Distrust, doubt and protective reactions to COVID-19

Distrust, trauma, doubt and protective reactions to COVID-19

Dariotis, J. K. et al., (2025) summarised by Graciela Maitland

Introduction

This research explored three stories that show how people’s reactions and decisions about vaccines can vary depending on their circumstances. Findings showed how participants feel about vaccines and what influences their choices. They emphasised the importance of their family’s health and shared their past experiences with vaccines. It identified the support they receive from others and the need for reliable information, also assessing their trust or distrust of the media and politicians.

Summary

This research included 506 participants from the USA and focused on their experiences during the pandemic and how well they followed public health guidelines. The researchers interviewed 45 participants with different views on vaccines. It presented three cases to show how people made vaccination choices, highlighting a variety of feelings and opinions about vaccines.

1. Case 1: A nurse who opted not to vaccinate herself or her child against COVID-19 identified as a 56-year-old divorced white woman with a 15-year-old son with special needs and two elderly parents. She disagreed with the way the pandemic was being managed and left work to home school her child, placing a strong reliance on her religion to keep her safe. She found an online group that “supported each other through a course of miracles”. She disliked being mandated to have a flu vaccination, believing in free choice. Her son became ill after she had her flu vaccine and she attributed “his sickness to her flu shot”, although agreed to them both having a Tetanus vaccine. With her nursing background, she knew the importance of wearing masks and before leaving work, took the N95 masks (referred to as FFP2 masks in the UK) that had been fitted to her.

2. Case 2: A risk assessor who made vaccination decisions based on statistics identified as a 38-year-old married white man with four children, including a 5-year-old son with health concerns. All members of his family received the standard vaccinations but he was cautious about the COVID-19 vaccine for his young son with pre-existing conditions. After reviewing the data, he stated there were no concerns about the speed of the vaccine rollout as the technology had been building for years, and “this wasn’t as novel as kind of the mainstream media seem to be picking up on”. The family all received COVID-19 vaccines and boosters as they were approved, he is open to future vaccinations for himself and his family.

3. Case 3: A childcare worker identified as a 51-year-old black divorced woman with two adult children. She had asthma, arthritis, and eczema. She received the COVID-19 vaccine because of workplace mandates, although supports traditional childhood vaccinations saying she valued “some vaccine mandates because without the protection she may have died”. However when feeling ill, which she attributed to the COVID-19 vaccine, her previous pro-vaccine stance turned to scepticism. To her knowledge, she never had COVID-19 although maybe she did not conduct tests. She believed “an effective vaccine should not require repeated administrations such as boosters annually or for new strains” despite this being the case for flu vaccines. She doesn’t have the flu vaccination, believing that taking “orange juice, vitamin C tablets, and iron” can “prevent the flu” adding that “medicines were created to sustain big corporate companies”. Although she perhaps takes medication for her asthma, arthritis, and eczema. She added that her parents were illiterate and suggested health officials should sit down with patients to explain vaccines step by step, checking they understand before making a decision.

Conclusion:

These three cases consider vaccine hesitancy and uptake from distrustful and resistant people to accepting vaccinations, although sometimes resentfully due to work mandates. The research found that factors like age, personal health, social circles and individual beliefs all play a role. An element of distrust came from the conflicting information of public health officials. Participants expressed that having the freedom to make their own health choices made them more likely to get vaccinated. The case studies show that those who decided not to get vaccinated had specific reasons shaped by their experiences and views. Vaccine uptake is an essential component for managing epidemics and pandemics. People who remain unvaccinated are motivated by different values, and barriers that drive their behaviour. This research challenges the common design of public health messages, which often assumes that people make decisions based only on logic. Instead, it suggests the importance of creating customised messages to fit individual situations and social factors. If public health officials listened to patient concerns regarding vaccines they could address doubts and build trust. This case study suggests that giving people more time, and support, to access clear and helpful information is essential for future vaccine policy decisions.

Read the research here