Vaccine Hesitancy: A Health Belief Model Analysis

Introduction

Several assumptions have been drawn, underpinning the dominating mainstream rhetoric concerning parents in developed nations who refuse or hesitate about vaccination meant for children. Since the policy and scientific consensus on the advantages of the internationally recommended vaccination timetable is definite, vaccine refuters and delayers have been clasped, specifically within amateur converse, as being paranoid conspiracy theorists, ignorance or the lack of awareness. In this case, a phrase like ‘anti-vaccination ‘ is in several instances used to such parents that can serve to demarcate or chastise them for failure to comply with government directives. It comes down to the health belief model (HBM), a psychological ideal, which tries to explain as well as predict the health characters of these parents’ beliefs and attitudes in response to vaccination. Various literatures has explained HBM and its function in parents attitudes towards vaccination, in addition, concepts concerning these attitudes present strengths and shortcomings with implication on vaccination.

Literature Review

The theory of HBM according to Carpenter (2010), is a psychological ideal that tries to demonstrate and anticipate health characters. It focuses on the beliefs and character of people. The model was developed by Hochbaun, Kegels and Rosenstock back in the 1950s in the United States Public Health Service to respond to the lack of successful free tuberculosis (TB) medical screening program. Since then, the model has been fitted to explore and explain various short and long-term health characters, not leaving out transmission of HIV/AIDS, sexual risk behaviors and vaccinations. Being one of the most widely applied models of health character, Glanz and Bishop (2010), posit that the model poses six prefabs to stipulate health character. These six constructs include; risk perceptivity, risk asperity, benediction to action, and hindrances to action, self-competence, and an indication of actions. For that reason, the model has been identified as an ideal form of communication of studies, where researchers are basically interested in the processes of communication to favor explanatory systems according to Slater and Geason (2012). Application of HBM as a social cognition ideal to evaluate health character in recent studies on parent acceptance of vaccination to their children, the psychological instrument according to Harmsen (2012), relies on the six constructs mentioned by Glanz and Bishop (2010) in their study. Jones et al. (2016), depict that the first construct of HBM of risk perceptivity describes perceived risk of contracting an illness, followed by the risk asperity is the potential severity of the repercussion of the illness. Benediction of actions is the assessment of other positive results by various actions to deduce to perceptivity or severity. Hindrances to actively involve the negative factors linked to halt the efforts of seeking medical care and its issues according to and Janel et al. (2016) quote Bond and Nolan (2011) claiming that it involve emotions, time, and finances of unwanted secondary effects of preventive actions. Self-competence according to Bishop et al. (2014), it is suggested to involve negative feeling towards the belief to oneself in per taking an action, influence in preventing an illness as well as adjustment of character. Finally, indications of action, according to Serpell &Green, 2006 quote Bishop et al. (2014), it is also included as a personal action to accept advice from media, allies as well as health professionals. Effective application of the HBM as a framework for deciding to vaccinate children by parents offers an appealing to construe distinctiveness in compliant as well as non-compliant parents to children’s vaccination Bond and Nolan (2011) affirms. It can also be applied to evaluate predictable medical behavior, and according to Jones et al. (2016), various studies have identified that successful aspect of HBM is that it has successfully been adopted in culture, which is the primary model for a preventive health character that is often ignored by scholars in the communicating. Further, Jones et al. (2014), four assessments on HBM and later found to be contradicting. Four meta-analysis that was administered in the year 1974 and 1984 consistently, they were discovered to be least desirable anticipated medical behavior, such as the perceived severity was the least of all predictor and perceived barriers were identified to be the tenacious single anticipator of preventive health character. Perceived susceptibility and benefits were deemed crucial. Jones et al. (2016) further depicted that meta-examination contradictions were identified that the influence of every category of the primary HBM variable of the character was partially insignificant, however, the impact extent was uneven. When other theories are aligned with these HBM six constructs, weaknesses were identified. Specifically, Jones et al. (2016) accrued that barrier and benefits consistently led as the most powerful anticipators but completely, the link between specific behavior and negative results was estimated to be least. Not leaving out, the link between the medical behavior and susceptibility belief was rated at zero according to Jones et al. (2016, p568). Jones et al. (2016), thus reveals that the four analyses exist in HBM that would best describe the beliefs and behavior among parents in regards to vaccinating their children. It bound to surface since variables organizing is not experienced in most of the close-personal researches, as a result, it ends up adding cues to action as well as self-competence that is referred to as Extended HBM including ancient four HBM as well as the last two. Since human are engulfed by social factors, HBM has included social norms and emotional factors that can best describe parents’ behavior and beliefs on vaccinating their children. This is because people are easily affected by social factors as well as worries concerning diseases emotionally according to He et al. (2015). He et al. (20150, conducted a study to determine what factors influenced perceptions as well as decisions of parents towards their children I regard to immunization against seasonal influenza. However, HBM, in this case, has included some demographic aspects, anticipated regrets, social norms, expected grief, anxiety concerning influenza infection as well as anticipated repressing were linked with parental acknowledgment for child influenza vaccination. For that matter, He et al. (2015) formulated a framework to articulate the aspects of the initial Health Belief Model meant to promote the prediction capability from the beliefs and character of the parents.

Dig deeper into A Scientific Examination with our selection of articles.

Describing the diagram, demographic influence on the behavioral motive of the parental vaccination towards their children but the research is limited itself to a specific location, which is Guangzhou in China and sampled participants from a single hospital. According to He et al. (2015), anticipated asperity was staunchly linked with parental motives, anticipated interest or perk was the beneficial result concerning parental evaluation. Anticipated perceptivity of afflicting influenza was certainly affected by the vaccine motive. According to the studies conducted by He et al. (2015), demographic further involved past experiences of influenza vaccination, where once in the past it was claimed against influenza vaccine, parents motive to the vaccine indicated higher likelihood in future. On social, parents’ behavior and belief will be influenced by their friends, family members as well as other parents not leaving out cultural past experiences. While in the study there is a limited relation of social norms to the parents’ motive to vaccinate their children, the reason is that there might be limited studies that were undertaken. In regard to emotional prompt, it should be powerfully linked with a parental motive for children’s vaccination since recent studies have indicated that parents are anxious about the infections of influenza, thus positively directing influencing motive of the parents to vaccinate their children in the completely changed ideal.

Alternative Theory on the Beliefs and Behavior of Parents in vaccinating their children

In efforts to understand the beliefs and the behaviors of parents in regards to vaccination of their children, studies by Ward et al. (2017), claim that it is crucial to look at those parents that disregard vaccination completely. Within the study, Ward et al. (2015) have developed upon current activities by Sobo (2016) that remodels vaccine refusal from being a pessimistic or deficiency from the parent’s outlook, being a positively comprised act. Sobo (2016), further identified that refusing also a form of accepting-acknowledging the dominating values, coherence, and ways of life of one’s compeers. One of the concepts largely embraced by vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing parents is the salutogenesis. Aaron Antonovsky (1996), coined Salutogenesis in his research journal by the title health, Stress and Coping, back in the year 1979. He explained the meaning and claimed that it is the model that posits how conceptions of the human body as ‘instinctively’ healthy are erroneous. Antonovsky according to Ward et al. (2017) identifies the human system as innately defective, subject to inescapable to deterioration processes and consequently search to maneuver individuals along perpetuity from illness towards health through salutary aspects that are negentropic as well as earnestly fostering health. The concept thus according to Ward et al (2017), has therefore formulated the salutary parenting to describe the behavior and beliefs of parents who hesitate or refuse to vaccinate their children, being constructed by their own life-world as well as values. In this case, according to Smith et al. (2011), parents could be provided knowledgeable concepts and information regarding the benefits of vaccinating their children, but fails to promote intent to vaccinate, indicating that plainly ‘adjusting myths’ that even after health campaign may not change vaccination beliefs and behaviors.

Conclusion

The Health Belief Model has been extensively identified to explain the behavior and belief among parents who vaccinate or fail to vaccinate their children. The psychological behavioral theory has relied on six constructs but focused on four of them of anticipated susceptibility, severity, benefit, barriers to explain the behavior and belief of parents in regard to vaccinating their children. Later on an addition of two more constructs of self-competence and cues of action to determine their intentions incur after effects of vaccination. In addition, the salutogenic theory that molded the salutogenic parenting has also turned to address vaccine perspectives from within parents’ personal life-world as well as beliefs, which are perceived to be hard to change among these vaccine-refusing and vaccine-hesitant parents.

References

Antonovsky A. The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health Promotion International. 1996;11(1):11–8.

Bishop, A. C., Baker, G. R., Boyle, T. A., & MacKinnon, N. J. (2014). Using the health belief model to explain patient involvement in patient safety, Health Expectations, 18(6).

Bond, L., & Nolan, T. (2011). Making sense of perceptions of risk of diseases and vaccinations: a qualitative study combining models of health beliefs, decision-making and risk perception. Bond and Nolan BMC Public Health, 11(1), 943.

Glanz, K., & Bishop, D. B. (2010). The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions. Annual review of public health, 31, 399-418.

Jones, C. L., Jensen, J. D., Scherr, C.L., Brown, N. R., Christy, K., & Weaver, J. (2016). The health belief model as an explanatory framework in communication research: Exploring parallel, serial, and moderated mediation. Health communication, 30(6), 566-576.

Smith, P. J., Humiston, S. G., Marcuse, E. K., Zhao, Z., Dorell, C. G., Howes, C., & Hibbs, B. (2011). Parental delay or refusal of vaccine doses, childhood vaccination coverage at 24 months of age, and the Health Belief Model. Public Health Reports, 126(2_suppl): 135–146.

Slater, M. D., & Gleason, L. S. (2012). Contributing to theory and knowledge in quantitative communication science.Communication Methods and Measures, 6(4), 215-236.

Ward, P. R., Attwell, K., Meyer, S. B., Rokkas, P., & Leask, J. (2017). Understanding the perceived logic of care by vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing parents: A qualitative study in Australia. PloS one, 12(10), e0185955.