Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Communication Studies, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan 66000, Pakistan. Electronic address: sherazibzu@gmail.com
  • 2 Centre for Media and Communication Studies, University of Gujrat, Gujrat 50700, Pakistan. Electronic address: m.yousaf@uog.edu.pk
  • 3 Endicott College of International Studies, Woosong University, Jayang-Dong, Dong-gu Daejeon 34606, South Korea. Electronic address: umerzaman@endicott.ac.kr
  • 4 School of Multimedia Technology and Communication, Univerisiti Utara Malaysia, 0601, Malaysia. Electronic address: sannankharal@gmail.com
  • 5 Department Chair, Sociology & Anthropology Department, Stetson University, DeLand, FL 32723, USA. Electronic address: rcore@stetson.edu
  • 6 Department of Information Systems, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman; Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Finland. Electronic address: a.malik@squ.edu.om
Vaccine, 2023 Mar 03;41(10):1703-1715.
PMID: 36754765 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.01.047

Abstract

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.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.