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.

A Contingent Perspective on Pluralistic Ignorance: When the Attitudinal Object Matters

“…However, liberal (left-wing) respondents differentiate a great deal between their personal opinion and their perception of others' opinions. These results corroborate previous findings in the literature on false consensus (e.g., Amit et al, 2010;Dvir-Gvirsman, 2015) and false uniqueness (e.g., Rabinowitz et al, 2016;Stern et al, 2014). Furthermore, the comparison between opinions toward same-sex female parenting and working mothers might also indicate that…”

“…In a study of Israeli voters, extreme left-wing supporters had a tendency for false uniqueness, which might be explained by their motivation to be perceived as a unique minority and distinct from conventional right-wing voters (Babad & Yacobos, 1993). Moreover, liberals tended to underestimate their similarity with other people due to their desire to feel unique (Rabinowitz, Latella, Stern, & Jost, 2016;Stern, West, & Schmitt, 2014).…”

Ideological Asymmetries and the Essence of Political Psychology

“…On several issues, my collaborators and I find that conservatives exhibit a “truly false consensus effect”—assuming that like–minded others share their opinions more than they actually do, whereas liberals exhibit an “illusion of uniqueness”—assuming that like–minded others share their opinions less than they actually do (Rabinowitz, Latella, Stern, & Jost, ; Stern, West, & Schmitt, ). Thus, we see an especially stark asymmetry when it comes to relational motivation (see also Stern & West, ).…”

“…More interestingly, perhaps, Rabinowitz et al () observed that liberals underestimated the extent to which others shared their own (relatively favorable) beliefs about childhood vaccination; they assumed that the attitudes of the general public, other liberals, and conservatives were more divergent from their own attitudes than was actually the case (see Figure ). Moderates, too, underestimated how similar their own attitudes were to those of the general population and to those of liberals, but they did not distort the differences between their own attitudes and those of conservatives.…”

“…Source. This figure is adopted from Rabinowitz et al (2016). information that challenges those opinions (Barber a, Jost, Nagler, Tucker, & Bonneau, 2015). There are sound reasons to assume that selective exposure and network homophily would be equally prominent on the left and the right, including the suppositions that cognitive dissonance reduction, social identity maintenance, and motivated reasoning are ubiquitous phenomena (Hogg, 2007;Kahan, 2016;Liu et al, 2014;Munro et al, 2002).…”