‘From cover-up to catastrophe:’ how the anti-vaccine propaganda documentary ‘<i>Vaxxed’</i> impacted student perceptions and intentions about MMR vaccination

Bradshaw, Amanda S.; Shelton, Summer; Fitzsimmons, Alexis Bajalia; Treise, Debbie

doi:10.1080/17538068.2022.2117527

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…S38 and S39 ). Overall, these findings suggests that antivaccine audiences do value expert opinion, at least when it confirms their own stances, a result aligned with other studies that have found that scientists and medical professionals are popular sources among vaccine opponents ( 10 , 12 , 41 , 43 , 48 , 49 , 63 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Prior work on antivaccine influencers suggested a category analogous to our definition of perceived experts and provided notable examples ( 2 , 38–40 ). For example, former physician Andrew Wakefield and other perceived experts promulgated the myth that the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism ( 10 ), perceived experts appeared in the viral Plandemic conspiracy documentary and other antivaccine films ( 41–43 ), and 6 of the 12 antivaccine influencers identified as part of the “Disinformation Dozen” responsible for a majority of antivaccine content on Facebook and Twitter included medical credentials in their social media profiles ( 44 ). Antivaccine users comprised a considerable proportion of apparent medical professionals on Twitter (a subset of perceived experts excluding scientific researchers) sampled based on use of a particular hashtag ( 45 ) or inclusion of certain keywords in their profiles ( 46 , 47 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, perceived expertise may increase user influence within the provaccine and antivaccine communities. Although vaccine opponents express distrust in scientific institutions and the medical community writ large, they simultaneously embrace perceived experts who oppose the scientific consensus as heroes and trusted sources ( 10 , 41 , 43 , 48 ). Medical misinformation claims attributed to perceived experts were some of the most popular and durable topics within misinformation communities on Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic ( 12 , 63 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Perceived experts are prevalent and influential within an antivaccine community on Twitter

Harris,

Murtfeldt,

Wang

et al. 2024

PNAS Nexus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceived experts (i.e. medical professionals and biomedical scientists) are trusted sources of medical information who are especially effective at encouraging vaccine uptake. The role of perceived experts acting as potential antivaccine influencers has not been characterized systematically. We describe the prevalence and importance of antivaccine perceived experts by constructing a coengagement network of 7,720 accounts based on a Twitter data set containing over 4.2 million posts from April 2021. The coengagement network primarily broke into two large communities that differed in their stance toward COVID-19 vaccines, and misinformation was predominantly shared by the antivaccine community. Perceived experts had a sizable presence across the coengagement network, including within the antivaccine community where they were 9.8% of individual, English-language users. Perceived experts within the antivaccine community shared low-quality (misinformation) sources at similar rates and academic sources at higher rates compared to perceived nonexperts in that community. Perceived experts occupied important network positions as central antivaccine users and bridges between the antivaccine and provaccine communities. Using propensity score matching, we found that perceived expertise brought an influence boost, as perceived experts were significantly more likely to receive likes and retweets in both the antivaccine and provaccine communities. There was no significant difference in the magnitude of the influence boost for perceived experts between the two communities. Social media platforms, scientific communications, and biomedical organizations may focus on more systemic interventions to reduce the impact of perceived experts in spreading antivaccine misinformation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceived experts are prevalent and influential within an antivaccine community on Twitter

Harris,

Murtfeldt,

Wang

et al. 2024

PNAS Nexus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have advocated mass media-driven target campaigns to counteract misinformation and fabricated religious beliefs [ 13 ]. However, these communicative efforts must align with the socio-psychological mechanism explained by past theories that describe the health-related decision-making process [ 14 ]. Researchers have long been interested in explaining how individuals react to environmental cues or socially communicated alerts about health threats.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ingraining Polio Vaccine Acceptance through Public Service Advertisements in the Digital Era: The Moderating Role of Misinformation, Disinformation, Fake News, and Religious Fatalism

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, misinformation and disinformation, as well as fake news, have become global threats to public health owing to their role in spreading viral health hazard information. The growing explosive religious fatalistic views presented on social media and widespread misinformation, disinformation, and fake news can result in detrimental outcomes in adopting protective behavior. The moderating implications of misinformation and religious fatalism can be severe, leading to adverse effects on polio vaccine acceptance. Consequently, this research provides brief empirical evidence on the efficacy of risk communication strategies to address polio vaccine reluctance in a digital age landscape, an area that remains understudied. This research argues that the spread of misinformation, disinformation, fake news, and religious fatalism is not solely the bane of the polio vaccine, but rather represents the absence of risk communication strategies. The study opines that polio vaccine acceptance can be improved using risk communication strategies. Recognizing these risk factors and counter-risk communication strategies, this research tested a theoretical model using the cross-sectional survey design. Overall, data was collected from 2160 parents with children aged below five years. The results, based on structural equation modeling, revealed that public service advertisements are an effective tool to counter the inverse impacts of misinformation, disinformation, fake news, and religious fatalism. Furthermore, the inverse moderating role of misinformation, disinformation, fake news, and religious fatalism has been verified to potentially diminish polio vaccine acceptance. These results suggest that healthcare providers must identify and address all forms of digitally disseminated information that encumbers public health behaviors. Accordingly, this research recognized the utilization of evidence-based strategic communication campaigns to cultivate and encourage the literacy necessary to counter health hazard information, including misinformation. This study’s findings will benefit health and other concerned authorities in utilizing strategic communication on different media platforms to reduce or eradicate the polio endemic.

show abstract

“…However, this tendency may be problematic when the public is unable to discern genuine expertise from non-genuine expertise (Cummings, 2014). In addition, anti-vaccine influencers frequently leverage credentials (Kata, 2010;Prasad, 2022), which could be a persuasive tactic (Bradshaw et al, 2020(Bradshaw et al, , 2022. Historically, industries have also recruited and amplified apparent scientific experts to cast doubt on the links between smoking and cancer, the threat of climate change caused by fossil fuel emissions, and the health risks of lead and asbestos to stave off regulation (Michaels, 2008;Oreskes & Conway, 2022).…”

Section: Expertise Cuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who is Perceived to be an Expert on COVID-19 Vaccines on Social Media?: Biomedical Credentials Confer Expertise, Even Among Vaccine-hesitant and Conservative Observers

Jalbert¹,

Harris²,

Williams³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Who is perceived to be an expert on COVID-19 vaccination on social media? We conducted two experimental studies investigating how the presence of biomedical credentials on social media profiles impacts users’ perceived expertise. Participants (Experiment 1 N = 200; Experiment 2 N = 201) viewed a series of Twitter profiles that appeared with or without biomedical credentials and judged to what extent they believed each user was an expert on the topic of COVID-19 vaccination. We found that the presence of biomedical credentials consistently increased perceptions of expertise, including among unvaccinated, vaccine-hesitant, and conservative participants. This work supports existing observations that biomedical credentials may be leveraged by both pro- and anti-vaccine communities to increase perceived credibility and message reach, and counters the narrative that those with anti-vaccination attitudes do not recognize biomedical credentials as conferring expertise.

show abstract

‘From cover-up to catastrophe:’ how the anti-vaccine propaganda documentary ‘Vaxxed’ impacted student perceptions and intentions about MMR vaccination

Cited by 6 publications

References 44 publications

Perceived experts are prevalent and influential within an antivaccine community on Twitter

Perceived experts are prevalent and influential within an antivaccine community on Twitter

Ingraining Polio Vaccine Acceptance through Public Service Advertisements in the Digital Era: The Moderating Role of Misinformation, Disinformation, Fake News, and Religious Fatalism

Who is Perceived to be an Expert on COVID-19 Vaccines on Social Media?: Biomedical Credentials Confer Expertise, Even Among Vaccine-hesitant and Conservative Observers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About