Cited by 99Vaccine Coverage and HesitancyMisinformation and Its ImpactsRisk Perception and Management

A taxonomy of reasoning flaws in the anti-vaccine movement

Jacobson, Robert M., Targonski, Paul V., Poland, Gregory A.·2007·Vaccine

Abstract

In a scholarly analysis of widely held misconceptions, Gilovich provides a classification scheme of common flaws in reasoning seen in contemporary society. He broadly categorizes these flaws as having cognitive determinants or in having motivational and social determinants. In this survey, the authors examine the various claims against routine childhood and adult vaccines as made by the more public and more organized entities of the anti-vaccine movement as well as those made apparent by surveys of parents and other groups of individuals. The claims illustrate the breadth of reasoning flaws while providing a basis for anticipating and correcting them.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.01.046

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Anti-vaccination activists ignore overwhelming statistical evidence while focusing on anecdotes or information that has been shown to be false.

    “anti-vaccination activists ignore overwhelming statistical evidence while focusing on anecdotes or information that has been shown to be false [49]”

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jacobson, R. M., Targonski, P. V., & Poland, G. A.
Affiliations
Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Jacobson, Robert M.
Venue
Vaccine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-04
Volume
25
Issue
16
Pages
3146-3152
ISSN
0264-410X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2114122284
Cited by
99
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Vaccine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Mayo Clinic
  • National Institutes of Health (n01ai40065-5-0-0)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (AI40065, AI48793, R01AI033144, AI-33144)
  • National Center for Research Resources (M01RR000585)
  • NIH Clinical Center
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
Keywords
anti-vaccine movement, cognitive biases, vaccine hesitancy, childhood vaccines, adult vaccines
MeSH terms
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Parents, Public Health, Public Policy, Socioeconomic Factors, Vaccines, Treatment Refusal, Immunization Programs, Health Care Surveys, Refusal to Participate

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review