Healthcare professionals are being encouraged to consider the role of patient attitudes when discussing vaccines, according to a new article contributed by Dr. Lori Handy and Charlotte A. Moser. The article is the first in a three-part series examining how clinicians can more effectively communicate with families about vaccination.
The authors illustrate how personal attitudes shape perceptions of vaccine information, noting that agreement or disagreement with statements such as “Vaccines are a great public health accomplishment” or “Vaccines are well-tested” influences whether individuals view the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines as positive or negative. They point out that while many in medicine see this speed as an achievement—highlighted by Drs. Drew Weissman and Katalin Karikó winning the 2023 Nobel Prize for their work on mRNA vaccines—others may interpret it as cause for concern about safety.
The piece references Social Judgement Theory from the 1960s, which explains that people’s pre-existing attitude structures determine how they receive new information. Key elements include an individual’s anchor (their most prominent idea about a topic), latitudes of acceptance or rejection, and ego involvement (how invested they are in the issue). According to Sherif and Hovland, creators of the theory, “If it is within their latitude of acceptance, they will ‘make room for it,’ but if it is in their latitude of rejection, they will be unaccepting and may even push back on the idea.” They suggest that gradual attitude changes occur through messages delivered near the edges of one’s acceptance zone rather than expecting sudden shifts.
Clinically, this understanding helps manage expectations around changing patient attitudes during brief healthcare visits. The authors state: “A single health message or conversation is unlikely to dramatically change a person’s attitudes.” Instead, small changes over time should be recognized.
The article recommends several strategies for healthcare teams:
– Recognize that attitudes form through repeated exposure to relevant messages across different settings—not just clinical encounters.
– Consider institutional practices that create space for deeper conversations around contentious topics like vaccines.
– Use tools such as Rehavior and Chadis to assess patient attitudes before appointments; these platforms integrate questionnaires and support into electronic records systems.
– Foster research collaborations across communications, behavioral psychology, public health, and vaccinology to identify best practices for addressing emotional or politicized topics.
Chadis provides online screening tools designed by pediatricians to collect data and support clinical decision-making with patients prior to visits. Rehavior develops targeted communication solutions by analyzing common concerns about healthcare topics; its tool integrates with electronic medical records so providers can better understand individual motivations.
The authors emphasize ongoing adaptation: “We can all benefit from being attuned to this work and open to trying new approaches in the clinical setting.”
