Understanding vaccination resistance: moving beyond risk
Abstract
Mass childhood immunisation (MCI) is of primary importance to all modern public health systems and relies on high levels of uptake. Recent controversy in the UK about the safety of the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine has prompted widespread concerns and a government response that concentrates on providing more information to the public. This information has mainly adopted the language of risk, as exemplified in recent health promotion materials designed to persuade parents to choose the MMR vaccine. The paper analyses the key material and reveals three contestable assumptions; first, that individuals make decisions through a comparison of individual risk; second, that public concern about vaccination is due to a miscalculation of risk; third, that a policy of providing more risk statistics is the best response to the controversy. Through criticising these assumptions it is argued that some resistance to MCI is about alternative understandings of basic categories of health and disease. Further research is needed to investigate the role of uncertainty and trust in understanding anti-vaccination.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Vaccine concerns and resistance have been previously tied to the critical approach to public understanding of science by Hobson-West and Leach and Fairhead.
“Vaccine concerns and resistance have been previously tied to this critical approach to public understanding of science by Hobson-West (2003; 2007) and Leach and Fairhead (2007).”
From Public Misunderstanding of Science? Reframing the Problem of Vaccine Hesitancy (2016) · cites this paper as Hobson-West 2003
Cites
1 retracted
Wakefield, A., Murch, S., Anthony, A., Linnell, J., Casson, D., Malik, M., Berelowitz, M., Dhillon, A., Thomson, M., Harvey, P., et al. (1998) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(97)11096-0 · Cited by 3,006 · see citing works
Retracted
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A postmodern Pandora's box: anti-vaccination misinformation on the internet
Kata, A. (2010) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022 · Cited by 1,208 · see citing works
Karafillakis, E., Simas, C., Jarrett, C., Verger, P., Peretti-Watel, P., Dib, F., De Angelis, S., Takacs, J., Ali, K. A., Pastore Celentano, L., et al. (2019) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2018.1564436 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
“A number of studies have shown that uncertainty can influence as much as empirical evidence in vaccination decision-making.(122,123) Uncertainty is still often framed as something that can be overcome by filling information gaps with more facts; however, mistrust of health authorities and some doctors was commonly rep…”
BackgroundPublic Misunderstanding of Science? Reframing the Problem of Vaccine Hesitancy
Goldenberg, M. J. (2016) · Perspectives on Science · doi:10.1162/posc_a_00223 · Cited by 218 · see citing works
Is the cultural context of mmr rejection a key to an effective public health discourse?
Cassell, J. A., Leach, M., Poltorak, M. S., Mercer, C. H., Iversen, A., & Fairhead, J. R. (2006) · Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2006.03.011 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hobson-West, P.
- Venue
- Health, Risk & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 273-283
- ISSN
- 1369-8575 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8331
- OpenAlex
- W2046756427
- Cited by
- 243
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 6.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Health Risk & Society (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Leverhulme Trust
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Keywords
- anti-vaccination, childhood immunization, risk communication, risk perception, health promotion materials, vaccine safety, public trust, uncertainty, parental decision-making, measles, mumps and rubella
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
