IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/8hnxd.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Erroneous Consonance. How Inaccurate Beliefs about Physician Opinion Influence COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

Author

Listed:
  • Motta, Matt

    (Boston University School of Public Health)

  • Callaghan, Timothy
  • Trujillo, Kristin Lunz
  • Lockman, Alee

Abstract

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have studied how Americans' attitudes toward health experts influence their health behaviors and policy opinions. Fewer, however, consider the potential gap between individual and expert opinion about COVID-19, and how that might shape health attitudes and behavior. This omission is notable, as discrepancies between individual and expert opinion could help explain why some Americans fail to take action to protect themselves and others from the virus. In novel demographically representative surveys of the US adult population (N = 5,482) and primary care physician subpopulations (PCPs; N = 625), we contrast the relationship between: (1) Americans’ and (2) PCPs' preferences regarding who ought to be responsible for taking action to combat the spread of COVID-19, as well as (3) Americans' perceptions of PCP preferences ("PCP meta-opinion"). In the aggregate, we find that Americans are far less likely than PCPs to see a role for both private and state actors in taking action to combat COVID-19. Interestingly, though, this disjuncture is not reflected in individual-level PCP meta-opinion; as most Americans think that PCPs share their views on state and private intervention (𝛕b = 0.44 - 0.49). However, this consonance is often erroneous, which we show can have problematic health consequences. Multivariate models suggest that Americans who both see little place for individual responsibility in taking action to stop viral spread and who think that PCPs share those views are significantly less likely to vaccinate against COVID-19. We conclude by discussing the public health benefits of efforts to bring public opinion in line with expert opinion.

Suggested Citation

  • Motta, Matt & Callaghan, Timothy & Trujillo, Kristin Lunz & Lockman, Alee, 2022. "Erroneous Consonance. How Inaccurate Beliefs about Physician Opinion Influence COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy," SocArXiv 8hnxd, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:8hnxd
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/8hnxd
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6356d0156e71e820119cb8f7/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/8hnxd?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. Eric Merkley & Peter John Loewen, 2021. "Anti-intellectualism and the mass public’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(6), pages 706-715, June.
    2. Avnika B. Amin & Robert A. Bednarczyk & Cara E. Ray & Kala J. Melchiori & Jesse Graham & Jeffrey R. Huntsinger & Saad B. Omer, 2017. "Association of moral values with vaccine hesitancy," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(12), pages 873-880, December.
    3. Mildenberger, Matto & Tingley, Dustin, 2019. "Beliefs about Climate Beliefs: The Importance of Second-Order Opinions for Climate Politics," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 1279-1307, October.
    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. Simon Briole & Marc Gurgand & Eric Maurin & Sandra McNally & Jenifer Ruiz-Valenzuela & Daniel Santin, 2022. "The making of civic virtues: a school-based experiment in three countries," CEP Discussion Papers dp1830, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    2. Baiardi, Donatella & Morana, Claudio, 2021. "Climate change awareness: Empirical evidence for the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Niels G. Mede, 2022. "Legacy media as inhibitors and drivers of public reservations against science: global survey evidence on the link between media use and anti-science attitudes," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Callaghan, Timothy & Motta, Matthew & Sylvester, Steven & Lunz Trujillo, Kristin & Blackburn, Christine Crudo, 2019. "Parent psychology and the decision to delay childhood vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Buckman, Cierra & Liu, Indran C. & Cortright, Lindsay & Tumin, Dmitry & Syed, Salma, 2020. "The influence of local political trends on childhood vaccine completion in North Carolina," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    6. Motta, Matt & Callaghan, Timothy & Trujillo, Kristin Lunz, 2022. "“The CDC Won’t Let Me Be.” The Opinion Dynamics of Support for CDC Regulatory Authority," SocArXiv pxrn3, Center for Open Science.
    7. Sugandha Srivastav & Ryan Rafaty, 2023. "Political Strategies to Overcome Climate Policy Obstructionism," Papers 2304.14960, arXiv.org.
    8. Beiser-McGrath, Liam & Busemeyer, Marius R., 2023. "Carbon inequality and support for carbon taxation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120925, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Jordan Luttrell-Freeman & Timothy J. Bungum & Jennifer R. Pharr, 2021. "A Systematic Review of the Rationale for Vaccine Hesitancy among American Parents," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(8), pages 1-77, August.
    10. Motta, Matt & Benegal, Salil D, 2022. "How Pandemic-Related Changes in Global Attitudes Toward the Scientific Community Shape “Post-Pandemic” Environmental Opinion," SocArXiv v9egn, Center for Open Science.
    11. Srivastav, Sugandha & Rafaty, Ryan, 2021. "Five Worlds of Political Strategy in the Climate Movement," INET Oxford Working Papers 2021-07, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    12. Reddinger, J. Lucas & Charness, Gary & Levine, David, 2022. "Prosocial motivation for vaccination," SocArXiv emj6v, Center for Open Science.
    13. Anita Lavorgna & Leslie Carr, 2021. "Tweets and Quacks: Network and Content Analyses of Providers of Non-Science-Based Anticancer Treatments and Their Supporters on Twitter," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440211, March.
    14. Drews, Stefan & Savin, Ivan & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2022. "Biased perceptions of other people's attitudes to carbon taxation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Antoci, Angelo & Sabatini, Fabio & Sacco, Pier Luigi & Sodini, Mauro, 2022. "Experts vs. policymakers in the COVID-19 policy response," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 22-39.
    16. Amanda Hudson & William J. Montelpare, 2021. "Predictors of Vaccine Hesitancy: Implications for COVID-19 Public Health Messaging," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-14, July.
    17. Schmidtke, Kelly Ann & Kudrna, Laura & Noufaily, Angela & Stallard, Nigel & Skrybant, Magdalena & Russell, Samantha & Clarke, Aileen, 2022. "Evaluating the relationship between moral values and vaccine hesitancy in Great Britain during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    18. Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Michael Kirchler & Christian König-Kersting, 2023. "Climate Crisis Attitudes among Financial Professionals and Climate Experts," Working Papers 2023-06, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    19. Fang, Ximeng & Innocenti, Stefania, 2023. "Increasing the acceptability of carbon taxation: The role of social norms and economic reasoning," INET Oxford Working Papers 2023-25, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    20. Allan Dafoe & Remco Zwetsloot & Matthew Cebul, 2021. "Reputations for Resolve and Higher-Order Beliefs in Crisis Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(7-8), pages 1378-1404, August.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:8hnxd. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.