media organizations, and especially by information technology companies, in attempting to stifle debate over COVID-19 policy and measures. In the effort to silence alternative voices, widespread use was made not only of censorship, but of tactics of suppression that damaged the reputations and careers of dissenting doctors and scientists, regardless of their academic or medical status and regardless of their stature prior to expressing a contrary position. In place of open and fair discussion, censorship and suppression of scientific dissent has deleterious and far-reaching implications for medicine, science, and public health.
IMPORTANT (Coercive messaging to persuade) – Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8531257/
Authors found:
We conducted two pre-registered experiments to study how different persuasive messages affect intentions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, willingness to persuade friends and relatives to receive one, and negative judgments of people who choose not to vaccinate. In the first experiment, we tested the efficacy of a large number of messages against an untreated control condition (see Table 1 for full text of messages). A subgroup of the messages in Experiment 1 drew on this collective action framework of vaccination and emphasized who benefits from vaccination or how choosing not to vaccinate hurts one’s social image. A second subgroup drew on contemporary arguments about restrictions on liberty and economic activity during the COVID-19 pandemic.
VERY IMPORTANT (Meta analysis of studies about vaccine hesitency) – What Contributes to COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy? A Systematic Review of the Psychological Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36366286/
As per the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines, a systematic search was conducted on electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, PsycNET, and Web of Science, and a manual search was conducted on Google Scholar. Out of the 2289 articles obtained, 79 studies that met the inclusion criteria were deemed eligible for the review. The findings highlight appraisals of the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine safety and side effects, vaccine confidence/trust, trust in government and healthcare professionals, scepticism around vaccine production, conspiracy beliefs, emotions, and information and knowledge about the vaccine as the major psychological factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy. Concerningly, misinformation on COVID-19 vaccination spread through social media platforms, increasing vaccine hesitancy. Recommendations for government authorities, healthcare professionals, and implications for future research are also outlined.
IMPORTANT – Communicating about COVID-19 vaccine development and safety https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.25.21259519v2
VERY IMPORTANT (US Government giving billions to local groups to increase uptake) – U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Launches Nationwide Network of Trusted Voices to Encourage Vaccination in Next Phase of COVID-19 Public Education Campaign https://web.archive.org/web/20210407152040/https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2021/04/01/hhs-launches-nationwide-network-trusted-voices-encourage-vaccination-next-phase-covid-19-public-education-campaign.html
VERY IMPORTANT (Messaging and survey showed a liklihood that between 229,319 – 344,319 have lost their lives to the injections, further fuelling hesitency) – COVID-19 Illness and Vaccination Experiences in Social Circles Affect COVID-19 Vaccination Decisions https://www.publichealthpolicyjournal.com/_files/ugd/adf864_4c3afc4436234a96aa1f60bb6e677719.pdf
An online survey of COVID-19 health experiences was conducted to collect information regarding reasons for and against COVID-19 inoculations, including experiences with COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 inoculations by survey respondents and their social circles. The survey was completed by 2,840 participants between December 18 and 23, 2021. Logit regression analyses were carried out to identify factors influencing the likelihood of being vaccinated. Those who knew someone who experienced a health problem from COVID-19 were more likely to be vaccinated (OR: 1.309, 95% CI: 1.094-1.566), while those who knew someone who experienced a health problem following vaccination were less likely to be vaccinated (OR: 0.567, 95% CI: 0.461-0.698). Thirty-four percent (959 of 2,840) reported that they knew at least one person who experienced a significant health problem due to the COVID-19 illness. Similarly,
22% (612 of 2,840) indicated that they knew at least one person who experienced a health problem following COVID-19 vaccination. With these survey data, the total number of fatalities due to COVID-19 inoculation may be as high as 289,789 (95% CI: 229,319 – 344,319). The large difference in the possible number of fatalities due to COVID-19 vaccination that emerges from this survey and the available governmental data should be further investigated.
IMPORTANT – The Effect of Frames on COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.04.21249241v1 Published https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpos.2021.661257/full
In an original survey of 1,123 American M-Turk respondents conducted in the summer of 2020, we provided six different information conditions suggesting the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, the lack of safety/efficacy of the vaccine, the suggestion that most others would take the vaccine, the suggestion that most others would not take the vaccine, the suggestion that the vaccine is being promoted by liberals to gain greater control over individual freedom, and the suggestion that its approval is being by President Trump rushed for political motivations. We compared the responses for those in the treatment groups with a control group who received no additional information. In comparison to the control group, those who received information about the safety/efficacy of the vaccine were more likely to report that they would take the vaccine, those who received information that others were reluctant to take the vaccine were more likely to report that they themselves would not take it, and those who received information about political influences on vaccine development expressed resistance to taking it.
IMPORTANT NARRATIVE- Positive attribute framing increases COVID-19 booster vaccine intention for unfamiliar vaccines
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.25.22269855v1 Published https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/10/6/962
This pre-registered study (aspredicted#78369) compared the effect of standard negatively framed EU patient information leaflets (PILs), with new positively framed PILs, on booster intentions (measured pre- and post-intervention) for AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. A representative sample of 1222 UK-based adults was randomised to one of six groups in a factorial design with framing (Positive vs. Negative) and vaccine familiarity (same (as previous), familiar, unfamiliar) as factors. The benefit of positive framing was hypothesised to be strongest for the least familiar vaccine (Moderna). Framing was moderated by familiarity, where only the unfamiliar vaccine showed a benefit of positive relative to negative Framing. Framing and familiarity also interacted with baseline Intention with the effect of framing on the unfamiliar vaccine especially pronounced at low baseline Intent. Conversely, standard negative framing appeared to increase intentions for familiar vaccines at low baseline intent.
IMPORTANT – Considering Emotion in COVID-19 Vaccine Communication: Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy and Fostering Vaccine Confidence
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33124475/
In addition to a segment of population that refuses vaccines, the novelty of the disease and concerns over safety and efficacy of the vaccine have a sizable proportion of the U.S. indicating reluctance to getting vaccinated against COVID-19. Among various efforts to address vaccine hesitancy and foster vaccine confidence, evidence-based communication strategies are critical. There are opportunities to consider the role of emotion in communication efforts. In this commentary, we highlight several ways negative as well as positive emotions may be considered and leveraged. Examples include attending to negative emotions such as fear and anxiety, raising awareness of emotional manipulations by anti-vaccine disinformation efforts, and activating positive emotions such as altruism and hope as part of vaccine education endeavors.
Guilt versus Shame: Coping, Fluency, and Framing in the Effectiveness of Responsible Drinking Messages https://depts.washington.edu/aglab/docs/Duhachek,%20Agrawal%20&%20Han%20(2012)_Guilt%20versus%20Shame.pdf
The Influence of Narrative v. Statistical Information on Perceiving Vaccination Risks https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X11400419
How to Debunk Misinformation about COVID, Vaccines and Masks https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-debunk-misinformation-about-covid-vaccines-and-masks/
Misinformation in the COVID-19 Infodemic: Government Response to the Committee’s Second Report https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5801/cmselect/cmcumeds/894/89402.htm
Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01056-1
Trusted News Initiative (TNI) to combat spread of harmful vaccine disinformation and announces major research project https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2020/trusted-news-initiative-vaccine-disinformation
Inducing Resistance to Conspiracy Theory Propaganda: Testing Inoculation and Metainoculation Strategies https://academic.oup.com/hcr/article-abstract/39/2/184/4093671?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false
Emotional responses to prosocial messages increase willingness to self-isolate during the COVID-19 pandemic https://psyarxiv.com/qkxvb/
Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0884-z
Don’t get it or don’t spread it: Comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviours https://psyarxiv.com/yuq7x/
COVID-19 vaccination intention in the UK: results from the COVID-19 vaccination acceptability study (CoVAccS), a nationally representative cross-sectional survey https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33242386/
Parents intention to vaccinate their 5-11 years old children with the COVID-19: vaccine rates, predictors and the role of incentives
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.05.21265900v1
Determinants of the COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Spectrum https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.05.21261675v1
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy January-May 2021 among 18-64 year old US adults by employment and occupation https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.20.21255821v4
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy worldwide: a systematic review of vaccine acceptance rates https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.28.20248950v1
Understanding COVID-19 Vaccine Early Skepticism and Misinformation https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.21.21260881v1
Why one size fits all is not enough when designing covid-19 immunity certificates for domestic use: a UK wide cross-sectional online survey https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.12.21264898v2
Predicting willingness to be vaccinated for Covid-19: evidence from New Zealand https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.24.21265447v1.full-text
Measuring COVID-19 related anxiety and obsession: Validation of the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale and the Obsession with COVID-19 Scale in a probability Chinese sample https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34706425/
Exploration of attitudes regarding uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among vaccine hesitant adults in the UK: A qualitative analysis https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268325v1
Healthcare workers’ views on mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the United Kingdom: findings from the UK-REACH prospective longitudinal cohort study
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269017v1
Vaccine hesitancy: What causes it, what can change it? – study
https://m.jpost.com/health-and-wellness/coronavirus/article-703187
Underlying factors that influence the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine in a country with a high vaccination rate https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.31.21265676v1
A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33082575/
Acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine: A multifactorial consideration https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7588176/
Acceptability of a COVID-19 vaccine among adults in the United States: How many people would get vaccinated? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32863069/
Using conditional inference to quantify interaction effects of socio-demographic covariates of US COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.02.21264456v1
COVID-19 booster vaccine attitudes and behaviors among university students and staff: the USC Trojan Pandemic Research Initiative https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.09.21267545v1