IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0279393.html

Trustworthiness of information sources on vaccines for COVID-19 prevention among Brazilians

Author

Listed:
  • Adriana Teixeira Reis
  • Karla Gonçalves Camacho
  • Maria de Fátima Junqueira-Marinho
  • Saint Clair dos Santos Gomes Junior
  • Dimitri Marques Abramov
  • Livia Almeida de Menezes
  • Marcio Fernandes Nehab
  • Carlos Eduardo da Silva Figueiredo
  • Maria Elisabeth Lopes Moreira
  • Zilton Farias Meira de Vasconcelos
  • Flavia Amendola Anisio de Carvalho
  • Livia de Rezende de Mello
  • Roberta Fernandes Correia
  • Zina Maria Almeida de Azevedo
  • Margarida dos Santos Salú
  • Daniella Campelo Batalha Cox Moore

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to assess the trustworthiness of information sources, perception of clear information about the vaccine, and strategies to increase adherence to vaccination to provide managers with information that helps establish effective communication with the population about vaccination. Method: This is an online survey conducted between January 22 and 29, 2021, preceded by an Informed Consent, that aims to assess vaccine hesitancy, which corresponded to the first week of vaccination initiation to prevent COVID-19 in Brazil. Data were obtained from a questionnaire made available through a free platform and stored in Google Forms and later exported to the SPSS statistical package for analysis. The sample consisted of all questionnaires from participants who self-declared as age 18 or older, Brazilian, and residing in Brazil at the time of the survey. Incomplete records with more than 50% of blank items and duplicates were excluded. All categorical variables were analyzed from their absolute and relative frequencies. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to verify the relationship between dependent variables and independent variables. Results: The results show that trust in information sources diverges between hesitant and non-hesitant. They also showed that some participants show an overall distrust that seems to have deeper foundations than issues related only to the source of information. The high rejection of television and the WHO as sources of information among hesitant suggests that integrated actions with research institutes, public figures vaccinating, and religious leaders can help to combat vaccine hesitation. Two actors become particularly important in this dynamic, both for good and bad, and their anti-vaxxer behavior must be observed: the doctor and the Ministry of Health. Conclusion: This study contributes to gathering valuable information to help understand the behavior and thinking relevant to the adherence to vaccination recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Adriana Teixeira Reis & Karla Gonçalves Camacho & Maria de Fátima Junqueira-Marinho & Saint Clair dos Santos Gomes Junior & Dimitri Marques Abramov & Livia Almeida de Menezes & Marcio Fernandes Nehab , 2023. "Trustworthiness of information sources on vaccines for COVID-19 prevention among Brazilians," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(1), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0279393
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279393
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279393
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279393&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0279393?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sebastian Neumann-Böhme & Nirosha Elsem Varghese & Iryna Sabat & Pedro Pita Barros & Werner Brouwer & Job van Exel & Jonas Schreyögg & Tom Stargardt, 2020. "Once we have it, will we use it? A European survey on willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 977-982, September.
    2. Vincenzo Galasso & Vincent Pons & Paola Profeta & Michael Becher & Sylvain Brouard & Martial Foucault, 2020. "Gender Differences in COVID-19 Related Attitudes and Behavior: Evidence from a Panel Survey in Eight OECD Countries," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03594437, HAL.
    3. Jamie Murphy & Frédérique Vallières & Richard P. Bentall & Mark Shevlin & Orla McBride & Todd K. Hartman & Ryan McKay & Kate Bennett & Liam Mason & Jilly Gibson-Miller & Liat Levita & Anton P. Martine, 2021. "Psychological characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/30j8b527qi94hpffbv52bsav72 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashlin Lee & Marian Sheppard & Claire K. Naughtin & Megan A. Rebuli & Emily Brindal, 2025. "Key Predictors that Characterize Different Stances on Significant Global Scientific Challenges: Comparing Vaccine and Climate Change Beliefs," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(1), pages 21582440251, March.
    2. Takahashi, Masaki & Takaku, Reo & Ashida, Toyo & Ibuka, Yoko, 2025. "Public investment on health and voter responses: Evidence from the mass vaccination during COVID-19," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    3. Jian Cao & Christina M. Ramirez & R. Michael Alvarez, 2022. "The politics of vaccine hesitancy in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(1), pages 42-54, January.
    4. Peer Henri Kieweg & Stefanie Schöberl & Gabriele Palozzi, 2021. "The Role of Communication In COVID-19 Crisis Management: Findings about Information Behavior of German and Italian Young People," International Journal of Business Research and Management (IJBRM), Computer Science Journals (CSC Journals), vol. 12(5), pages 263-288, October.
    5. Foliano, Francesca & Tonei, Valentina & Sevilla, Almudena, 2024. "Social restrictions, leisure and well-being," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    6. Gary D. Sherman & Beth Vallen & Stacey R. Finkelstein & Paul M. Connell & Wendy Attaya Boland & Kristen Feemster, 2021. "When taking action means accepting responsibility: Omission bias predicts parents' reluctance to vaccinate due to greater anticipated culpability for negative side effects," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 1660-1681, December.
    7. Giulietti, Corrado & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Zenou, Yves, 2023. "When reality bites: Local deaths and vaccine take-up," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Holden, Stein T. & Tione, Sarah & Tilahun, Mesfin & Katengeza, Samson, 2023. "Religion, beliefs, trust, and COVID vaccination behavior among rural people in Malawi?," CLTS Working Papers 4/23, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    9. Tine Buyl & Thomas Gehrig & Jonas Schreyögg & Andreas Wieland, 2022. "Resilience: A Critical Appraisal of the State of Research for Business and Society," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 453-463, December.
    10. Krishna Reddy Gujjula & Jiangyue Gong & Brittany Segundo & Lewis Ntaimo, 2022. "COVID-19 vaccination policies under uncertain transmission characteristics using stochastic programming," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-21, July.
    11. Eiji Yamamura & Yoshiro Tsutsui & Fumio Ohtake, 2026. "Would monetary incentives to COVID-19 vaccination reduce motivation?," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 15-44, January.
    12. Sonia OREFICCE & Climent Quintana-Domeque, 2021. "Gender inequality in COVID-19 times: evidence from UK prolific participants," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 261-287, June.
    13. Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Howell, Christopher & Heinrich, Tobias, 2021. "Vaccine hesitancy, state bias, and Covid-19: Evidence from a survey experiment using Phase-3 results announcement by BioNTech and Pfizer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    14. An Hoai Duong & Ernoiz Antriyandarti, 2023. "The Willingness to get Vaccinated Against SARS-CoV-2 Virus among Southeast Asian Countries: Does the Vaccine Brand Matter?," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(2), pages 765-793, April.
    15. Nguyen, Viet Cuong, 2023. "Does the Covid-19 Pandemic Make People Unhappy? Evidence from a Six-Country Survey," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 64(1), pages 18-41, June.
    16. De Paz Nieves,Carmen & Gaddis,Isis & Muller,Miriam, 2021. "Gender and COVID-19 : What have we learnt, one year later ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9709, The World Bank.
    17. Celidoni, Martina & Costa-Font, Joan & Salmasi, Luca, 2022. "Too Healthy to Fall Sick? Longevity Expectations and Protective Health Behaviours during the First Wave of COVID-19," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 733-745.
    18. Pronkina, Elizaveta & Berniell, Inés & Fawaz, Yarine & Laferrère, Anne & Mira, Pedro, 2023. "The COVID-19 curtain: Can past communist regimes explain the vaccination divide in Europe?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).
    19. Abel Brodeur & David Gray & Anik Islam & Suraiya Bhuiyan, 2021. "A literature review of the economics of COVID‐19," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1007-1044, September.
    20. Hsin-Yu Kuo & Su-Yen Chen & Yu-Ting Lai, 2021. "Investigating COVID-19 News before and after the Soft Lockdown: An Example from Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-23, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0279393. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.