Where are you on the vaccine trust spectrum?

Out of six sub-Saharan African countries, people in South Africa are by far the most vocal about Covid-19 vaccines on social media platforms.

‘ANC’ is a popular topic discussed by sceptics, while enthusiasts like to use the hashtag ‘#news’.

The vaccine-hesitant often use American and British flags as emojis, while neutrals may lurk in Covid-19 conversation, gleaning information while trying to decide if they will get vaccinated.

This – and other key insights into Covid-19 conversations on social media – is according to the Vaccine Trust Spectrum Segmentation Report published by the University of Cape Town’s Centre for Analytics and Behavioural Change (CABC) as part of the latest weekly social listening report by the Department of Health.

Data was gathered from mid-June to mid-August and geo-filtered to locate the origin in one of six countries: South Africa, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, Nigeria and Tanzania.

Evident from the report is that citizens of several southern African countries are widely divided when it comes to their level of trust in Covid-19 vaccinations.

The report classifies Sub-Saharan social media users into six distinctive segments: fringe conspiracy theorists, vaccine sceptics, the vaccine-hesitant, neutral, enthusiastic and advocates.

Included in the study are the most commonly discussed topics, most commonly used hashtags, total mentions by country, most common words and emojis in author biographies, most commonly used emojis, and segment overlap within each category on social media.

The CABC says the insights into the social profiles and underlying belief structures could potentially be used in crafting creative communication for strategic interventions, as each country in the report deals with its own vaccination conversation.

Vaccine Trust Spectrum model classifications

Fringe conspiracy theorists/extreme anti-vaccine views

This segment is deeply entrenched in anti-vaccine beliefs and is characterised by marginalised viewpoints.

People in this segment are deeply suspicious, may express feelings of victimhood, and respond poorly to fact-based interventions.

These individuals show interest in politics and index heavily towards conversation about the global North/Western world.

Vaccine sceptics

This group faces several barriers to vaccine uptake and believes that the risks of the jab outweigh the benefits.

They engage in efficacy conversations, in which they express their view that the protection afforded by the vaccine is or may be insufficient.

Their concerns tend to be more rooted in reality than those of fringe conspiracists, although they seem mistrustful of government (unlikely to change).

Flowing from this mistrust, they suspect ulterior motives behind vaccine policy (ivermectin and vaccines as a money-making scheme).

These individuals discuss local issues while still engaging in conversations about the vaccine outside of their home country.

They are reactive to feelings of being denied personal choice and engage in the forced vaccination sub-narrative by expressing negative sentiment towards the jab.

This segment shows interest in business and politics. People in this group are mainly South African, English-speaking and Christian.

Vaccine hesitant

This category has single or few barriers to vaccine uptake and is focused on practical issues that affect day-to-day life (such as vaccine side effects and mandatory vaccinations for travel and in the workplace).

When addressing side effects, they express negative sentiment towards the vaccine, believing there is enough reasonable doubt to prevent them from getting vaccinated.

These individuals are anxious about introducing a foreign substance into their bodies, an irreversible decision (what if the rumours are true?).

When discussing forced vaccination, they express neutral sentiment towards the jab, suggesting that feelings of lost personal choice are not a key barrier to vaccination.

They are overwhelmed by conflicting information, combined with institutional mistrust and a lifetime of broken promises, which casts doubt on official pro-vaccine comms from official channels (DOH, the presidency).

Generally, they believe in science and are responsive to fact-based interventions tailored to their specific concerns (personal health and safety weighed against the tangible benefits of vaccination).

These concerns may be overlooked in pro-vaccine messaging that targets ‘anti-vaxxers’ as fringe conspiracy theorists.

Vaccine procrastinators/neutrals

Many don’t really want to get vaccinated but feel they should. This segment leans towards pro-jab views, with many posts that describe individual vaccination experiences.

They are vulnerable to peer pressure and the urge to conform to social norms (parents nagging or a reluctance to be viewed by others as an ‘anti-vaxxer’) and may be averse to the experience of receiving an injection.

They are not overly focused on Covid; they discuss vaccination along with many other topics.

Vaccine neutrals are biding their time to see if the anti-vaccine rumours are true and they may lurk in the Covid conversation without explicitly stating that they want to delay their decision.

They engage in the efficacy conversation without expressing sentiment for or against the vaccine, and are pragmatic, reactive to issues that affect them directly (such as forced vaccination in the workplace or for travel, and ‘real’ side effects, such as soreness or flu-like symptoms after vaccination).

Vaccine enthusiasts

These individuals decided that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the perceived risks and they reinforce pro-vaccination social norms through peer interaction.

This group is motivated by personal/family protection and engages in conversation about side effects by describing personal post-vaccination experiences, often reporting minimal side effects and encouraging others to vaccinate.

Some support vaccinations while opposing forced vaccinations. Many are critical of the vaccine roll-out (stemming from distrust of government).

They show interest in sports and health. This segment is made up of a greater proportion of females and students, who are more likely to share (reputable) pro-vaccine content than create it.

Vaccine advocates

This segment has a deeply entrenched pro-vaccine viewpoint and urges others to vaccinate, often expressing frustration at the decision not to vaccinate.

They are champions of science and engage in conspiracy conversations to debunk, disagree or argue.

Underlying institutional mistrust surfaces in calls for fair and equitable access to the vaccine. These individuals are reactive to fact-based interventions.

ALSO READ: Govt promises foolproof digital vaxx certificate

Key findings on conversations

* In June, 85% of anti-vaccine posts and 75% of pro-vaccination posts in all six countries came from South Africa.

By August, South Africa was responsible for 92% of the anti-vaccination hashtag usage and 78% of the pro-vaccination hashtag usage.

* Social media accounts with more than 10 000 followers contributed only 6% of the anti-vaccine conversation, which suggests that the anti-vax posts are driven mainly by users with small followings.

* The pro-vaccine narrative is driven mainly by scientists, influencers, journalists, businesses, government and its institutions.

* The conversation is a polarised and combative space. Misinformation and disinformation is rife, driven mainly by minority clusters that have an overt distrust of institutions, government, elites and experts.

The CABC is a Section 18a NPO that acts in the public interest. It was formed in 2017 and is incubated at the Graduate School of Business at the University of Cape Town.

View the full report here.

NOW READ: I got vaccinated, and I didn’t become magnetic or emit 5G signals