{"id":4677,"date":"2026-01-26T08:59:57","date_gmt":"2026-01-26T08:59:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/practicalhealthpsychology.com\/?p=4677"},"modified":"2026-03-27T07:53:38","modified_gmt":"2026-03-27T07:53:38","slug":"supporting-health-workers-in-addressing-vaccine-hesitancy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/practicalhealthpsychology.com\/id\/2026\/01\/supporting-health-workers-in-addressing-vaccine-hesitancy\/","title":{"rendered":"Supporting health workers in addressing vaccine hesitancy"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Dawn Holford, University of Bristol, UK, Linda Karlsson, University of Turku, Finland, Frederike Taubert, Erfurt University, Germany, Emma C. Anderson, University of Bristol, UK, Virginia C. Gould, University of Bristol, UK<\/strong><\/p>\n

Correcting misconceptions about vaccination<\/strong><\/p>\n

Vaccination is one of the most successful tools of public health\u2014they have been estimated to <\/span>save 6 lives every minute<\/span><\/a>. But vaccines have also faced public resistance, with persistent disinformation undermining public trust in vaccination, and posing a challenge for health workers with vaccination roles. How do health workers keep up with the flood of false narratives about vaccines? What can they say to patients who cite these narratives as reasons not to vaccinate themselves or their children?\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

While it can be tempting to respond by citing the facts, correcting misconceptions about vaccines\u2014which are often fuelled by disinformation\u2014is <\/span>not as simple as sharing more factual information<\/span><\/a>. Take the example of a <\/span>long-debunked myth about vaccines and autism<\/span><\/a>: despite decades of research and extensive evidence that there is no link between the two, health workers continue to encounter this concern among parents. Myths like this are \u201csticky\u201d because <\/span>they play on people\u2019s underlying fears, using strong narratives that appear intuitive at first glance<\/span><\/a>. They can also be <\/span>weaponised by those with political agendas<\/span><\/a> to keep these myths circulating in public.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

So, what can health workers say to someone who holds a misconception about vaccines? It starts with understanding what motivates someone\u2019s beliefs. Let\u2019s imagine two parents, Tina and Tom. Both share a concern that their children\u2019s immune system will not cope with all the recommended vaccinations. This is another common misconception: the fact is that vaccines are only a tiny dose compared to the real disease. For Tom, the concern is motivated by his fear of adverse effects each vaccine might trigger. For Tina, the concern is motivated by her preference for her child to have strong \u201cnatural\u201d resistance to disease. These deeper drivers of the surface concern are known in psychology as \u201c<\/span>attitude roots<\/span><\/a>\u201d, and they can motivate people to cling to their misconceptions in the face of factual correction.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Often, we have a natural impulse to directly correct misconceptions we hear from others. However, research shows that when we first validate people\u2019s attitude roots, they are more <\/span>receptive to corrections of vaccine myths<\/span><\/a>, which can increase their acceptance of vaccines. So, to address Tom\u2019s concern, we might want to first reassure him that it\u2019s normal to want to protect his child. In contrast, to address Tina\u2019s concern, it could be better to begin by acknowledging that it is generally good to avoid unnecessary medication. After connecting with them and building trust, we can continue with addressing their misconceptions and sharing more information about vaccination.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

How can we prepare health workers for vaccine conversations?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The best way to address vaccine misconceptions is through tailored, <\/span>dialogue-based approaches<\/span><\/a>. When people are able to speak to health workers whom they trust for medical advice, this can be <\/span>highly effective at raising vaccine uptake<\/span><\/a>. An example of such an approach is the <\/span>Empathetic Refutational Interview<\/span><\/a>, a four-step framework to structure vaccine conversations using evidence-based techniques described above to build trust and address misconceptions while respecting people\u2019s attitude roots. It was created by the <\/span>JITSUVAX project<\/span><\/a> and builds on other dialogue-based approaches, such as <\/span>Motivational Interviewing<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

However, engaging in respectful dialogue with patients about vaccination is not always easy. Health workers may <\/span>worry about provoking conflict<\/span><\/a> during the discussion. Many health workers <\/span>do not receive training<\/span><\/a> to prepare them for such conversations. In fact, where health workers receive training or guidance for this important role, it tends to <\/span>rely on an information-based approach<\/span><\/a> of providing facts to patients\u2014which can actually be counterproductive. The JITSUVAX project interviewed health workers who described their need for specific support and strategies they can use to deal with patients\u2019 vaccine misconceptions.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The <\/span>JITSUVAX project<\/span><\/a> developed tools to support health workers to use the Empathetic Refutational Interview for vaccine conversations:<\/span><\/p>\n