Opinion Survey on Vaccines Published by JREF and WT,Inc

[MattusMaximus]

I am very pleased to announce that a ground-breaking survey conducted on the issue of people’s opinions regarding vaccines and vaccination has been published; the work was a joint project of the James Randi Educational Foundation and Women Thinking, Inc. and it gets to the heart of how those of us who support good science-based medicine can communicate a more positive message on vaccines.

In addition, I am happy to say that I took a personal role in this research during my time with the Women Thinking, Inc. organization

So, without further ado, I would like to link to the JREF’s press-release on the survey; please note that you can download the full paper at this link, so please share it!

 

[MattusMaximus]

FYI all, my skeptical colleague, Jamie Bernstein, wrote a wonderful piece on this survey research over at Skepchick, and she outlines there just how many people were involved in this process over the last few years. Check it out!

 

[Travis]

Huh, I'm glad to see a little public shaming finally got it released.

 

[Homeapathy]

Thanks for posting this, Matt.

I'd like to discuss strategy for a moment:

A combined strategy targeting parents’ intellectual
understanding of vaccines and their emotional
reaction needs to be employed. Currently, the antivaccine movement does this. They offer madeup facts that, to the layperson and especially the
overwhelmed new parent, are indistinguishable from
the legitimate, scientifically supported facts being
presented by the pro-vaccine messages. The antivaccine messages have an advantage because they
combine their information with emotionally gripping
stories of vaccine injury that do not have to be fully
convincing to give a parent enough pause to ask
themselves “But...what if?”

Considering this, do you think we should employ stories ourselves? Like stories of outbreaks that were limited thanks to vaccinations, or where someone got sick for refusing vaccinations etc.

While I think studies are significantly stronger as evidence, there's little doubt that stories themselves can be very convincing, because it gives people something concrete to hold onto instead of the abstract numbers and statistics that studies employ.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Thanks for posting this, Matt.

I'd like to discuss strategy for a moment:

Considering this, do you think we should employ stories ourselves? Like stories of outbreaks that were limited thanks to vaccinations, or where someone got sick for refusing vaccinations etc.

While I think studies are significantly stronger as evidence, there's little doubt that stories themselves can be very convincing, because it gives people something concrete to hold onto instead of the abstract numbers and statistics that studies employ.

Yes. Stories are critical; of course, stories backed up by evidence are even better.

Also, messaging is important. For example, making the message pro-good parenting is a real plus; so mention to people something like "well, you wouldn't put your child into a car without strapping on their safety belt, would you?" if they balk at getting their kids vaccinated.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Huh, I'm glad to see a little public shaming finally got it released.

I honestly don't know what happened behind the scenes in the last couple of weeks, because I took myself out of the process. So I won't speak to that point.

However, what I will say is that I'm glad this study got published. And now we need to read it and use it. To me, that's what is most important here.

 

[MattusMaximus]

bumpity bump

Mostly because I saw this recent episode of The Daily Show, and it reminded me of how important is this research.