Enhancing vaccine communication in social Q&A: identifying readily applicable factors for answer acceptance on medical sciences stack exchange

Introduction. Despite the efficacy of vaccines, online misinformation contributes to vaccine hesitancy. This study investigates factors influencing the acceptance of answers to vaccine-related questions on social Q&A platforms, aiming to improve online vaccine communication. Method. We analysed 511 vaccine-related questions and 875 associated answers on the medical sciences stack exchange platform. Eleven variables were identified as potential predictors of answer acceptance, including citation practices, use of personal experiences, and recognition of asker's concerns. Analysis. Logistic regression was employed to determine which variables significantly predict the likelihood of an answer being designated as the ‘accepted answer’ by the asker. Results. Personal experience sharing, recognition of asker's concerns, citing data sources, and including calls-to-action emerged as significant predictors of answer acceptance. Notably, professional credentials had a modest effect, while factors such as the use of analogies or citing health authorities were not significant predictors. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that effective vaccine communication on social Q&A platforms should balance factual information with personal narratives, address user concerns empathetically, and provide clear, actionable advice. These insights can inform strategies for health communicators and platform designers to enhance the quality and acceptance of vaccine information online.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Information Research an international electronic journal
Published
2025-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.47989/ir30iconf47155
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.17
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Enhancing vaccine communication in social Q&A: identifying readily applicable factors for answer acceptance on medical sciences stack exchange

Hengyi Fu
1 citations
Information Research an international electronic journal
Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
2.17
article

Enhancing vaccine communication in social Q&A: identifying readily applicable factors for answer acceptance on medical sciences stack exchange

Hengyi Fu
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Introduction. Despite the efficacy of vaccines, online misinformation contributes to vaccine hesitancy. This study investigates factors influencing the acceptance of answers to vaccine-related questions on social Q&A platforms, aiming to improve online vaccine communication. Method. We analysed 511 vaccine-related questions and 875 associated answers on the medical sciences stack exchange platform. Eleven variables were identified as potential predictors of answer acceptance, including citation practices, use of personal experiences, and recognition of asker's concerns. Analysis. Logistic regression was employed to determine which variables significantly predict the likelihood of an answer being designated as the ‘accepted answer’ by the asker. Results. Personal experience sharing, recognition of asker's concerns, citing data sources, and including calls-to-action emerged as significant predictors of answer acceptance. Notably, professional credentials had a modest effect, while factors such as the use of analogies or citing health authorities were not significant predictors. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that effective vaccine communication on social Q&A platforms should balance factual information with personal narratives, address user concerns empathetically, and provide clear, actionable advice. These insights can inform strategies for health communicators and platform designers to enhance the quality and acceptance of vaccine information online.

Information Research an international electronic journalVol. 30(iConf)
University of Alabama (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
2.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.