Unwillingness to engage in behaviors that protect against COVID-19: the role of conspiracy beliefs, trust, and endorsement of complementary and alternative medicine

Assessing the role of conspiracy beliefs in oncological treatment decisions: An experimental approach

Cancer is an important issue and a model topic for misinformatfion researchers. The present research experimentally investigates the effect of cancer-related conspiracy beliefs and misinformation on oncology treatment intentions in a cancer-free population. In three pre-registered studies (N total = 1020), participants were asked to put themselves in the shoes of a patient recommended for chemotherapy. Study 1 (N = 300) failed to experimentally manipulate cancer-related conspiracy beliefs with exposure to a health scandal not related to cancer. In Study 2 (N = 258), exposure to a pro-conspiracy (vs. anti-conspiracy) content related to cancer treatment was associated with more conspiracy beliefs, less intention to use chemotherapy and more intentions to use unconventional medicines. Exploratory analyses revealed that these effects were conditioned by the credibility of the misinformation. Study 3 (N = 462) replicated these findings using a full experimental design. Exposure (vs. no exposure) to a warning and accuracy prompt, prior to exposure to the pro-conspiracy content, was found to be effective in reducing its credibility and preventing its detrimental effects. These findings corroborate the existence of an effect of conspiracy beliefs on treatment intentions in oncology and also suggest several ways to mitigate them.

Exposure to objective/sensationalist information moderates associations between psychological factors and COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes: An experimental study

BACKGROUND

Research examining the relationship between psychological factors and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been mostly based on observational designs, with little attention devoted to the role of exposure to objective/sensationalist information.

PURPOSE

This experimental study examined the extent to which exposure to objective or sensationalist news headlines: 1) influenced COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes; and 2) moderated the relationship between psychological factors and COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes.

METHODS

123 participants (mean age = 28.55, SD = 11.44) completed measures of psychological factors previously associated with vaccine hesitancy (i.e. social norms regarding COVID-19, adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), perceived health competence, trust in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, and COVID-19 risk perception). Next, participants were randomly assigned to view nine print news headlines about COVID-19 vaccines that were depicted in objective or sensationalist terms. Finally, participants completed a measure of COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes. A t-test and simple slope analyses were performed to assess whether there were group differences in COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes between participants exposed to objective or sensationalist information, and whether exposure to objective or sensationalist information moderated the relationship between psychological factors and COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes, respectively.

RESULTS

Participants exposed to sensationalist news headlines reported stronger COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes than those exposed to objective headlines. Exposure to objective or sensationalist news headlines moderated the relationship between several psychological factors (i.e. adherence to NPIs, perceived health competence, and trust in CAM) and COVID-19 anti-vaccination attitudes.

CONCLUSIONS

The results highlight that a joint focus on psychological factors and exposure to objective/sensationalist information may contribute to gain a better understanding of vaccine hesitancy in the context of the COVID-19 infodemic.

Communicating and complying with COVID-19 actions in northernmost Finland

In Finland, national and local restrictions were implemented to control the COVID-19 pandemic after the increase of cases, and it changed the everyday life of people. The purpose of our study was to explore public health communication and compliance related to the COVID-19 public health instructions, recommendations, and restrictions in two municipalities in Northernmost Finland, Inari and Utsjoki. We interviewed the representatives and operators working in the municipalities to understand and learn about their experiences. Results suggested that residents complied with different COVID-19 actions, and overall, communication was found to be good. Altogether, guidelines were easy to follow but required the individual's own activity. Guidelines were also published in Sámi language. National border restrictions were a challenging part of communication and information, and guidelines were found to be contradictory at times. National border actions required resources from the municipalities, e.g. testing, which caused more demands on municipalities operating with already low resources. In the future, it is essential to consider the local situation of the pandemic and harmonise actions and put effort on local cooperation. It is important to invest in clear communication, which reaches people of all ages, and in three Sámi languages.

Conspiracy narratives and vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review of prevalence, impact, and interventions

Believing conspiracy narratives is frequently assumed to be a major cause of vaccine hesitancy, i.e., the tendency to forgo vaccination despite its availability. In this scoping review, we synthesise and critically evaluate studies that assess i) the occurrence of vaccine-related conspiracy narratives on the internet, ii) the prevalence of belief in vaccine-related conspiracy narratives, iii) the relationship between belief in conspiracy narratives and vaccination intention or vaccination uptake, and iv) interventions that reduce the impact of conspiracy narratives on vaccination intention.In July 2022, we conducted a literature search using three databases: PubMed, PsychInfo, and Web of Science. Following the PRISMA approach, of the 500 initially identified articles, 205 were eligible and analysed.The majority of identified studies were conducted in Europe and North America, were published in 2021 and 2022, and investigated conspiracy narratives around the COVID-19 vaccination. The prevalence of belief in various vaccine-related conspiracy narratives varied greatly across studies, from 2 to 77%. We identified seven experimental studies investigating the effect of exposure to conspiracy narratives on vaccination intentions, of which six indicated a small negative effect. These findings are complemented by the evidence from over 100 correlative studies showing a significant negative relationship between conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intention or uptake. Additionally, the review identified interventions (e.g., social norm feedback, fact-checking labels, or prebunking) that decreased beliefs in vaccine-related conspiracy narratives and, in some cases, also increased vaccination intentions. Yet, these interventions had only small effects.In summary, the review revealed that vaccine-related conspiracy narratives have spread to varying degrees and can influence vaccination decisions. Causal relationships between conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions remain underexplored. Further, the review identified a need for more research on interventions that can reduce the impact of conspiracy narratives.

Analogies for modeling belief dynamics

Belief dynamics has an important role in shaping our responses to natural and societal phenomena, ranging from climate change and pandemics to immigration and conflicts. Researchers often base their models of belief dynamics on analogies to other systems and processes, such as epidemics or ferromagnetism. Similar to other analogies, analogies for belief dynamics can help scientists notice and study properties of belief systems that they would not have noticed otherwise (conceptual mileage). However, forgetting the origins of an analogy may lead to some less appropriate inferences about belief dynamics (conceptual baggage). Here, we review various analogies for modeling belief dynamics, discuss their mileage and baggage, and offer recommendations for using analogies in model development.

Association between beliefs in medical conspiracy theories and health behaviors among medical and healthcare students. Implications for professional practice

BACKGROUND

While conspiracy theories cover many different themes, medical conspiracy theories (MCTs) have become particularly prevalent in modern societies. As beliefs in MCTs can become a source of "infodemics", influence individual health behaviors and cause distrust in medical institutions and personnel, healthcare workers must find ways to overturn patients' conspiracy thinking. However, as the medical world is not free of these beliefs, in this study, we investigated beliefs in MCTs among medical and health science students and their association with reported health behaviors.

METHODS

Our sample was derived from a self-administered, anonymized, computer-assisted web survey conducted among 1,175 medical and health science students enrolled at the Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland.

RESULTS

From a set of twenty different MCTs, one-third of students rejected all of them, 18% believed in one, 15% in two, 10% in three, and 24% supported four or more conspiracy theories. In addition, many students were hesitant or unsure about MCTs. We also found that nursing and midwifery students were the most likely to believe in MCTs, while medical and dental students were the least supportive. Support for MCTs was higher among students in the early years of their studies and who declared themselves religious and conservative. This study also highlights the association between students' support for MCTs and their reported health behaviors, including avoiding vaccinations, using alternative medicine, taking vitamin C, or using social media as an essential source of health information.

CONCLUSIONS

As medical and health science students are prone to conspiratorial thinking, they should be trained to act as a trusted and reliable source of medical information, to mitigate conspiratorial beliefs, and to act as role models for their patients and society, effectively shaping health behaviors in the population.

Trust in COVID-19 information sources and vaccination status: Exploring social inequalities and differences within the four United Kingdom nations using a representative survey

OBJECTIVES

To explore how the use of, and trust in, different sources of advice and information on COVID-19 differed across the four UK nations and between different sociodemographic groups and their associations with COVID-19 vaccination status.

METHODS

We used a UK-wide representative survey conducted in July 2021, which included data on uptake of COVID-19 vaccination, trust in information sources, use of sources and geographical and sociodemographic variables. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with completed or planned COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

Trust in the NHS, followed by trust in scientists, were the strongest predictors of vaccination intention. NHS websites were the most used (56% across the UK); only the Scottish government website had a higher level of reported use (58%). Using either source was associated with a positive vaccination status as were use of the GP and television as sources of advice. Use of social media, family and friends, and 'none' of the sources enquired about, were all linked to a lower likelihood of being or intending to get vaccinated. Compared to those in England, respondents in other UK nations were less likely to trust the central UK government for advice on COVID-19. There was considerable variation by age in trust and use of some, but not all, sources of advice, with predicted probabilities ranging from 35% among the youngest age group to 62% among those aged 65 years or older. There were also significant differences by annual household income and by occupational class for trust in government, with higher incomes correlating with greater likelihood of trust.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates high levels of trust in the key sources of public health advice and there was a positive association between using official sources of advice and vaccination intentions, even in the context of overall high vaccination rates. Our findings highlight the need for the UK and devolved governments to value the importance of public trust in the health system and take appropriate measures to avoid undermining such trust.

Investigating Beliefs in Anti-Vax Conspiracy Theories among Medical Students

While the doctors' role in immunization is essential, their lack of knowledge or vaccine hesitancy may affect their ability to communicate effectively and educate patients about vaccination, vaccine hesitancy, and vaccine conspiracy theories. This, in turn, may hinder health policy aimed at fighting infectious diseases. Vaccine hesitancy is prevalent not only among the general population but also among healthcare workers; thus, this study is aimed at assessing future doctors' attitudes towards anti-vax conspiracy theories. A total of 441 medical students at Poznan University of Medical Sciences completed a web-based survey designed to explore their attitudes toward the six most prevalent anti-vaccine conspiracy theories. The survey showed that although over 97% of future doctors support vaccinations as an effective form of fighting infectious diseases, and 80% did not believe in any anti-vax conspiracy theory, a significant fraction of 20% of medical students either believed in at least one such theory or were unsure. It has also shown that male and younger students who had not received a flu vaccination and defined themselves as politically right-wing or conservative and religious were more likely to believe in anti-vax conspiracy theories. Our data suggest that, in order to overcome medical students' ambivalent attitudes towards anti-vax conspiracy theories, they should receive more education about the importance of vaccination in preventing disease and about effective ways to combat vaccine hesitancy and anti-vax conspiracy theories.

Covid-19 skepticism and public health norms during refugee assistance: does skepticism always lead to poor safety protocol adherence?

BACKGROUND

Skepticism about COVID-19's existence or severity has spread as fast as the disease itself, and in some populations has been shown to undermine protective public health behaviors that can mitigate infection. For populations that are especially vulnerable to COVID spread and severity, such as refugees, COVID skepticism is particularly problematic.

METHODS

We examine data collected from observations of humanitarian services provided to refugees in Lebanon, Türkiye, and Jordan to determine if skepticism is related to adherence to specific health-protective protocols (masking, social distancing, and hand sanitizing), and whether the effects of COVID skepticism are mediated by particular populations of refugees or the country in which those refugees receive assistance.

RESULTS

We found that community skepticism (the frequency of COVID skepticism expressed by others within a service location) is associated with lower adherence to certain protocols and not others. We also found that with certain protocols, the country in which refugees receive services mediates the relationship between community skepticism and protocol adherence, but for other protocols the relationship between skepticism and adherence is independent of either country in which refugees reside or the refugee population being served.

CONCLUSIONS

The existence of skepticism about COVID-19 does not always lead to an unwillingness to take protective measures to avoid infection. The mechanisms underlying the relationship between skepticism and adherence to health-protective protocols vary based on the type of protocol in question. In order to increase protocol adherence, the specific variables predicting adherence to different protocols need to be assessed in order to increase adherence and improve public health during humanitarian services.

Heritage and hesitancy: how preference for traditional Chinese medicine influences vaccine attitudes

Introduction

Vaccine hesitancy, amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic, is a pressing public health challenge. This study investigates the association between Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) preference and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy within China.

Methods

The study uses data from the 2021 Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS) (N = 2,690). Logistic regressions and Karlson-Holm-Breen (KHB) method are employed to analyzed the relationship between TCM preference and vaccine hesitancy.

Results

The study reaffirms prior findings by revealing a robust and stable association between TCM preference and vaccine hesitancy, which remains unaffected by socioeconomic and demographic confounders, as well as institutional trust dynamics of healthcare system. Contrary to expectations, TCM enthusiasts do not exhibit vaccine hesitancy based on divergent epistemological views concerning vaccine risks and immunity acquisition compared to biomedicine.

Discussion

This research enriches understandings of the intricate relations between healthcare paradigms and vaccine attitudes, inviting further inquiry into the role of CAM in shaping vaccination behaviors across different cultures and contexts. The insights bear significant public health implications for enhancing vaccine acceptance and coverage, particularly among populations where CAM practices wield substantial influence.

Undermining support for COVID-19 public health policies: an analysis of the impact of subversive conspiracy narratives on Czech General Practitioners

BACKGROUND

Limited knowledge exists regarding the impact of COVID-19 conspiracy theories on the professional practice of general practitioners (GPs). This study aimed to identify the basic characteristics of GPs who endorse COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and compare their level of support for COVID-19 health policies with GPs who do not believe in conspiracies.

METHODS

Between January and February 2021, a representative online survey was conducted among 1163 GPs in the Czech Republic. The sample was designed to be representative of members of The Association of GPs of the Czech Republic.

RESULTS

The survey revealed that nearly 14% of the GPs surveyed believed in one or more COVID-19 conspiracies. The average age of GPs who endorsed conspiracies was 58, which was higher than the rest of the sample (average age of 50). GPs who believed in conspiracies were less likely to support COVID-19 public health policies and therapy recommendations, including vaccination. Logistic and linear regression analyses indicated that doctors who believed in conspiracies were 2.62 times less likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccine. Mediation analysis showed that approximately one-quarter (23.21%) of the total effect of trust in government information on support for public health policies was indirectly mediated by the endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings suggest a concerning association between belief in COVID-19 conspiracies and a reduced level of support for public health policies among GPs. These results underscore the importance of incorporating the 'conspiracy agenda' into medical authorities' more effective public health communication strategies.

Vaccine hesitancy among physicians: a qualitative study with general practitioners and paediatricians in Austria and Germany

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to understand reasons for vaccine hesitancy (VH) among general practioners (GPs) and paediatricians. We aim to analyse how and when the healthcare workers (HCWs) developed vaccine-hesitant views and how they transfer these to patients.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Semistructured interviews with vaccine-hesitant GPs and paediatricians were conducted in Austria and Germany using an explorative qualitative research design.

PARTICIPANTS

We contacted 41 physicians through letters and emails and 10 agreed to participate, five were male and five female.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Ten interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymised. The material was analysed inductively following a grounded theory approach with open coding using the software atlas.ti.

RESULTS

Key themes that were identified were education and career path, understanding of medicine and medical profession, experiences with vaccines, doctor-patient interactions and continuous education activities and the link to VH. GPs and paediatricians' vaccine-hesitant attitudes developed during their medical training and, in particular, during extracurricular training in homeopathy, which most of the participants completed. Most participants work in private practices rather than with contracts with social insurance because they are not satisfied with the health system. Furthermore, they are critical of biomedicine. Most of the interview partners do not consider themselves antivaccination, but are sceptical towards vaccines and especially point out the side effects. Most do not vaccinate in their practices and some do only occasionally. Their vaccine-hesitant views are often fostered through respective online communities of vaccine-hesitant HCWs.

CONCLUSIONS

More studies on a connection between complementary medicine and vaccine-hesitant views of HCWs are needed. Education about vaccines and infectious diseases among healthworkers must increase especially tailored towards the use of internet and social media. Physicians should be made aware that through time and empathy towards their patients they could have a positive impact on undecided patients and parents regarding vaccine decisions.

Students' mental health during the pandemic: results of the observational cross-sectional COVID-19 MEntal health inTernational for university Students (COMET-S) study

Introduction

The aim of the study was to search rates of depression and mental health in university students, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Materials and methods

This is an observational cross-sectional study. A protocol gathering sociodemographic variables as well as depression, anxiety and suicidality and conspiracism was assembled, and data were collected anonymously and online from April 2020 through March 2021. The sample included 12,488 subjects from 11 countries, of whom 9,026 were females (72.2%; aged 21.11 ± 2.53), 3,329 males (26.65%; aged 21.61 ± 2.81) and 133 "non-binary gender" (1.06%; aged 21.02 ± 2.98). The analysis included chi-square tests, correlation analysis, ANCOVA, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analysis and Relative Risk ratios.

Results

Dysphoria was present in 15.66% and probable depression in 25.81% of the total study sample. More than half reported increase in anxiety and depression and 6.34% in suicidality, while lifestyle changes were significant. The model developed explained 18.4% of the development of depression. Believing in conspiracy theories manifested a complex effect. Close to 25% was believing that the vaccines include a chip and almost 40% suggested that facemask wearing could be a method of socio-political control. Conspiracism was related to current depression but not to history of mental disorders.

Discussion

The current study reports that students are at high risk for depression during the COVID-19 pandemic and identified specific risk factors. It also suggested a role of believing in conspiracy theories. Further research is important, as it is targeted intervention in students' groups that are vulnerable both concerning mental health and conspiracism.

Exploring First Responder Beliefs and Decisions to Vaccinate Against SARS-COV-2

As frontline providers, first responders are not always thought of as patients with unique health beliefs. During early and continued distribution, many first responders in the United States chose to refuse vaccination. Guided by the health belief model and emerging research related to SARS-COV-2, the aim of this study was to further explore the complex message conditions that contributed to first responders' early vaccination decisions. An online survey was conducted between March 1 and March 31 2021, among first responders in the state of Kentucky, which has lagged behind most states in the percentage of the population who are fully vaccinated. The first responder sample included Firefighters, Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs), and paramedics who completed a Qualtrics survey that included measures aimed at assessing health beliefs about SARS-COV-2, beliefs about SARS-COV-2 vaccines, source trustworthiness, and vaccine motivation. First responders were also asked to rank the importance of various information sources about SARS-COV-2 and its vaccines. Findings suggest significant differences exist among first responders who have chosen to receive SARS-COV-2 vaccines and those who have refused, including source preference, conspiracy beliefs, and perceived risk. Future directions, including the exploration of institutional mistrust as a health belief are discussed. These findings offer practical insights that may improve continuing approaches to discover and use preferred communication sources to reach the vaccine-hesitant.

Exploring COVID-19 conspiracy theories: education, religiosity, trust in scientists, and political orientation in 26 European countries

The COVID-19 virus disseminated globally at an accelerated pace, culminating in a worldwide pandemic; it engendered a proliferation of spurious information and a plethora of misinformation and conspiracy theories (CTs). While many factors contributing to the propensity for embracing conspiracy ideation have been delineated, the foremost determinant influencing individuals' proclivity towards CT endorsement appears to be their level of educational attainment. This research aimed to assess the moderating effect of religiosity, trust in scientists, and political orientation on the impact of education level on people's belief in COVID-19-related CTs in Europe by considering both individual-level and country-level contextual covariates of CT. We analysed data from the newest European Social Survey (ESS10) round conducted between September 2020 and September 2022 in 26 countries. We found religiosity weakens, and trust in scientists strengthens the effect of education, while the impact of political orientation is not straightforward. The result also demonstrates a significant negative correlation between the aggregate country-level data of the respondents supporting CTs and the level of vaccination and cumulative excess deaths in Europe. We concluded with a recommendation that planning effective public health strategies and campaigns are insufficient when based solely on people's education, as individuals' beliefs moderate the effect of education.

Conspiracy Theories, Trust in Science, and Knowledge during the Third Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Cyprus

Conspiracy theories flourish during periods of crisis. One way to counteract the believability of conspiracy theories is trust in science and knowledge about the "perceived threat", such as the SARS-CoV-2 virus. A total of 363 adults from Cyprus were recruited via convenience and snowball sampling methods. The data were collected via an internet-based questionnaire that examined participants' belief in 17 conspiracy theory statements, trust in science and scientists, knowledge about the symptoms and the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, phobic anxiety, hostility, somatization, and personality traits based on the Big Five. The results suggest (a) the overall belief in conspiracy theories in Cyprus is low, even though a notable percentage holds a neutral stance towards these theories; (b) trust in science and knowledge about the symptoms and the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is negatively related to conspiracy theories, indicating the importance of trusting science and having knowledge as a means to counteract conspiracy theories; (c) young adults, those residing in rural areas, and those with a low education level are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories; (d) there are no significant associations between conspiracy theories and the psychological dimensions of phobic anxiety, hostility, and somatization; (e) there is difficulty in identifying specific traits related to conspiracy ideation. Public health officials could benefit from the findings when communicating information during periods of crisis.

The use of complementary and traditional medicine for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use and effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies as part of the treatment of COVID-19 and its complications, either combined or not with the usual treatment.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted between August and October 2021 using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Web of Science databases. From a total of 204 articles identified, 33 were included in the final sample (15 clinical trials and 18 quasi-experimental studies). The methodological evaluation was carried out using STROBE and CONSORT guidelines.

RESULTS

There is a growing literature on the use of CAM for COVID-19. Most studies have shown positive findings, particularly for the use of TCM, other herbal therapies and acupuncture. Nevertheless, most studies were carried out in Asia and relied on quasi-experimental designs. The current evidence is available for physical outcomes (mortality rate, pneumonia resolution and other symptoms, negative PCR test, and hospitalization and ICU admissions) and for mental health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Despite a positive role of CAM on COVID-19 outcomes, the evidence is still mostly based on quasi-experimental studies. More robust clinical trials are needed in order to generate better evidence in this area.

Validating a German Version of the Conspiracy Mentality Scale (CMS)

Increased scientific interest in conspiracy beliefs raises the need for validated individual difference measures in the general tendency to believe in conspiracy theories, otherwise referred to as conspiracy mentality. In this article, we present a German language version of the Conspiracy Mentality Scale (CMS). A representative sample of German-speaking Swiss residents (N = 468) filled in the scale, along with measures of trust in several sources of information, need for social validation, compliance with Covid-19 preventive measures, perceived severity of the pandemic, loneliness, functional literacy and interpersonal conflict. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-dimensional structure of the original scale. Positive correlations between conspiracy theory ideation and trust in friends and the need for social validation on the one hand, and negative correlations with trust in scientific publications and scientific experts, perceived severity of the pandemic and functional literacy on the other hand supported construct validity. We conclude that our German language version of the scale is a valid measure of conspiracy theory ideation and skepticism.

A taxonomy of anti-vaccination arguments from a systematic literature review and text modelling

The proliferation of anti-vaccination arguments is a threat to the success of many immunization programmes. Effective rebuttal of contrarian arguments requires an approach that goes beyond addressing flaws in the arguments, by also considering the attitude roots-that is, the underlying psychological attributes driving a person's belief-of opposition to vaccines. Here, through a pre-registered systematic literature review of 152 scientific articles and thematic analysis of anti-vaccination arguments, we developed a hierarchical taxonomy that relates common arguments and themes to 11 attitude roots that explain why an individual might express opposition to vaccination. We further validated our taxonomy on coronavirus disease 2019 anti-vaccination misinformation, through a combination of human coding and machine learning using natural language processing algorithms. Overall, the taxonomy serves as a theoretical framework to link expressed opposition of vaccines to their underlying psychological processes. This enables future work to develop targeted rebuttals and other interventions that address the underlying motives of anti-vaccination arguments.

Karakatsoulis G, Abraham S, Adorjan K, Ahmed HU, Alarcón RD, Arai K, Auwal SS, Bobes J, Bobes-Bascaran T, Bourgin-Duchesnay J, Bredicean CA, Bukelskis L, Burkadze A, Cabrera Abud II, Castilla-Puentes R, Cetkovich M, Colon-Rivera H, Corral R, Cortez-Vergara C, Crepin P, de Berardis D, Zamora Delgado S, de Lucena D, de Sousa A, di Stefano R, Dodd S, Elek LP, Elissa A, Erdelyi-Hamza B, Erzin G, Etchevers MJ, Falkai P, Farcas A, Fedotov I, Filatova V, Fountoulakis NK, Frankova I, Franza F, Frias P, Galako T, Garay CJ, Garcia-Álvarez L, García-Portilla P, Gonda X, Gondek TM, Morera González D, Gould H, Grandinetti P, Grau A, Groudeva V, Hagin M, Harada T, Hasan TM, Azreen Hashim N, Hilbig J, Hossain S, Iakimova R, Ibrahim M, Iftene F, Ignatenko Y, Irarrazaval M, Ismail Z, Ismayilova J, Jacobs A, Jakovljević M, Jakšić N, Javed A, Yilmaz Kafali H, Karia S, Kazakova O, Khalifa D, Khaustova O, Koh S, Kopishinskaia S, Kosenko K, Koupidis SA, Kovacs I, Kulig B, Lalljee A, Liewig J, Majid A, Malashonkova E, Malik K, Iqbal Malik N, Mammadzada G, Mandalia B, Marazziti D, Marčinko D, Martinez S, Matiekus E, Mejia G, Memon RS, Meza Martínez XE, Mickevičiūtė D, Milev R, Mohammed M, Molina-López A, Morozov P, Muhammad NS, Mustač F, Naor MS, Nassieb A, Navickas A, Okasha T, Pandova M, Panfil AL, Panteleeva L, Papava I, Patsali ME, Pavlichenko A, Pejuskovic B, Pinto da Costa M, Popkov M, Popovic D, Raduan NJN, Vargas Ramírez F, Rancans E, Razali S, Rebok F, Rewekant A, Reyes Flores EN, Rivera-Encinas MT, Saiz PA, Sánchez de Carmona M, Saucedo Martínez D, Saw JA, Saygili G, Schneidereit P, Shah B, Shirasaka T, Silagadze K, Sitanggang S, Skugarevsky O, Spikina A, Mahalingappa SS, Stoyanova M, Szczegielniak A, Tamasan SC, Tavormina G, Tavormina MGM, Theodorakis PN, Tohen M, Tsapakis EM, Tukhvatullina D, Ullah I, Vaidya R, Vega-Dienstmaier JM, Vrublevska J, Vukovic O, Vysotska O, Widiasih N, Yashikhina A, Prezerakos PE, Berk M, Levaj S, Smirnova D. Results of the COVID-19 mental health international for the health professionals (COMET-HP) study: depression, suicidal tendencies and conspiracism

INTRODUCTION

The current study aimed to investigate the rates of anxiety, clinical depression, and suicidality and their changes in health professionals during the COVID-19 outbreak.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data came from the larger COMET-G study. The study sample includes 12,792 health professionals from 40 countries (62.40% women aged 39.76 ± 11.70; 36.81% men aged 35.91 ± 11.00 and 0.78% non-binary gender aged 35.15 ± 13.03). Distress and clinical depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm, respectively.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analyses, and Factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tested relations among variables.

RESULTS

Clinical depression was detected in 13.16% with male doctors and 'non-binary genders' having the lowest rates (7.89 and 5.88% respectively) and 'non-binary gender' nurses and administrative staff had the highest (37.50%); distress was present in 15.19%. A significant percentage reported a deterioration in mental state, family dynamics, and everyday lifestyle. Persons with a history of mental disorders had higher rates of current depression (24.64% vs. 9.62%; p < 0.0001). Suicidal tendencies were at least doubled in terms of RASS scores. Approximately one-third of participants were accepting (at least to a moderate degree) a non-bizarre conspiracy. The highest Relative Risk (RR) to develop clinical depression was associated with a history of Bipolar disorder (RR = 4.23).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study reported findings in health care professionals similar in magnitude and quality to those reported earlier in the general population although rates of clinical depression, suicidal tendencies, and adherence to conspiracy theories were much lower. However, the general model of factors interplay seems to be the same and this could be of practical utility since many of these factors are modifiable.

COVID-19 resilience index in European Union countries based on their risk and readiness scale

Addressing risks and pandemics at a country level is a complex task that requires transdisciplinary approaches. The paper aims to identify groups of the European Union countries characterized by a similar COVID-19 Resilience Index (CRI). Developed in the paper CRI index reflects the countries' COVID-19 risk and their readiness for a crisis situation, including a pandemic. Moreover, the study detects the factors that significantly differentiate the distinguished groups. According to our research, Bulgaria, Hungary, Malta, and Poland have the lowest COVID-19 Resilience Index score, with Croatia, Greece, Czechia, and Slovakia following close. At the same time, Ireland and Scandinavian countries occupy the top of the leader board, followed by Luxemburg. The Kruskal-Wallis test results indicate four COVID-19 risk indicators that significantly differentiate the countries in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Among the significant factors are not only COVID-19-related factors, i.e., the changes in residential human mobility, the stringency of anti-COVID-19 policy, but also strictly environmental factors, namely pollution and material footprint. It indicates that the most critical global environmental issues might be crucial in the phase of a future pandemic. Moreover, we detect eight readiness factors that significantly differentiate the analysed country groups. Among the significant factors are the economic indicators such as GDP per capita and labour markets, the governance indicators such as Rule of Law, Access to Information, Implementation and Adaptability measures, and social indicators such as Tertiary Attainment and Research, Innovation, and Infrastructure.

Endorsement of alternative medicine and vaccine hesitancy among physicians: A cross-sectional study in four European countries

Vaccine hesitancy has become a threat to public health, especially as it is a phenomenon that has also been observed among healthcare professionals. In this study, we analyzed the relationship between endorsement of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and vaccination attitudes and behaviors among healthcare professionals, using a cross-sectional sample of physicians with vaccination responsibilities from four European countries: Germany, Finland, Portugal, and France (total N = 2,787). Our results suggest that, in all the participating countries, CAM endorsement is associated with lower frequency of vaccine recommendation, lower self-vaccination rates, and being more open to patients delaying vaccination, with these relationships being mediated by distrust in vaccines. A latent profile analysis revealed that a profile characterized by higher-than-average CAM endorsement and lower-than-average confidence and recommendation of vaccines occurs, to some degree, among 19% of the total sample, although these percentages varied from one country to another: 23.72% in Germany, 17.83% in France, 9.77% in Finland, and 5.86% in Portugal. These results constitute a call to consider health care professionals' attitudes toward CAM as a factor that could hinder the implementation of immunization campaigns.

A comparative study of eight COVID-19 protective measures and their impact on Swiss tourists' travel intentions

A comparative vignette-based experimental survey design incorporating various socio-psychological factors, linked to the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the Health Belief Model (HBM) and the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale (DOSPERT) was carried out to test variations in eight travel-related COVID-19 protective measures on Swiss tourists' travel intentions. Among the tested measures, vaccination passports, surgical masks and quarantining are those that stand out the most, with surgical masks having the greatest acceptance and willingness to adopt while traveling. Quarantining, on the other hand, appears to have a deterrent influence on travel intentions, and vaccination passports have the lowest perceived barriers during travel, but the highest perceived benefits in mitigating the spread of the infection. The discussion of individual differences has specific implications for tourism management against the background of our empirical findings.

Psychological profiles of anti-vaccination argument endorsement

The proliferation of anti-vaccination arguments online can threaten immunisation programmes, including those targeting COVID-19. To effectively refute misinformed views about vaccination, communicators need to go beyond providing correct information and debunking of misconceptions, and must consider the underlying motivations of people who hold contrarian views. Drawing on a taxonomy of anti-vaccination arguments that identified 11 "attitude roots"-i.e., psychological attributes-that motivate an individual's vaccine-hesitant attitude, we assessed whether these attitude roots were identifiable in argument endorsements and responses to psychological construct measures corresponding to the presumed attitude roots. In two UK samples (total n = 1250), we found that participants exhibited monological belief patterns in their highly correlated endorsements of anti-vaccination arguments drawn from different attitude roots, and that psychological constructs representing the attitude roots significantly predicted argument endorsement strength and vaccine hesitancy. We identified four different latent anti-vaccination profiles amongst our participants' responses. We conclude that endorsement of anti-vaccination arguments meaningfully dovetails with attitude roots clustering around anti-scientific beliefs and partisan ideologies, but that the balance between those attitudes differs considerably between people. Communicators must be aware of those individual differences.

How Scientists View Vaccine Hesitancy

This paper examines possible causes, consequences, and potential solutions for addressing vaccine hesitancy in the United States, focusing on the perspectives of academic scientists. By examining the experiences of scientists, who are arguably a critical community in US society, we gain deeper insights into how they understand the complexities of vaccine hesitancy and whether their insights and opinions converge with or diverge from the current literature. We present findings from a national survey of a representative sample of academic scientists from the fields of biology and public health regarding vaccine hesitancy and related topics. Empirical analysis using descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses covers multiple topics, including vaccine controversy, trust in science, causes of vaccine hesitancy, preferred policy and regulatory approaches, risk perceptions, and scientists' ethics and perceived communication roles. The results highlight a diversity of opinions within the scientific community regarding how to improve science-society communication in regard to vaccines, including the need to be transparent and candid to the public about the risk of vaccines and their research.

COVID-19 Vaccine Refusal and Delay among Adults in Italy: Evidence from the OBVIOUS Project, a National Survey in Italy

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy was defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2019 as a major threat to global health. In Italy, reluctance to receive vaccines is a widespread phenomenon that was amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic by fear and mistrust in government. This study aims to depict different profiles and characteristics of people reluctant to vaccinate, focusing on the drivers of those who are in favor of and those who are opposed to receiving the COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

A sample of 10,000 Italian residents was collected. A survey on COVID-19 vaccination behavior and possible determinants of vaccine uptake, delay, and refusal was administered to participants through a computer-assisted web interviewing method.

RESULTS

In our sample, 83.2% stated that they were vaccinated as soon as possible ("vaccinators"), 8.0% delayed vaccination ("delayers"), and 6.7% refused to be vaccinated ("no-vaccinators"). In general, the results show that being female, aged between 25 and 64, with an education level less than a high school diploma or above a master's degree, and coming from a rural area were characteristics significantly associated with delaying or refusing COVID-19 vaccination. In addition, it was found that having minimal trust in science and/or government (i.e., 1 or 2 points on a scale from 1 to 10), using alternative medicine as the main source of treatment, and intention to vote for certain parties were characteristics associated with profiles of "delayers" or "no-vaccinators". Finally, the main reported motivation for delaying or not accepting vaccination was fear of vaccine side effects (55.0% among delayers, 55.6% among no-vaccinators).

CONCLUSION

In this study, three main profiles of those who chose to be vaccinated are described. Since those who are in favor of vaccines and those who are not usually cluster in similar sociodemographic categories, we argue that findings from this study might be useful to policy makers when shaping vaccine strategies and choosing policy instruments.

Unlocking infodemics and mysteries in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Nexus of conspiracy beliefs, digital informational support, psychological Well-being, and religious fatalism

Guarding against an anti-science camouflage within infodemics is paramount for sustaining the global vaccination drive. Vaccine hesitancy remains a growing concern and a significant threat to public health, especially in developing countries. Infodemics, conspiracy beliefs and religious fatalism primarily fuel vaccine hesitancy. In addition, anti-vaccine disinformation, lack of understanding, and erroneous religious beliefs also trigger vaccine hesitancy. Global behavioral strategies such as wearing face masks and long-term preventive measures (i.e., COVID-19 vaccination) have effectively limited the virus's spread. Despite the alarming rate of global deaths (i.e., over 99% being unvaccinated), a large proportion of the global population remains reluctant to vaccinate. New evidence validates the usefulness of technology-driven communication strategies (i.e., digital interventions) to address the complex socio-psychological influence of the pandemic. Hence, the present research explored the digital information processing model to assess the interface between informational support (through digital interventions) and antecedents of vaccine hesitancy. This research involved two separate studies: a focus group to operationalize the construct of infodemics, which remained ambiguous in previous literature (Study 1), followed by a cross-sectional survey (Study 2) to examine the conceptual model. Data were collected from 1906 respondents through a standard questionnaire administered online. The focus group's findings revealed a multi-dimensional nature of infodemics that was also validated in Study 2. The cross-sectional survey results substantiated infodemics, religious fatalism and conspiracy beliefs as significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Similarly, conspiracy beliefs negatively influence an individual's psychological well-being. Furthermore, information support (through digital intervention) affected infodemics and religious fatalism, whereas it inversely influenced the strength of their relationships with vaccine hesitancy. Information support (through digital intervention) also moderated the relationship between conspiracy beliefs and psychological well-being.

Older adults' subjective experiences of the COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown in Italy: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the subjective experience of the COVID-19 outbreak in healthy older adults and develop a model of the older population's psychological adaptation to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A qualitative grounded theory approach was taken to the study design and analysis, using semi-structured interviews to collect data from 19 community-active Italian older people by telephone during the first wave of COVID-19 (May 2020).

RESULTS

The theory emerging from the study conceptualized the COVID-19 subjective experience in older people as an adjustment process to the disruption of habits, social contacts, and routines that prompted a meaning-making process to face this adverse experience. Three emergent categories included 'loss, uncertainty, and distress' as the psychological impact of the pandemic emergency, 'making sense of COVID-19' as a subjective sense-making process of the pandemic, and 'living with the pandemic' as agency and self-management within the pandemic experience. The resulting narratives encompassed themes, i.e. risk perception, representation of the self, connection with past-time memories, and compliance with safety measures.

CONCLUSION

The results have implications for designing effective messages to promote hope, social responsibility, and commitment in aging during the COVID-19 pandemic and for health workers who wish to support the psychological health of older adults.

Finding more constructive ways forward in the debate over vaccines with increased disability cultural competence

The aim of this article is to study the discursive construction of disability that takes place in the vaccine-autism controversy from the 1990s to 2000s, and an attempt to develop a more holistic framework to understand vaccine decisions and their motivations. It is argued that the debate over vaccines produces knowledge and meanings about disability, and that the vaccine-autism controversy is kept alive largely because of how it reproduces stigmatising accounts of disability and autism. The suggestion is that if the stigmatising elements of disability were removed in the debate over vaccines, there would be no controversy to keep alive in the broader vaccine debate. Hence, this article is an attempt to increase disability cultural competence in the media and among health authorities and health professionals and therethrough broaden the shared understanding of what it means to be or become disabled. By investigating the driving forces for past vaccine controversies, the goal is to find more constructive ways forward in present day and future debates over vaccines.

Contemporary trends in psychological research on conspiracy beliefs. A systematic review

Background

The number of psychological studies on conspiracy beliefs has been systematically growing for about a dozen years, but in recent years, the trend has intensified. We provided a review covering the psychological literature on conspiracy beliefs from 2018 to 2021. Halfway through this period, the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, accompanied by an explosion of movements based on conspiracy theories, intensifying researchers' interest in this issue.

Methods

Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, the review systematically searched for relevant journal articles published between 2018 and 2021. A search was done on Scopus and Web of Science (only peer-reviewed journals). A study was included if it contained primary empirical data, if specific or general conspiracy belief(s) were measured and if its correlation with at least one other psychological variable was reported. All the studies were grouped for the descriptive analysis according to the methodology used, the participants' characteristics, the continent of origin, the sample size, and the conspiracy beliefs measurement tools. Due to substantial methodological heterogeneity of the studies, narrative synthesis was performed. The five researchers were assigned specific roles at each stage of the analysis to ensure the highest quality of the research.

Results

Following the proposed methodology, 308 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 274 articles (417 studies) meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and included in the review. Almost half of the studies (49.6%) were conducted in European countries. The vast majority of the studies (85.7%) were carried out on samples of adult respondents. The research presents antecedents as well as (potential) consequences of conspiracy beliefs. We grouped the antecedents of conspiracy beliefs into six categories: cognitive (e.g., thinking style) motivational (e.g., uncertainty avoidance), personality (e.g., collective narcissism), psychopathology (e.g., Dark Triad traits), political (e.g., ideological orientation), and sociocultural factors (e.g., collectivism).

Conclusion and limitations

The research presents evidence on the links between conspiracy beliefs and a range of attitudes and behaviors considered unfavorable from the point of view of individuals and of the society at large. It turned out that different constructs of conspiracy thinking interact with each other. The limitations of the study are discussed in the last part of the article.

Factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination intention among university students: A cross-sectional study in Malaysia

Vaccination is crucial in controlling the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that triggered the pandemic, but herd immunity can only work with high vaccination coverage in the population. This study aims to measure the COVID-19 knowledge level and determine the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination intention among university students in Malaysia. A cross-sectional online survey was carried out with 1,274 Malaysian university students in July 2021. Univariate and multivariate analyses were employed to examine the relationships between the study variables. Results showed that the majority of university students had an acceptable level of knowledge of COVID-19. The knowledge, risk perception of COVID-19, social norms, and perceived benefit of COVID-19 vaccination were positively associated with vaccination intention. However, perceived trust in information sources of COVID-19 vaccination and the government's response to COVID-19 did not affect the university students' desire to receive the vaccination. These findings are essential for health policymakers and healthcare providers to implement evidence-based interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake among university students.

Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic

Scientific reasoning and trust in science are two facets of science understanding. This paper examines the contribution of science understanding, over and above analytic thinking, to the endorsement of conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs about COVID-19 and behavioral intentions to engage in the recommended preventive behavior. We examined the direct and indirect effects of science understanding on normative health behavior in a representative sample of the Slovak population (N = 1024). The results showed more support for the indirect pathway: individuals with a better understanding of science generally had fewer epistemically suspect beliefs and as a consequence tended to behave more in line with the evidence-based guidelines and get vaccinated. Neither scientific reasoning nor trust in science directly predicted non-compliance with preventive measures, but analytic thinking correlated positively with non-compliance with preventive measures. The strongest predictor of epistemically suspect beliefs was trust in science, which also directly predicted the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Therefore, reasoning about which experts or sources to believe (second-order scientific reasoning) has become more important than directly evaluating the original evidence (first-order scientific reasoning).

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04284-y.

Conspiracy beliefs and COVID-19 guideline adherence in adolescent psychiatric outpatients: the predictive role of adverse childhood experiences

BACKGROUND

Conspiracy beliefs have become widespread throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies have shown that endorsing conspiracy beliefs leads to lower protective guideline adherence (i.e., wearing face masks), posing a threat to public health measures. The current study expands this research across the lifespan, i.e., in a sample of adolescents with mental health problems. Here, we investigated the association between conspiracy beliefs and guideline adherence while also exploring the predictors of conspiracy beliefs.

METHODS

N = 93 adolescent psychiatric outpatients (57% female, mean age: 15.8) were assessed using anonymous paper-pencil questionnaires. Endorsement of generic and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs was assessed, in addition to items measuring adherence to protective guidelines and mental health (stress, depressive symptoms, emotional/behavioral problems, and adverse childhood experiences). Multiple regressions and supervised machine learning (conditional random forests) were used for analyses.

RESULTS

Fourteen percent of our sample fully endorsed at least one COVID-19 conspiracy theory, while protective guidelines adherence was relatively high (M = 4.92, on a scale from 1 to 7). The endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs-but not of generic conspiracy beliefs-was associated with lower guideline adherence (β = - 0.32, 95% CI - 0.53 to - 0.11, p < .001). Conditional random forests suggested that adverse childhood experiences and peer and conduct problems were relevant predictors of both conspiracy belief categories.

CONCLUSION

While a significant proportion of our sample of adolescents in psychiatric treatment endorsed conspiracy beliefs, the majority did not. Furthermore, and to some degree, contrary to public perception, we found that adolescents show relatively good adherence to public health measures-even while experiencing a high degree of mental distress. The predictive value of adverse childhood experiences and peer/conduct problems for conspiracy beliefs might be explained by compensatory mechanisms to ensure the safety, structure, and inclusion that conspiracies provide.

Susceptibility to COVID-19 Nutrition Misinformation and Eating Behavior Change during Lockdowns: An International Web-Based Survey

To understand the susceptibility to nutrition-health misinformation related to preventing, treating, or mitigating the risk of COVID-19 during the initial lockdowns around the world, the present international web-based survey study (15 April-15 May 2020) gauged participants' (n = 3707) level of nutrition-health misinformation discernment by presenting them with 25 statements (including unfounded or unproven claims circulated at the time), alongside the influence of information sources of varying quality on the frequency of changes in their eating behavior and the extent of misinformation held, depending on the source used for such changes. Results revealed widespread misinformation about food, eating, and health practices related to COVID-19, with the 25 statements put to participants receiving up to 43% misinformed answers (e.g., 'It is safe to eat fruits and vegetables that have been washed with soap or diluted bleach'). Whereas higher quality information sources (nutrition scientists, nutrition professionals) had the biggest influence on eating behavior change, we found greater misinformation susceptibility when relying on poor quality sources for changing diet. Appropriate discernment of misinformation was weakest amongst participants who more frequently changed their eating behavior because of information from poor quality sources, suggesting disparities in the health risks/safety of the changes performed.

Populist Attitudes Predict Compliance-Related Attitudes and Behaviors During the COVID-19 Pandemic Via Trust in Institutions

Abstract. While previous research discussed populism as a phenomenon of declining trust, we investigated the predictive value of populist attitudes for citizens’ trust, attitudes, and behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, we tested the role of trust in several institutions simultaneously. As preregistered, the cross-sectional ( N = 1,090) and longitudinal ( n = 216) data collected (April to June, 2020) in Germany ( n = 617) and Poland ( n = 473) showed that stronger populist attitudes predicted higher trust in (a) alternative news media but less trust in (b) mainstream news media, (c) political institutions, and (d) scientific institutions. Moreover, we found negative effects of populist attitudes on acceptance and compliance, mediated via trust in political and scientific institutions (but not news media).

Perceptions of institutional performance and compliance to non-pharmaceutical interventions: How performance perceptions and policy compliance affect public health in a decentralized health system

Trust in institutions is a key driver to shape population attitudes and behavior, such as compliance of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI). During the COVID-19 pandemic, this was fundamental and its compliance was supported by governmental and non-governmental institutions. Nevertheless, the situation of political polarization in some countries with decentralized health systems increased the difficulty of such interventions. This study analyzes the association between non-pharmaceutical interventions' compliance and individual perception regarding institutions' performance during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. A web survey was conducted in Brazil between November 2020 and February 2021. Bivariate analysis and ordered logit regressions were performed to assess the association between NPIs compliance and perceived institutions' performance. Results suggest a negative association between NPIs' compliance and Federal Government and Ministry of health perceived performance, which may reflect the political positioning of the respondents. Moreover, we find a positive association between NPI compliance and the perceived performance of the remaining institutions (state government, federal supreme court, national congress, WHO, media and SUS). Our contribution goes beyond the study of a relationship between non-pharmaceutical interventions' compliance and institutions' performance, by pointing out the importance of subnational and local governmental spheres in a decentralized health system, as well as highlighting the importance of social communication based on health organizations' information and scientific institutions.

Testing the validity of the modified vaccine attitude question battery across 22 languages with a large-scale international survey dataset: within the context of COVID-19 vaccination

In this study, we tested the validity of the modified version of the Vaccine Attitude Question Battery (VAQB) across 22 different languages. Validity test was conducted with a large-scale international survey dataset, COVIDiSTRESSII Global Survey, collected from 20,601 participants from 62 countries. We employed exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, measurement invariance test, and measurement alignment for internal validity test. Moreover, we examined correlation between the VAQB score, vaccination intent, compliance with preventive measures, and trust in public health-related agents. The results reported that the modified VAQB, which included five items, showed good validity across 22 languages with measurement alignment. Furthermore, the VAQB score showed negative association with vaccination intent, compliance, and trust as expected. The findings from this study provide additional evidence supporting the validity of the modified VAQB in 22 languages for future large-scale international research on COVID-19 and vaccination.

Attitudes towards mandatory vaccination and sanctions for vaccination refusal

AIMS

Investigating attitudes towards mandatory vaccination and sanctions for vaccination refusal in an area with insufficient vaccination coverage may help health authorities to assess which strategies for increasing vaccination coverage are appropriate. This study examines attitudes to vaccine mandates and asks questions regarding what kinds of sanctions could legitimately result from vaccination refusal. It seeks to find out if people's attitudes towards mandates and towards sanctions for vaccination refusal are related to their attitudes to vaccines and the degree of trust they feel towards health care professionals and health care authorities. The study also discusses how the observed attitudes towards mandates may be related to perceptions of autonomy, responsibility, and equitability.

METHODS

Data collection was carried out in Finland through an online survey in a region with suboptimal vaccine uptake. Statistical analysis was conducted on a sample of 1101 respondents, using confirmatory factor analysis and structural regression analysis.

RESULTS

Persons hold different views on mandates and sanctions. Importantly, the persons who support vaccination mandates and sanctions for vaccination refusal are to a great degree the same people who have positive attitudes to vaccines and high trust in health care professionals and health authorities.

CONCLUSION

Trust is a key factor which has a bearing on people's attitudes towards mandates and sanctions for noncompliance. A focus on the reasons for lack of trust, and on how to enhance trust, is a more feasible long-term way (than mandates) to promote large- scale compliance with childhood vaccine programmes in the studied country context.

Sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and leading concerns with COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women at a South Texas clinic

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19 vaccination rates among pregnant women remain low, despite increased risk of COVID-19-related illness and death and demonstrated vaccine safety and efficacy in this population. The objective of this study is to identify sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and elucidate important concerns among the pregnant population in light of evolving conversations regarding COVID-19.

METHODS

A prospective survey of pregnant women at a single urban clinic in South Texas was conducted August to September 2021 to identify predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the pregnant population. Collected variables included demographics, COVID-19 beliefs, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap)/influenza vaccine hesitancy, and primary vaccine concerns. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test, asymptotic two-sample Brown-Mood median test, and multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

One hundred and nine participants completed the survey, 35 vaccinated and 74 unvaccinated, with a response rate of 91.6%. Women who were COVID-19 vaccine hesitant were more likely to be younger (28.0 vs. 31.0 years, p < .004) and further along in pregnancy (30.0 vs. 20.0 weeks, p = .001). They were also more likely to report influenza (odds ratio (OR) 6.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.5-17.1) and Tdap (OR 4.1; 95% CI 1.75-10.7) vaccine hesitancy. Furthermore, women who were vaccine hesitant were more likely to believe they did not have enough information to confidently make their decision (OR 4.0; 95% CI 1.4-11.4). Primary concerns with COVID-19 vaccines included: short- and long-term side effects on the pregnancy, personal long-term side effects, and harmful ingredients.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine hesitant pregnant women were more likely to be younger, hesitant toward other vaccines, and concerned with pregnancy impact and harmful ingredients. Personal knowledge of other vaccinated pregnant women was associated with significantly higher vaccine acceptance rates. Access to vaccines and concerns about quality control were not cited as reasons for vaccine hesitancy, in contrast to earlier studies on this topic.

The Relationship between COVID-19 Protection Behaviors and Pandemic-Related Knowledge, Perceptions, Worry Content, and Public Trust in a Turkish Sample

Background: This study aimed to explore the effect of knowledge, COVID-19-related perceptions, and public trust on protective behaviors in Turkish people. Methods: Data were collected from an online survey (Turkish COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring) conducted between July 2020 and January 2021. The recommended protective behaviors (hand cleaning, wearing a face mask, and physical distancing) to prevent COVID-19 were examined. The impacts of the following variables on protective behaviors were investigated using logistic regression analysis: knowledge, cognitive and affective risk perception, pandemic-related worry content, public trust, conspiracy thinking, and COVID-19 vaccine willingness. Results: Out of a total of 4210 adult respondents, 13.8% reported nonadherence to protection behavior, and 86.2% reported full adherence. Males and young (aged 18−30 years) people tend to show less adherence. Perceived self-efficacy, susceptibility, and correct knowledge were positively related to more adherence to protective behavior. Perceptual and emotional factors explaining protective behavior were perceived proximity, stress level, and worrying about the relatives who depended on them. Trust in health professionals and vaccine willingness were positive predictors, while conspiracy thinking and acquiring less information (<2, daily) were negative predictors. Unexpectedly, trust in the Ministry of Health showed a weak but negative association with protection behavior. Conclusions: Perceived stress, altruistic worries, and public trust seem to shape protection behaviors in addition to individuals’ knowledge and cognitive risk perception in respondents. Males and young people may have a greater risk for nonadherence. Reliable, transparent, and culture-specific health communication that considers these issues is required.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Medicare Beneficiaries with and Without Cancer History: A US Population-based Study

Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Medicare beneficiaries is critical for increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the US. This study aimed to estimate and compare the vaccine hesitancy rate among community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries with and without cancer history, also to investigate factors associated with vaccine hesitancy during the first four months after COVID-19 vaccine became available. We used population-based, cross-sectional data on 3,034 community-living Medicare beneficiaries from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Winter 2021 Supplement. Sample weights were applied to account for the complex survey design with results generalizable to 16.4 million Medicare beneficiaries. Weighted multivariable logistic regression model was conducted to investigate the association between cancer history and vaccine hesitancy adjusting for covariates. A total of 39.6% were hesitant about getting COVID-19 vaccine. Those with cancer history were significantly less likely to be hesitant to get vaccinated than those without cancer history (adjusted odds ratio = 0.80, 95% confidence interval: 0.64, 0.99, p = .050). The most common reason for being hesitant to get COVID-19 vaccine was that the vaccine could have side effects or was viewed as not safe (19.2%), followed by not trusting what government says about vaccine (11.4%). Those with cancer history were more likely to report ongoing health conditions, lack of recommendation from a doctor, and doctor recommending against COVID-19 vaccination as reasons for not getting the vaccine compared to participants without cancer history. Increasing the confidence and knowledge about vaccine benefits among high-risk and more hesitant individuals are urgently needed to increase the vaccine uptake.

The scientistic worldview and its relationships with fear of COVID, conspiracy beliefs, preventive behaviors, and attitudes towards vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic in a Polish sample

BACKGROUND

The scientistic worldview is characterized by the tendency to justify beliefs and behavior with scientific findings and to function on the basis of theorems and opinions formulated by scientists. The aim of this study was to test whether the attitudes typical for the scientistic worldview could be related to beliefs and behaviors that may reduce the risk of contracting and spreading COVID-19.

PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE

The study was conducted on a Polish sample of 1286 participants, using an online survey platform. Participants were asked to complete questionnaires to measure attitudes towards vaccines on COVID-19, the scientistic worldview, fear of COVID, conspiracy beliefs about the COVID-19 pandemic, and preventive behaviors undertaken. Participants were also asked about their personal experiences with the pandemic.

RESULTS

The study showed that the scientistic worldview was associated with a higher fear of COVID, a higher level of containment-related behavior, a lower level of conspiracy beliefs about the COVID-19 pandemic, and more positive attitudes towards vaccination against COVID-19. A structural model of relations between the studied variables turned out to be very effective and explained 51% of the variance of containment-related behavior and 63% of the variance of attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

The study found that preventive behaviors and attitudes towards vaccination against COVID-19 were weakly related to personal experiences during the pandemic but significantly correlated with psychological variables. The results suggest that very positive, scientistic attitudes towards science may be related to higher adherence to science-based public health recommendations.

Strategies to address conspiracy beliefs and misinformation on COVID-19 in South Africa: A narrative literature review

Conspiracy theories and misinformation have been explored extensively however, strategies to minimise their impact in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are limited. This study aimed to explore strategies that can be used to reduce the negative effects of conspiracies and misinformation about SARS-CoV-2. This review was carried out based on accessed literature on beliefs in misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic. A comprehensive search of databases, such as Google Scholar, EBSCOhost and African Journals between 2019 and 2022 yielded qualitative and quantitative studies. Two themes emerged, namely underlying motives for conspiracy theories and belief in misinformation about the pandemic and ways to overcome them. The latter included: (1) strengthening critical scanning of information, (2) critical review to address misinformation and (3) establishing approaches for managing conspiracy theories. A proposal is made to address conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 infection.

Contribution

This is believed to be the first review that describes strategies to mitigate belief in conspiracies and misinformation to promote vaccination.

Conspiratorial thinking as a precursor to opposition to COVID-19 vaccination in the US: a multi-year study from 2018 to 2021

Despite widespread availability of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines in the US, only about 66% of the eligible US population had taken the recommended initial doses of the COVID-19 vaccines as of April 2022. Explanations for this hesitancy have focused on misinformation about the vaccines, lack of trust in health authorities, and acceptance of conspiracy theories about the pandemic. Here we test whether those with a conspiratorial mindset, which distrusts a wide range of institutions, were poised to reject COVID vaccines before the pandemic even began. To answer that question, we reinterviewed members of a national US panel that we had previously surveyed beginning in 2018. As hypothesized, having a conspiratorial mindset in 2019 predicted COVID-vaccination hesitancy in 2021 better than prior trust in health authorities or acceptance of vaccine misinformation. Those with the mindset were also more likely to consume media that bolstered belief in pandemic conspiracies. Research is needed on the determinants of conspiratorial mindset and ways to minimize the likelihood that consequential health decisions will be influenced by it.

Open science and public trust in science: Results from two studies

In two studies, we examined whether open science practices, such as making materials, data, and code of a study openly accessible, positively affect public trust in science. Furthermore, we investigated whether the potential trust-damaging effects of research being funded privately (e.g. by a commercial enterprise) may be buffered by such practices. After preregistering six hypotheses, we conducted a survey study (Study 1; N = 504) and an experimental study (Study 2; N = 588) in two German general population samples. In both studies, we found evidence for the positive effects of open science practices on trust, though it should be noted that in Study 2, results were more inconsistent. We did not however find evidence for the aforementioned buffering effect. We conclude that while open science practices may contribute to increasing trust in science, the importance of making use of open science practices visible should not be underestimated.

Open science and public trust in science: Results from two studies

In two studies, we examined whether open science practices, such as making materials, data, and code of a study openly accessible, positively affect public trust in science. Furthermore, we investigated whether the potential trust-damaging effects of research being funded privately (e.g. by a commercial enterprise) may be buffered by such practices. After preregistering six hypotheses, we conducted a survey study (Study 1; N = 504) and an experimental study (Study 2; N = 588) in two German general population samples. In both studies, we found evidence for the positive effects of open science practices on trust, though it should be noted that in Study 2, results were more inconsistent. We did not however find evidence for the aforementioned buffering effect. We conclude that while open science practices may contribute to increasing trust in science, the importance of making use of open science practices visible should not be underestimated.

Open science and public trust in science: Results from two studies

In two studies, we examined whether open science practices, such as making materials, data, and code of a study openly accessible, positively affect public trust in science. Furthermore, we investigated whether the potential trust-damaging effects of research being funded privately (e.g. by a commercial enterprise) may be buffered by such practices. After preregistering six hypotheses, we conducted a survey study (Study 1; N = 504) and an experimental study (Study 2; N = 588) in two German general population samples. In both studies, we found evidence for the positive effects of open science practices on trust, though it should be noted that in Study 2, results were more inconsistent. We did not however find evidence for the aforementioned buffering effect. We conclude that while open science practices may contribute to increasing trust in science, the importance of making use of open science practices visible should not be underestimated.

Open science and public trust in science: Results from two studies

In two studies, we examined whether open science practices, such as making materials, data, and code of a study openly accessible, positively affect public trust in science. Furthermore, we investigated whether the potential trust-damaging effects of research being funded privately (e.g. by a commercial enterprise) may be buffered by such practices. After preregistering six hypotheses, we conducted a survey study (Study 1; N = 504) and an experimental study (Study 2; N = 588) in two German general population samples. In both studies, we found evidence for the positive effects of open science practices on trust, though it should be noted that in Study 2, results were more inconsistent. We did not however find evidence for the aforementioned buffering effect. We conclude that while open science practices may contribute to increasing trust in science, the importance of making use of open science practices visible should not be underestimated.

Misinformation about medication during the COVID- 19 pandemic: A perspective of medical staff

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals had to face numerous challenges during the pandemic, their professional activity being influenced not only by the virus, but also by the spread of medical misinformation. In this regard, we aimed to analyze, from the perspective of medical staff, the way medical and non-medical information about the virus was communicated during the pandemic to encourage the development of future research or interventions in order to raise awareness about the way misinformation affected medical staff.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The study was conducted on Romanian healthcare professionals. They were asked to answer to a questionnaire and the sample of the research includes 536 respondents. The findings revealed that most respondents stated that information about alternative treatments against the virus affected the credibility of health professionals, and that younger professionals believed to a greater extent that trust in doctors was affected. The research also showed that respondents were well informed about the drugs used in clinical trials in order to treat the virus.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals declared that the spread of misinformation regarding alternative treatments, affected their credibility and the relationship with their patients. Healthcare professionals had knowledge about the drugs used in clinical trials, and they acknowledged the role of social media in spreading medical misinformation. However, younger professionals also believed that social media could be used to share official information about the virus.