Transparent communication about negative features of COVID-19 vaccines decreases acceptance but increases trust

Abstract

During the rapid development and rolling out of vaccines against COVID-19, researchers have called for an approach of “radical transparency,” in which vaccine information is transparently disclosed to the public, even if negative information can decrease vaccine uptake. Consistent with theories about the psychology of conspiracy beliefs, these calls predict that a lack of transparency may reduce trust in health authorities and may facilitate the spread of conspiracy theories, which may limit the long-term capabilities of health authorities during and after the pandemic. On the basis of preregistered experiments conducted on large, representative samples of Americans and Danes (N > 13,000), the current study contrasts the effects of vague vaccine communication with transparent communication, which discloses either positive or negative vaccine features. The evidence demonstrates that transparent negative communication may indeed harm vaccine acceptance here and now but that it increases trust in health authorities. Furthermore, the alternative of vague, reassuring communication does not increase vaccine acceptance either and leads to both lower trust and higher endorsement of conspiracy theories.

Did the European suspension of the AstraZeneca vaccine decrease vaccine acceptance during the COVID-19 pandemic?

“…It is important to emphasize that findings should not be taken to suggest that authorities should not transparently disclose negative information about vaccines. A recent experimental study find that while such transparency may hinder short-term vaccine acceptance, it can uphold trust in the health authorities [8] , which is the biggest predictor of overall acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines [4] , [5] . Instead, the contribution from the present analyses is that they provide the first evidence that decisions from one national health authority during a pandemic can reach and impact the populations of other countries.…”

“…It is well-known that concerns about side effects are significantly associated with vaccine skepticism also in the context of COVID-19 vaccines [2] , [6] , [9] , [1] , [8] . Accordingly, there has been raised debates over whether the decision to suspend the AstraZeneca vaccine in some countries has potential effects on levels of acceptance when it comes to COVID-19 vaccines more generally [3] .…”

Belonging to Socially Excluded Groups as a Predictor of Vaccine Hesitancy and Rejection

“…Research has shown that conspiracy theories are likely to channel people's feelings of resentment toward political targets and to support radical attitudes ( 38 ). Second, questioning the integrity of the pharmaceutical companies: a general feeling of missing relevant information concerning the vaccine's effectiveness ( 39 , 40 ), and concerns about unforeseen side effects and risks of this vaccine ( 2 , 5 ). A third, indirect claim of conspiracy, which is phrased in terms of unrealistic optimism, argues that the risk of this plague, as presented by the authorities, is highly exaggerated and unjustified ( 41 ).…”

Relief After COVID-19 Vaccination: A Doubtful or Evident Outcome?

“…When adverse events were reported related to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic vaccine, some countries did not provide timely information about the association of the events with the vaccine, causing lack of confidence in the vaccine that subsequently influenced vaccine uptake and communication ( 11 , 12 ). Thus, sustaining trust during a pandemic is critical for health authorities, both if repeated vaccinations are necessary and in preparation for future health emergencies ( 13 ).…”