by: hailey ripple
While there are many pressing issues in today’s world, one of the most crucial is the anti-vaccination movement which centers around the idea that vaccines are unsafe (Novak, 2015). The movement was brought about by statements made by Andrew Wakefield and later promoted by Jenny McCarthy citing vaccines as a cause of autism. Although statements made by Andrew Wakefield were later found to be false and he was stripped of his medical license (Novak, 2015), the damage had been done and a group of individuals who considered themselves to be anti-vaccine were left behind. If you’re anything like me, you may find yourself hearing arguments as to why not vaccinating your child is the best option and wondering how misinformation has taken such a strong hold when solid evidence to the contrary exists. While you may believe that simply presenting followers of the anti-vaccine movement with evidence that it is false will be enough to assuage them back to believing vaccines are safe for their children, you would be wrong. According to Mooney (2014), a body of research exists that says correcting false information is more complex than it may seem and further, presenting individuals with evidence contrary to their beliefs may cause them to more fervently defend those beliefs. This brings me to the purpose of this blog: how do we effectively go about changing the minds of anti-vaxxers?
Functions and Maintenance of Attitudes
While many proposals of how to deal with anti-vaccine movement exist, it is important to consider what research tells us about attitudes and the purpose they serve and what maintains or abolishes them. Two primary functions of attitudes discussed in social psychology include understanding and belonging (Fiske, 2014). Object appraisal, the most basic function of attitude, allows us to understand our attitudes about specific things and decide which we want to seek out or avoid. Object appraisal primarily serves as a function for the self. On the other hand, value-expressive functions of attitudes focus on how others view our attitudes and foster a sense of being a part of a socially desirable group. Further, Fiske (2014) discusses different ways attitudes can form based on classic learning theories of psychology including classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and social learning. It is important to be aware of these functions of attitudes and how they are formed in order to drive effective strategies for changing attitudes.
Options for dealing with the issue of individuals being anti-vaccine can range from targeting a larger group or the movement in general, how the information/argument is presented, or specific individuals. It has been suggested that shame be used to target those who believe the anti-vaccine movement. Novak (2015) suggested not targeting individual people, but the culture surrounding this viewpoint. Novak uses examples such as the shaming of the Ku Klux Klan and those who opposed gay marriage and the LGBTQ community. Novak argues that by making it a social faux pas to even utter the phrase “I don’t believe in vaccinating” would greatly reduce the prevalence of this movement. This approach may be effective because it targets the value-expressive function of attitude by focusing on how you will be viewed by others if you hold the view of anti-vaccinations. However, Schultz (2008) points out that social norms are often more relevant to public behaviors rather than private, meaning that while individuals may not voice these socially inappropriate behaviors, they still hold them in private.
Others argue that shaming anti-vaxxers won’t work because it may further confuse misinformed victims of the anti-vaccination movement. Singal (2015) suggests that rather than shaming these individuals or the movement in general, trusted or familiar individuals should educate families about this topic. We can further manipulate the way information regarding vaccinations is delivered to consumers by altering the way arguments are presented. Clarke, McKeever, Holton, and Dixon (2015) examined how “weight-of-evidence” statements (i.e. citing scientific research with results contrary to beliefs of anti-vaxxers) presented in a message about vaccines affected participant opinion. Researchers found that the inclusion of a concrete “weight-of-evidence” statement in their message resulted in decreased information uncertainty (in other words, increased confidence in the information being presented to them) and in turn, more positive attitudes toward vaccines. These methods map onto the object appraisal function of attitudes by targeting the individual decision making processes.
Lastly, targeting individuals through cognitive dissonance interventions for non-clinical health behaviors, as discussed by Freijy and Kothe (2013), could be considered. When implementing a cognitive dissonance intervention, it is critical to create a discrepancy between someone’s beliefs and their behavior. Researchers found the most effective and reliable method of cognitive dissonance intervention, it is critical to create a discrepancy between someone’s beliefs and their behavior. Researchers found the most effective and reliable method of cognitive dissonance intervention was hypocrisy induction, which involves an individual making prosocial statements (in this case, about vaccinations). These prosocial statements remind participants of ways their behavior has been contrary to this statement in the past, resulting in an uncomfortable mental state.
A Comprehensive Plan of Action
Overall, targeting all levels of this problem (i.e. people perpetuating/driving the rhetoric, how info is presented, and individuals) is the most comprehensive approach in beginning to make informed change in the attitudes of those who are anti-vaccine. Further, these approaches map onto the underlying functions of attitudes (understanding and belonging) as explained by Fiske (2014). If we are able to target multiple levels and attack the problem from multiple angles, it may be effective in tackling the problem of the anti-vaccine movement.
- Clarke, C. E., McKeever, B. W., Holton, A., & Dixon, G. N. (2015). The influence of weight-of-evidence messages on (vaccine) attitudes: a sequential mediation model. Journal of Health Communication, 20(11), 1302-1309.
- Fiske, S. T. (2014). Social Beings: Core Motives in Social Psychology (3rd edition). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
- Freijy, T. & Kothe, E. J. (2013). Dissonance-based interventions for health behavior change: a systematic review. British Journal of Health Psychology, 18, 310-337.
- Mooney, C. (2014, March 3). Study: you can’t change an anti-vaxxer’s mind. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/vaccine-denial-psychology-backfire-effect
- Novak, M. (2015, February 6). The anti-vaccine movement should be ridiculed, because shame works. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://gizmodo.com/the-anti-vaccine-movement-should-be-ridiculed-because-1683258152
- Schultz, P. W., Tabanico, J., & Rendón, T. (2008). Normative beliefs as agents of influence: Basic processes and real-world applications. In R. Prislin & W. Crano (Eds.), Attitudes and attitude change (pp. 385-409). New York: Psychology Press.
- Singal, J. (2015, February 10). Why shaming anti-vaxxers won’t work. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/02/why-shaming-anti-vaxxers-wont-work.html