Moral foundations and HPV vaccine acceptance in the United States: State, parental, and individual factors

Unraveling the Impact of Moral Framings within Media Coverage to Promote the (De)stigmatization of Depression on Social Media

Media coverage of depression on social media with specific framings could shape people's perception and attitude, which is significant in reducing the stigma and promoting support for depression sufferers. Adopting the lens of moral foundation theory (MFT), this study aims to explore the effect of inherent moral framings within depression coverage on social media on the stigma and approval attitudes toward depression in audiences' responses. A large language model and a dictionary-based approach were respectively adopted to score depression-related media coverages (n = 919) and corresponding comments (n = 92,505) collected from the Weibo platform against MFT's five dimensions and (de)stigma attitudes. The results indicated that care, purity, and fairness framings are prevalent in depression coverage, surpassing moral framings such as betrayal, harm, and cheating. Most responses expressed approval rather than stigma. Moreover, the use of care and loyalty framings can elicit approval responses but decrease audience engagement.

Did the COVID-19 experience change U.S. parents' attitudes towards HPV vaccination? Results from a national survey

BACKGROUND

In the U.S., uptake of the HPV vaccine remains below coverage goals. There is concern that negative reactions to emergency initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic, including vaccination, may have increased some parents' hesitancy towards all vaccines, including HPV. Understanding how different parent populations view routine vaccination post-pandemic is key to strategic efforts to maintaining and increasing uptake of HPV vaccine.

METHODS

In early 2022, we recruited an online panel of English-speaking U.S. parents and caregivers, who used the social media platform Twitter and had HPV vaccine-eligible but unvaccinated children age 9-14 years. Respondents completed a 20-minute survey measuring knowledge, attitudes and intentions regarding HPV vaccination for their child, as well as background socio-demographics and health information-seeking practices. Questions regarding experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic included changes in access to preventive care, and perceptions of whether pandemic experiences had positively or negatively affected their attitudes about routine vaccination, with open text capturing reasons for this change.

RESULTS

Among 557 respondents, 81 % were definitely or likely to vaccinate their child against HPV, with 12 % being uncertain, and 7 % unlikely to vaccinate. Regarding routine vaccination, most (70 %) felt their attitudes had not changed, while 26 % felt more positively, and only 4 % felt more negatively. Reasons for positive attitude change included increased appreciation for vaccines overall, and motivation to proactively seek preventive care for their child. Negative attitude changes stemmed from distrust of COVID-19 public health efforts including vaccine development, and disillusionment with vaccines' ability to prevent disease. In multivariable models, intention to vaccinate was greater among parents reporting greater education, Democratic affiliation, greater religiosity, and urban residence. Negative attitude change due to the pandemic independently predicted reduced HPV vaccination intention, while positive attitude change predicted positive intention.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-pandemic, most U.S. parents remain committed to vaccinating their children against HPV. However, addressing residual COVID-19 concerns could improve uptake among vaccine-hesitant parents.