Helena Tomljenovic1, Andreja Bubic2, Nikola Erceg3. 1. School of Medicine, University of Split, Split, Croatia. 2. Chair for Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Split, Split, Croatia. 3. Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
Abstract
Objective: Vaccine hesitancy has been identified as one of the major contributors to child under-vaccination. Research indicates that some hesitant parents' mistrust extends to specific conspiracy ideation, but research on vaccine conspiracy beliefs is still scarce. Our objective was to explore factors contributing to parental vaccine conspiracy beliefs and actual vaccine uptake in children.Design: A cross-sectional correlational design with a non-probabilistic sample of 823 volunteer participants surveyed online.Main outcome measures: We focussed on the contributions of the analytically rational and experientially intuitive thinking styles, as well as measures of emotional functioning, namely optimism and emotions towards vaccination, to vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccine uptake as outcomes. Results: The obtained results showed that greater vaccine conspiracy beliefs were associated with stronger unpleasant emotions towards vaccination and greater experientially intuitive thinking, as well as lower levels of education. Furthermore, unpleasant emotions towards vaccination and intuitive thinking were associated with vaccine refusal. Conclusion: These findings confirm the primary importance of emotions, along with the propensity towards intuitive thinking, in the context of vaccine conspiracy beliefs and refusal, supporting the notion that parents' avoidance is guided by their affect. These results have direct implications for addressing vaccine hesitancy within public campaigns and policies.
Objective: Vaccine hesitancy has been identified as one of the major contributors to child under-vaccination. Research indicates that some hesitant parents' mistrust extends to specific conspiracy ideation, but research on vaccine conspiracy beliefs is still scarce. Our objective was to explore factors contributing to parental vaccine conspiracy beliefs and actual vaccine uptake in children.Design: A cross-sectional correlational design with a non-probabilistic sample of 823 volunteer participants surveyed online.Main outcome measures: We focussed on the contributions of the analytically rational and experientially intuitive thinking styles, as well as measures of emotional functioning, namely optimism and emotions towards vaccination, to vaccine conspiracy beliefs and vaccine uptake as outcomes. Results: The obtained results showed that greater vaccine conspiracy beliefs were associated with stronger unpleasant emotions towards vaccination and greater experientially intuitive thinking, as well as lower levels of education. Furthermore, unpleasant emotions towards vaccination and intuitive thinking were associated with vaccine refusal. Conclusion: These findings confirm the primary importance of emotions, along with the propensity towards intuitive thinking, in the context of vaccine conspiracy beliefs and refusal, supporting the notion that parents' avoidance is guided by their affect. These results have direct implications for addressing vaccine hesitancy within public campaigns and policies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Vaccine hesitancy; affect-heuristic; conspiracy beliefs; emotions; faith in intuition; need for cognition; optimism
Authors: Mikaella E Patsali; Danai-Priskila V Mousa; Eleni V K Papadopoulou; Konstantina K K Papadopoulou; Chrysi K Kaparounaki; Ioannis Diakogiannis; Konstantinos N Fountoulakis Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2020-07-13 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Mazin Barry; Mohamad-Hani Temsah; Abdullah Alhuzaimi; Nurah Alamro; Ayman Al-Eyadhy; Fadi Aljamaan; Basema Saddik; Ali Alhaboob; Fahad Alsohime; Khalid Alhasan; Abdulkarim Alrabiaah; Ali Alaraj; Rabih Halwani; Amr Jamal; Sarah Alsubaie; Fatimah S Al-Shahrani; Ziad A Memish; Jaffar A Al-Tawfiq Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-11-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Konstantinos N Fountoulakis; Maria K Apostolidou; Marina B Atsiova; Anna K Filippidou; Angeliki K Florou; Dimitra S Gousiou; Aikaterini R Katsara; Sofia N Mantzari; Marina Padouva-Markoulaki; Evangelia I Papatriantafyllou; Panagiota I Sacharidi; Aikaterini I Tonia; Eleni G Tsagalidou; Vasiliki P Zymara; Panagiotis E Prezerakos; Sotirios A Koupidis; Nikolaos K Fountoulakis; George P Chrousos Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2020-11-02 Impact factor: 4.839