Understanding the rationales and information environments for early, late, and nonadopters of the COVID-19 vaccine

• Published in: npj vaccines Vol. 9; no. 1; pp. 168 - 12
• Main Authors: Singh, Lisa, Bao, Le, Bode, Leticia, Budak, Ceren, Pasek, Josh, Raghunathan, Trivellore, Traugott, Michael, Wang, Yanchen, Wycoff, Nathan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 14-09-2024; Nature Publishing Group; Nature Portfolio
• Subjects: 692/499; 692/700/478/174; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Biomedicine; COVID-19; COVID-19 vaccines; Immunization; Infectious Diseases; Medical Microbiology; Pandemics; Public Health; Statistical analysis; Subpopulations; Vaccine; Vaccines; Virology
• DOI: 10.1038/s41541-024-00962-5
• EISSN: 2059-0105

Anti-vaccine sentiment during the COVID-19 pandemic grew at an alarming rate, leaving much to understand about the relationship between people’s vaccination status and the information they were exposed to. This study investigated the relationship between vaccine behavior, decision rationales, and information exposure on social media over time. Using a cohort study that consisted of a nationally representative survey of American adults, three subpopulations (early adopters, late adopters, and nonadopters) were analyzed through a combination of statistical analysis, network analysis, and semi-supervised topic modeling. The main reasons Americans reported choosing to get vaccinated were safety and health. However, work requirements and travel were more important for late adopters than early adopters (95% CI on OR of [0.121, 0.453]). While late adopters’ and nonadopters’ primary reason for not getting vaccinated was it being too early, late adopters also mentioned safety issues more often and nonadopters mentioned government distrust (95% CI on OR of [0.125, 0.763]). Among those who shared Twitter/X accounts, early adopters and nonadopters followed a larger fraction of highly partisan political accounts compared to late adopters, and late adopters were exposed to more neutral and pro-vaccine messaging than nonadopters. Together, these findings suggest that the decision-making process and the information environments of these subpopulations have notable differences, and any online vaccination campaigns need to consider these differences when attempting to provide accurate vaccine information to all three subpopulations.