Abstract: How Divergent Risk-Characters Rewrite the Anti-Vaccination Narrative

◆ Shelby Luttman, University of Tennessee

The modern narrative originates in 1998, when a paper by a British medical journal The Lancet alleged that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine may cause autism and bowel disease (Wakefield, Murch, Linnell, & Casson, 1998). The funding of the publication was deemed erroneous, yet the research sparked a connection between vaccines and disorders that would soon undermine public confidence in vaccines. Still today, the debate on vaccines poses a threat to public health in the United States of America as “opt-out” rates, particularly in states with recent outbreaks are increasing (Ratzan, 2011). This study sought to examine what factors contribute to divergent behavior in previously unvaccinated children from the lens of narrative theory and the framework of communication accommodation theory. The narrative analysis draws into question the role of Fisher’s (1984) contribution to narrative theory alongside Palmlund’s (2009) typology of risk characters. The methodology utilizes qualitative interviews in order to identify the various stimuli that contributed to divergent or convergent behavior within previously unvaccinated individuals. This strategy provides an environment of open-ended discussion and findings that organically result from the interview process to the point of redundancy. Three main questions along with multiple prompt questions (see figure 1) were formulated in order to accurately and efficiently carry out the interview process, which catered to the participants extrapolation of their narrative. Data from the participant’s answers was analyzed through the use of thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) in order to identify patterns in the resulting stimuli affecting behavior. Furthermore, the study sought to provide insight and implications to researchers, students, and practitioners that traditional theories such as narrative and communication accommodation theory stand applicable in the plight to grasp the idiosyncrasies contributing to the latent effects of the vaccination crisis. The results of this study suggested that future health strategies should aim to: (1) establish trust of medical institutions, (2) validate parental decisions, rather than judge them, and (3) encourage independent research (especially outside of social media). The theoretical implications advise that that perceived risk be more closely associated with the creation of narrative in future studies. The practical and societal implications involve the de-stigmatization of the COVID-19 vaccine and other vaccines for the purpose of developing herd immunity against harmful diseases. Key words: Anti-vaccination, communication accommodation, divergence, narrative, risk