To overcome vaccine hesitation, government officials need to be creative

Despite widespread availability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, the United States has fallen just below vaccination targets established by the Biden administration. As agencies and officials at all levels of government continue their efforts to promote immunization, our research shows that misinformation and politicization are among the main drivers of vaccine reluctance. This suggests that officials may need inventive strategies to change attitudes and effectively persuade people to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.

The School of Public Affairs at the University of South Florida recently conducted a survey of 600 adult Floridians to measure exposure to misinformation and common objections to vaccination. The results suggest that achieving herd immunity will require enhanced public health messages that address specific themes of disinformation, while individually addressing diverse ideological communities.

Among the most significant results of the survey was a sharp divergence in vaccination rates according to political affiliation. Specifically, 66% of self-identified Democrats said they were fully immunized, compared to just 54% of self-identified Republicans and 50% of independents. Overall, these numbers are well below the vaccination targets of the White House and the estimated thresholds by health experts to obtain collective immunity. However, the partisan differences themselves are instructive.

While officials and public health officials may wish to stay above the political fray, these data remind us that the real effects of politicization cannot be ignored when it comes to public health messages and policy implementation. The more people see COVID-19 as a partisan issue, the more likely they are to seek clues from political opinion leaders rather than medical professionals.

The survey also highlighted the widespread exposure of Americans to vaccine misinformation, as well as a clear link between exposure to misinformation and vaccination. Drawing on both academic research and public health advice, we have identified eight common themes of misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccines. Based on these themes, almost three-quarters of respondents (73%) reported at least some degree of exposure to disinformation. The most frequently encountered misinformation themes included claims that 1) COVID-19 vaccines contain a live strain of the virus; 2) COVID-19 vaccines contain 5G chips; and 3) COVID-19 vaccines alter the genes of recipients and alter their DNA. More than a third of respondents said they encountered each of these complaints, while 42% encountered the first.

Perhaps more importantly, the results showed a clear correlation between exposure to misinformation and acceptance of the vaccine. Of those surveyed who did not encounter any misinformation, 74% said they had been vaccinated. That number fell to 63% among respondents exposed to a single theme of disinformation, and to 52% among those who encountered six or more. The differences were found to be statistically significant.

Reason to be optimistic

While these results are disheartening, public officials and health professionals have reason to be hopeful. Recent studies found evidence that disinformation can be overcome with effective and targeted messages. The transmission of these messages will require a capital of trust between professionals and local community leaders. Transparent and respectful communication is the key to informed decision-making aimed at reducing vaccine hesitancy.

Ultimately, those who view COVID-19 as a partisan issue will need to be reassured about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine by trusted political opinion leaders who share their ideological views. Even those with medically valid objections, such as concerns about potential side effects or fertility implications, are more likely to be persuaded by targeted rather than broad public health messages. Recent research in the field of medicine suggested that the testimony of individual experts such as practicing physicians is more convincing to consumers of information than institutional messages.

Like it or not, efforts to promote immunization will need to overcome these obstacles, meaning that public leaders and health professionals will need to be creative in their advocacy efforts. This may include pursuing active measures to counter common themes of misinformation in places such as social media, while partnering directly with clinical health care providers at the local level. It also means engaging with political opinion leaders at local, state and national levels to talk about the reluctance of skeptical audiences.

* The survey was conducted as a web panel between June 3 and June 14, 2021. The sample was purchased through Prodege MR, one of the leading market research providers. The sample of 600 adult Floridians was enumerated using a stratified quota sampling method to ensure representativeness (by region of the state) by age, sex, race and of ethnic origin. The results are reported with a confidence level of 95% and a margin of error of +/- 4.0.

Robin L. Ersing, PhD, is associate professor and director of the School of Public Affairs at the University of South Florida. Stephen Neely, PhD, is an associate professor of public administration at the school. Christa Remington, PhD, is an assistant professor of public administration at the school.