Beliefs about childhood vaccination in the United States: Political ideology, false consensus, and the illusion of uniqueness

Mitchell Rabinowitz, Lauren Latella, Chadly Stern, John Jost

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Several contagious diseases were nearly eradicated through childhood vaccination, but some parents have decided in recent years not to fully vaccinate their children, raising new public health concerns. The question of whether and how beliefs about vaccination are linked to political ideology has been hotly debated. This study investigates the effects of ideology on perceptions of harms and benefits related to vaccination as well as judgments of others' attitudes. A total of 367 U.S. adults (131 men, 236 women; Mage = 34.92 years, range = 18-72) completed an online survey through Mechanical Turk. Results revealed that liberals were significantly more likely to endorse pro-vaccination statements and to regard them as "facts" (rather than "beliefs"), in comparison with moderates and conservatives. Whereas conservatives overestimated the proportion of like-minded others who agreed with them, liberals underestimated the proportion of others who agreed with them. That is, conservatives exhibited the "truly false consensus effect," whereas liberals exhibited an "illusion of uniqueness" with respect to beliefs about vaccination. Conservative and moderate parents in this sample were less likely than liberals to report having fully vaccinated their children prior to the age of two. A clear limitation of this study is that the sample is not representative of the U.S. population. Nevertheless, a recognition of ideological sources of potential variability in health-related beliefs and perceptions is a prerequisite for the design of effective forms of public communication.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere0158382
JournalPLoS One
Volume11
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2016

Fingerprint

Public health
childhood
Consensus
Vaccination
vaccination
Health
Communication
Parents
communication (human)
public health
Public Health
sampling
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Beliefs about childhood vaccination in the United States : Political ideology, false consensus, and the illusion of uniqueness. / Rabinowitz, Mitchell; Latella, Lauren; Stern, Chadly; Jost, John.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 11, No. 7, e0158382, 01.07.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{44efbf6ed1b541db984c8e9c81e5a9f3,
title = "Beliefs about childhood vaccination in the United States: Political ideology, false consensus, and the illusion of uniqueness",
abstract = "Several contagious diseases were nearly eradicated through childhood vaccination, but some parents have decided in recent years not to fully vaccinate their children, raising new public health concerns. The question of whether and how beliefs about vaccination are linked to political ideology has been hotly debated. This study investigates the effects of ideology on perceptions of harms and benefits related to vaccination as well as judgments of others' attitudes. A total of 367 U.S. adults (131 men, 236 women; Mage = 34.92 years, range = 18-72) completed an online survey through Mechanical Turk. Results revealed that liberals were significantly more likely to endorse pro-vaccination statements and to regard them as {"}facts{"} (rather than {"}beliefs{"}), in comparison with moderates and conservatives. Whereas conservatives overestimated the proportion of like-minded others who agreed with them, liberals underestimated the proportion of others who agreed with them. That is, conservatives exhibited the {"}truly false consensus effect,{"} whereas liberals exhibited an {"}illusion of uniqueness{"} with respect to beliefs about vaccination. Conservative and moderate parents in this sample were less likely than liberals to report having fully vaccinated their children prior to the age of two. A clear limitation of this study is that the sample is not representative of the U.S. population. Nevertheless, a recognition of ideological sources of potential variability in health-related beliefs and perceptions is a prerequisite for the design of effective forms of public communication.",
author = "Mitchell Rabinowitz and Lauren Latella and Chadly Stern and John Jost",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0158382",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Beliefs about childhood vaccination in the United States

T2 - Political ideology, false consensus, and the illusion of uniqueness

AU - Rabinowitz, Mitchell

AU - Latella, Lauren

AU - Stern, Chadly

AU - Jost, John

PY - 2016/7/1

Y1 - 2016/7/1

N2 - Several contagious diseases were nearly eradicated through childhood vaccination, but some parents have decided in recent years not to fully vaccinate their children, raising new public health concerns. The question of whether and how beliefs about vaccination are linked to political ideology has been hotly debated. This study investigates the effects of ideology on perceptions of harms and benefits related to vaccination as well as judgments of others' attitudes. A total of 367 U.S. adults (131 men, 236 women; Mage = 34.92 years, range = 18-72) completed an online survey through Mechanical Turk. Results revealed that liberals were significantly more likely to endorse pro-vaccination statements and to regard them as "facts" (rather than "beliefs"), in comparison with moderates and conservatives. Whereas conservatives overestimated the proportion of like-minded others who agreed with them, liberals underestimated the proportion of others who agreed with them. That is, conservatives exhibited the "truly false consensus effect," whereas liberals exhibited an "illusion of uniqueness" with respect to beliefs about vaccination. Conservative and moderate parents in this sample were less likely than liberals to report having fully vaccinated their children prior to the age of two. A clear limitation of this study is that the sample is not representative of the U.S. population. Nevertheless, a recognition of ideological sources of potential variability in health-related beliefs and perceptions is a prerequisite for the design of effective forms of public communication.

AB - Several contagious diseases were nearly eradicated through childhood vaccination, but some parents have decided in recent years not to fully vaccinate their children, raising new public health concerns. The question of whether and how beliefs about vaccination are linked to political ideology has been hotly debated. This study investigates the effects of ideology on perceptions of harms and benefits related to vaccination as well as judgments of others' attitudes. A total of 367 U.S. adults (131 men, 236 women; Mage = 34.92 years, range = 18-72) completed an online survey through Mechanical Turk. Results revealed that liberals were significantly more likely to endorse pro-vaccination statements and to regard them as "facts" (rather than "beliefs"), in comparison with moderates and conservatives. Whereas conservatives overestimated the proportion of like-minded others who agreed with them, liberals underestimated the proportion of others who agreed with them. That is, conservatives exhibited the "truly false consensus effect," whereas liberals exhibited an "illusion of uniqueness" with respect to beliefs about vaccination. Conservative and moderate parents in this sample were less likely than liberals to report having fully vaccinated their children prior to the age of two. A clear limitation of this study is that the sample is not representative of the U.S. population. Nevertheless, a recognition of ideological sources of potential variability in health-related beliefs and perceptions is a prerequisite for the design of effective forms of public communication.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979502828&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84979502828&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0158382

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0158382

M3 - Article

C2 - 27391965

AN - SCOPUS:84979502828

VL - 11

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 7

M1 - e0158382

ER -