SPRING 2022 | THE SCIENTIST 17MODIFIED FROM © ISTOCK.COM, VISUAL GENERATION
who wish to share medically sensitive information. There is debate
between researchers on whether education level plays a relevant role
in shaping vaccination views, but what seems to matter the most is
the underlying ability to critically evaluate information, independent
of knowledge in specific domains. If social media users cannot reach
a minimum score in a critical thinking test, appropriate disclaim-
ers could be added below their tweets and posts. Stronger measures
could partially or completely limit the reach or visibility of posts com-
ing from users who failed to pass the critical thinking test.It is important to underline that such interventions constitute
short-term solutions to end the acute phase of the anti-vaccine info-
demic on social media. A long-term strategy is also needed. For
this, we need to give all users of these platforms tools to under-
stand and properly contextualize the credibility of information they
are exposed to, enabling an easier and more efficient distinction
between what is fact and what is propaganda. In fact, as a recent
study suggested, prompting users to consider the accuracy of infor-
mation online could help counter the spread of misinformation.
We also envision the development of simple, long-term
interventions to help members of the general public increase
their critical thinking skills. Such skills include the under-
standing of the concepts of causation vs. correlation, source
credibility, statistical significance, experimental controls, rep-
lication, and reproducibility. Interventions to teach these skills
could come in the form of online games, given their value as
indirect teaching tools. For example, games in which users are
asked to produce fake news have been shown to be effective in
training individuals to distinguish online misinformation from
trusted knowledge.
These strategies could also be effective to counter misinforma-
tion related to other conspiracy theories, not only anti-vaccine dis-
course. In fact, data show that anti-vaccine supporters often believe
in several other conspiracy theories. They may believe that COVID-
19 is a hoax, or that the pandemic was planned by covert ruling elites.
Vaccines fit into this broader conspiratorial picture because they are
sometimes imagined to be agents of population and/or mind con-
trol. For many in the anti-vaccine community, COVID-19 serves as a
massive cover-up to allow global vaccination campaigns to take place
and ultimately reduce or stupefy the world’s population.
The tendency to believe in several conspiracy theories is likely
due to how people come across various types of information on
social media. For instance, if a person believes the 2020 US presi-
dential election was rigged and is lingering or clicking on posts sup-
porting this belief, then they will likely be exposed to anti-vaccine
views, thanks to social media platforms’ polarization-reinforcing
algorithms. This creates two diametrically opposed communities—one supportive of vaccines and one opposing their use—with little
in common, and therefore no room for discussion. Social media
should ideally act to prevent or lessen social polarization by facili-
tating communication between groups with opposing views.
Furthermore, according to the results of our PLOS ONE study,
anti-vaccine supporters tend to use emotional language in their
tweets, including expressions of rage, sadness, fear, or joy. In contrast,
pro-vaccine individuals tend to use a sterile, impersonal language
when tweeting. This latter cohort includes healthcare organiza-
tions, which would probably benefit from a change in communica-
tion strategy. Healthcare organizations should use a language that
is relatable to people’s experiences, while still rigorous from a scien-
tific point of view.
It is imperative to halt the circulation of skewed, misinformed,
or false views about vaccines, as they have the power to influence
hesitant people, who are unsure or unaware of the effectiveness
and safety of vaccines. Challenging the anti-vaccine rhetoric could
save many lives. gFederico Germani is a bioethicist and molecular biologist at the
University of Zurich, Switzerland. Nikola Biller-Andorno is
the director of the Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of
Medicine at the University of Zurich, Switzerland.Social media companies should not become
the arbiters of free speech.Did you know that more
than 2 million people
follow The Scientist
on Facebook? Like
our page to see the
latest news, videos,
infographics, and more,
right in your news feed.LIKE US ON
facebook.com/
TheScientistMagazine