The digital infrastructure of anti-vaccination tweets circulates and amplifies vaccine hesitancy, leading to declined vaccination rates, amplified susceptibility to preventable diseases, and an endangered public health landscape. The article carefully looks at a collection of tweets from different sources, such as individuals, political leaders, and health agencies, to find out how arguments for and against vaccinations are discussed, how people interact with each other, and what makes Twitter users in the USA and India different. We applied a Mann–Whitney U test to understand the engagement patterns of pro- and anti-vaccination tweets, and used a critical discourse analysis method on a corpus of tweets to reveal the four discursive strategies of vaccination: (a) vaccination management, (b) government emergency preparedness, (c) concerns and criticisms, and (d) the emotional spectrum surrounding vaccination. The findings show that engagement is higher for proponents of vaccines in both countries. However, the motivation factors of vaccine proponents and vaccine boycotts in India differ substantially from those in the USA. These results underscore the imperative for healthcare entities, governments, and policymakers to develop population-specific strategies, considering their geographical and cultural backgrounds, to address the epidemics surrounding vaccines.
AbbasAH (2021). Politicizing COVID-19 vaccines in the press: A critical discourse analysis. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique35(3): 1167–1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-021-09857-3
2.
Abdel-RaheemAAlkhammashR (2021). ‘To get or not to get vaccinated against COVID-19’: Saudi women, vaccine hesitancy, and framing effects. Discourse & Communication16(1): 21–36.
3.
AdebayoALDavidson MhondeRDeNicolaN, et al (2020). The effectiveness of narrative versus didactic information formats on pregnant women’s knowledge, risk perception, self-efficacy, and information seeking related to climate change health risks. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health17(19): 6969.
4.
AndersonKCreanzaN (2023). A cultural evolutionary model of the interaction between parental beliefs and behaviors, with applications to vaccine hesitancy. Theoretical Population Biology152: 23–38.
5.
AnkerAEFeeleyTH (2011). Asking the difficult questions: Message strategies used by organ procurement coordinators in requesting familial consent to organ donation. Journal of Health Communication16(6): 643–659.
6.
BanasJAMillerG (2013). Inducing resistance to conspiracy theory propaganda: Testing inoculation and meta inoculation strategies. Human Communication Research39(2): 184–207.
7.
BarkerCGalasinskiD (2001). Cultural Studies and Discourse analysis: A Dialogue on Language and Identity. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446219249
8.
BaschCHMacLeanSA (2019). A content analysis of HPV related posts on Instagram. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics15(7–8): 1476–1478.
9.
BattineniGBaldoniSChintalapudiN, et al (2020). Factors affecting the quality and reliability of online health information. Digital Health6: 1–12.
10.
BeneckeODeYoungSE (2019). Anti-vaccine decision-making and measles resurgence in the United States. Global Pediatric Health6: 1–5.
11.
BetschCBrewerNTBrocardP, et al (2012). Opportunities and challenges of Web 2.0 for vaccination decisions. Vaccine30(25): 3727–3733.
12.
BetschCRenkewitzFBetschT, et al (2010). The influence of vaccine-critical websites on perceiving vaccination risks. Journal of Health Psychology15(3): 446–455.
13.
BlumeS (2006). Anti-vaccination movements and their interpretations. Social Science & Medicine62(3): 628–642.
14.
BramerCAKimminsLMSwansonR, et al (2020). Decline in child vaccination coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic – Michigan care improvement registry, May 2016–May 2020. American Journal of Transplantation20(7): 1930–1931.
15.
BridgmanAMerkleyELoewenPJ, et al (2020). The causes and consequences of COVID-19 misperceptions: Understanding the role of news and social media. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review1(3): 1–18.
16.
BrodieRJIlicAJuricB, et al (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Research66(1): 105–114.
17.
BruntonMA (2007). One message for all? Framing public health messages to recognize diversity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations31(1): 127–132.
18.
BurkiT (2020). The online anti-vaccine movement in the age of COVID-19. The Lancet Digital Health2(10): e504–e505.
19.
CallahanDJenningsB (2002). Ethics and public health: Forging a strong relationship. American Journal of Public Health92(2): 169–176. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.92.2.169
20.
CandioPViolatoMClarkePM, et al. (2023). Prevalence, predictors and reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Results of a global online survey. Health Policy137: 104895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2023.104895
21.
CavicchioF (2024). Resources for emotion detection: Lexicons and annotated datasets. In: CavicchioF (ed.) Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies. Cham: Springer, pp.33–43.
ChanTFYuY (2023). Building a global community of health for all: A positive discourse analysis of COVID-19 discourse. Discourse & Communication17(4): 522–537.
24.
ChrissJJ (1995). Habermas, Goffman, and communicative action: Implications for professional practice. American Sociological Review60(4): 545.
25.
CristofaroM (2019). The role of affect in management decisions: A systematic review. European Management Journal37(1): 6–17.
26.
CukierWNgwenyamaOBauerR, et al (2009). A critical analysis of media discourse on information technology: Preliminary results of a proposed method for critical discourse analysis. Information Systems Journal19(2): 175–196.
27.
DawesDEAmadorCMDunlapNJ (2022). The political determinants of health: A global Panacea for health inequities. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Global Public Health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.1–466.
28.
DeanARoseFJonesK, et al (2023). Why do people take part in vaccine trials? A mixed methods narrative synthesis. Patient Education and Counseling114: 107861.
29.
DeightonJRomerDMcQueenJ (1989). Using drama to persuade. Journal of Consumer Research16(3): 335.
30.
EscalasJ (2007). Self-referencing and persuasion: Narrative transportation versus analytical elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research33(4): 421–429.
31.
FadlallahREl-JardaliFNomierM, et al. (2019). Using narratives to impact health policy-making: A systematic review. Health Research Policy and Systems17(1): 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0423-4
32.
FaircloughN (2013). Language and Power. London: Routledge.
33.
FerraraE (2020). What types of COVID-19 conspiracies are populated by Twitter bots?First Monday25(6): 10633
34.
GanczakMGilKKorzeńM, et al (2017). Coverage and influencing determinants of influenza vaccination in elderly patients in a country with a poor vaccination implementation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health14(6): 665.
35.
GuesalagaR (2016). The use of social media in sales: Individual and organizational antecedents, and the role of customer engagement in social media. Industrial Marketing Management54: 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.12.002
36.
HagenLKellerTNeelyS, et al (2018). Crisis communications in the age of social media: a network analysis of Zika-related tweets. Social Science Computer Review36(5): 523–41.
37.
HanXGuXPengS (2019). Analysis of tweet form’s effect on users’ engagement on Twitter. Cogent Business & Management6(1): 1564168
38.
HernandezRGLoniHKimberlyW, et al (2021). The COVID-19 vaccine social media infodemic: healthcare providers’ missed dose in addressing misinformation and vaccine hesitancy. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics17(9): 2962–2964.
39.
HughesBMiller-IdrissCPiltch-LoebR, et al (2021). Development of a codebook of online anti-vaccination rhetoric to manage COVID-19 vaccine misinformation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health18(14): 7556.
40.
HurICousinsKCStahlBC (2019). A critical perspective of engagement in online health communities. European Journal of Information Systems28(5): 523–548.
41.
HurstKSternMJ (2020). Messaging for environmental action: The role of moral framing and message source. Journal of Environmental Psychology68: 101394.
42.
HussainARafeeqHAsifHM, et al (2021). Current scenario of COVID-19 vaccinations and immune response along with antibody titer in vaccinated inhabitants of different countries. International Immunopharmacology99: 108050.
43.
JarqueCMBeraAK (1987). A test for normality of observations and regression residuals. International Statistical Review [Revue Internationale de Statistique]55(2): 163.
44.
KataA (2010). A postmodern Pandora ’s Box: Anti-vaccination misinformation on the internet. Vaccine28(7): 1709–1716.
45.
Keim-MalpassJMitchellEMSunE, et al (2017). Using Twitter to understand public perceptions regarding the# HPV vaccine: Opportunities for public health nurses to engage in social marketing. Public Health Nursing34(4): 316–323.
KhuranaCAroraMSalujaP, et al (2022). Acceptability of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination among Indian health-care professionals: A cross-sectional survey. Tzu Chi Medical Journal34(2): 245.
48.
KligyteVConnellySThielC, et al (2013). The influence of anger, fear, and emotion regulation on ethical decision making. Human Performance26(4): 297–326.
49.
KwokAJMentzerAKnightJC (2020). Host genetics and infectious disease: New tools, insights and translational opportunities. Nature Reviews Genetics22(3): 137–153.
50.
LewisNAtadE (2023). Effects of message framing and narrative format on promoting persuasive conversations with others about the flu vaccine. Health Communication39(10): 2110–2122.
51.
LiC (2013). Persuasive messages on information system acceptance: A theoretical extension of elaboration likelihood model and social influence theory. Computers in Human Behavior29(1): 264–275.
52.
LinCYehW (2017). How does health-related advertising with a regulatory focus and goal framing affect attitudes toward ads and healthy behavior intentions?International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health14(12): 1507.
53.
LinXKishoreR (2021). Social media-enabled healthcare: A conceptual model of social media affordances, online social support, and health behaviors and outcomes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change166: 120574.
54.
LoombaSDe FigueiredoAPiatekSJ, et al (2021). Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behaviour5(3): 337–348.
55.
LucaCAzoicăiDHarja AlexaI, et al (2020). Cultural perspectives on vaccination – An ethical dilemma?Journal of Intercultural Management and Ethics3(1): 19–27.
56.
MachadoDARobertsBWongBL, et al. (2021). The relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccine hesitancy: A scoping review of literature until August 2021. Frontiers in Public Health9: 747787. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.747787
57.
MaraniHSongMYJamiesonM, et al (2023). Public officials’ engagement on social media during the Rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine: Content analysis of tweets. JMIR Infodemiology3, e41582.
MonteroDAVidalRMVelascoJ, et al (2024). Two centuries of vaccination: Historical and conceptual approach and future perspectives. Frontiers in Public Health11: 1326154
60.
MuricGWuYFerraraE (2021). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy on social media: Building a public Twitter data set of Antivaccine content, vaccine misinformation, and conspiracies. JMIR Public Health and Surveillance7(11): e30642. https://doi.org/10.2196/30642
61.
NeigerMMeyersOBen-DavidA (2023). Tweeting the Holocaust: Social media discourse between reverence, exploitation, and simulacra. Journal of Communication73(3): 222–234.
62.
O’KeefeDJ (2018). Persuasion. In: O’KeefeDJ (ed.) The Handbook of Communication Skills. London: Routledge, pp.319–335.
RoozenbeekJVan der LindenS (2020). Breaking harmony Square: A game that “inoculates” against political misinformation. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. Epub ahead of print 2020. DOI: 10.37016/mr-2020-47.
65.
SalmonDAOmerSB (2006). Individual freedoms versus collective responsibility: Immunization decision-making in the face of occasionally competing values. Emerging Themes in Epidemiology3: 1–13.
66.
ScalesDGormanJMHurthL, et al (2023). Community-oriented Motivational Interviewing (MI): A novel framework extending MI to address COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in online social media platforms. Computers in Human Behavior141: 107609.
67.
ShrivastavaAPandeyA (2022). Understanding intra-group response biases in culturally diverse teams. International Journal of Intercultural Relations88: 189–199.
68.
SidorovaAEvangelopoulosNValacichJS, et al (2008). Uncovering the intellectual core of the information systems discipline. MIS Quarterly32(3): 467.
69.
SoaresJCLimongiRCohenED (2021). Engagement in a social media: An analysis in higher education institutions. Online Information Review46(2): 256–284. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-06-2020-0242
70.
SteinbergerJJeˇzekK (2012). Evaluation measures for text summarization. Computing and Informatics28(2): 251–275.
71.
SusmannMWXuMClarkJK, et al (2021). Persuasion amidst a pandemic: Insights from the elaboration likelihood model. European Review of Social Psychology33(2): 323–359.
72.
TannenDHamiltonHESchiffrinD (2015). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. New York, NY: Wiley.
73.
ThompsonCJ (1997). Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for deriving marketing insights from the texts of consumers’ consumption stories. Journal of Marketing Research34(4): 438–455.
74.
Van DijkTA (2008). Critical discourse analysis. Discourse and Power3(4): 85–101.
75.
VarghaADelaneyHD (2000). A critique and improvement of the “CL” Common language effect size statistics of McGraw and Wong. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics25(2): 101.
76.
WallJDStahlBCSalamAF (2015). Critical discourse analysis as a review methodology: An empirical example. Communications of the Association for Information Systems37: 3711.
77.
WangADaraRYousefinaghaniS, et al (2023). A review of social media data utilization for the prediction of disease outbreaks and understanding public perception. Big Data and Cognitive Computing7(2): 72.
78.
WarraichHJ (2009). Religious opposition to polio vaccination. Emerging Infectious Diseases15(6): 978a.
79.
WilsonSLWiysongeC (2020). Social media and vaccine hesitancy. BMJ Global Health5(10): e004206.
80.
World Health Organization (2020). World Health Statistics 2020. Geneva: WHO.
81.
World Health Organization (2021). World Health Statistics 2021. Geneva: WHO.
82.
YangKPierriFHuiP, et al (2021). The COVID-19 Infodemic: Twitter versus Facebook. Big Data & Society8(1): 1–8.
83.
YeWLiQYuS (2021). Persuasive effects of message framing and narrative format on promoting COVID-19 vaccination: A study on Chinese college students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health18(18): 9485.
