HKS Misinfo Review 2021
DOI: 10.37016/mr-2020-82
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vaccine hesitancy in online spaces: A scoping review of the research literature, 2000-2020

Abstract: We review 100 articles published from 2000 to early 2020 that research aspects of vaccine hesitancy in online communication spaces and identify several gaps in the literature prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. These gaps relate to five areas: disciplinary focus; specific vaccine, condition, or disease focus; stakeholders and implications; research methodology; and geographical coverage. Our findings show that we entered the global pandemic vaccination effort without a thorough understanding of how levels of confi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By examining what vaccine-related content is shared on Facebook and what additional vaccine-related videos are potentially recommended after viewing this content on YouTube, this article addresses an important gap in the literature on vaccine hesitancy and social media, as only 11% of the papers published in this area reviewed multiple social media platforms, with the majority of them (64%) examining "how do people talk about vaccines" as opposed to assessing the level of exposure to such content (Neff et al, 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By examining what vaccine-related content is shared on Facebook and what additional vaccine-related videos are potentially recommended after viewing this content on YouTube, this article addresses an important gap in the literature on vaccine hesitancy and social media, as only 11% of the papers published in this area reviewed multiple social media platforms, with the majority of them (64%) examining "how do people talk about vaccines" as opposed to assessing the level of exposure to such content (Neff et al, 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Peru represents an important national context for examining how social media risk amplification may influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance based on several key factors. First, as a non-Western, developing, non-English speaking country, it addresses historical WEIRD biases and gaps in the social amplification of risk [7], and social media and vaccine acceptance [6] research.…”
Section: Study Context: Perumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, the literature on the relationship between online discourse and vaccination attitudes and behaviors historically has focused on what are typically termed WEIRD populations-Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic [5]. In a recent scoping review, for instance, of the 352 studies initially collected from Web of Science about vaccine hesitancy and online content published between 2000 and 2020, seventy-five percent of them (254) were located in North America or Western Europe [6]. More generally, other scholars have identified a similar bias in research about how media, including social media, amplify or dampen risk perceptions [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Vaccine hesitancy in online spaces is a phenomenon that had been known and scientifically observed long before the SARS-CoV2 pandemic [50]. Social media are a particularly good arena for spreading disinformation.…”
Section: Russian Propaganda and Anti-vaccination Movementsmentioning
confidence: 99%