Polarization in COVID-19 Vaccine Discussion Networks

• Author: Sharif Amlani,Spencer Kiesel,Ross Butters
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221148670
• Published date: 01 March 2023
• Date: 01 March 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

American Politics Research

2023, Vol. 51(2) 260–273

© The Author(s) 2023

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1532673X221148670

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

Polarization in COVID-19 Vaccine Discussion

Networks

Sharif Amlani

1

, Spencer Kiesel

1

, and Ross Butters

1

Abstract

The emergence of COVID-19 spurred the fastest development of a vaccine in history. Yet, a large proportion of Americans

remain hesitant to receive it. Our paper investigates how the social networks we inhabit might expla in persistent vaccine

hesitancy. We argue that the COVID-19 vaccination status of respondents’closest associates inhibits or motivates their

decision to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. To test our argument, we conduct an original survey asking respondents a batte ry of

questions about the people with whom individuals most frequently discuss vaccines and COVID-19. Our survey reports that

individuals’discussion networks are polarized by vaccination status. Concurrently, there is a strong association bet ween the

social network’s vaccination status and the respondent’s vaccination status. This association is so robust that partisanship does

not moderate the association between discussants’vaccination status and respondents’vaccination status. Together , our results

imply that unvaccinated individuals remain hesitant because they face reinforcing social pressure from their closest associates.

The unique timing of our survey, during an unprecedented vaccination campaign against a novel disease, offers a snapshot of how

relationships may affect attitudes.

Keywords

COVID-19, vaccine hesitancy, egocentric networks, political discussions, survey research

Introduction

On January 7, 2020, Chinese health off‌icials reported the f‌irst

known case of COVID-19. After record development speed,

the United States administered its f‌irst COVID-19 vaccine on

December 14, 2020. Yet, after an initial boom, vaccination

rates stalled by July 2021. As of October 2022, only 68% of

Americans received either the Johnson & Johnson vaccine or

both doses of the Moderna and Pf‌izer vaccine and only a third

have received a COVID-19 booster (The New York Times,

2020). Public health experts agree these numbers are ex-

tremely concerning (Trogen & Pirofski, 2021;Troiano &

Nardi, 2021). Evidence shows that receiving a vaccine re-

duces deaths and hospitalization from COVID-19 (World

Health Organization, 2021). Scientists warn that without

mass vaccination, COVID-19 will burden healthcare systems,

deaths will increase, and variants that pose a greater risk may

be more likely to evolve. Yet, receiving a COVID-19 vaccine

has been at the center of political debates since their in-

ception. Our paper explores the factors explaining individ-

uals’decisions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and what may

continue to inhibit Americans willingness to receive it?

We utilize the unique situation of a rapidly developed

vaccine to provide a snapshot of how an individual’s closest

associates inf‌luence their decision to receive a COVID-19

vaccine. The role of social inf‌luence in political opinion and

behavior is well established (Berelson, Paul et al., 1954;

Huckfeldt & Sprague, 1987;Lupton & Thornton, 2017;

McClurg, 2006), but the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the

consequences and responsibility of interconnectedness. Not

only do our interpersonal connections spread the virus but our

connections can also encourage potentially lifesaving be-

haviors, like mask wearing and receiving a vaccine. We argue

that mass inoculation does not simply take place on television

or on front pages, but through the connections we hold with

individuals in our immediate social circles. To support our

argument, we examine the vaccination status among indi-

viduals’core discussion networks to determine whether in-

dividuals live in “vaccine bubbles.”We then consider how the

level of vaccine network homogeneity relates to individuals’

vaccine status. Our paper extends the literature on why in-

dividuals are hesitant to receive vaccines (Konstantinou et al.

2021) and previous literature on forces driving vaccination

status during the COVID-19 pandemic (Fridman et al., 2021)

1

Department of Political Science, UC Davis, CA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Spencer Kiesel, Department of Political Science, UC Davis, Kerr Hall, Davis,

CA 95616-5270, USA.

Email: skiesel@ucdavis.edu