The persuasiveness of different sources of information on the decision to vaccinate. A cross-sectional study in Germany during the pandemic at the turn of the year 2021/2022

Health information about vaccinations is communicated via various sources of information and is crucial for vaccination decisions. Information sources such as interpersonal sources, traditional print and digital media as well as social media offer information about the risks and benefits of vaccination. During health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic was, some information sources provide hanging or contradictory information, alongside with misinformation and disinformation. Little is known about the relationship between the reported persuasiveness of different sources of information for individual vaccination decisions and differences in this between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Utilizing data from 10,284 participants in the "Corona-Monitoring Nationwide" survey in Germany from winter 2021/22, this study explored the relationship between the persuasiveness of information sources and vaccination decisions, considering socio-demographic and pandemic-related factors. For more than half of respondents, talks with family, friends, and acquaintances were the most convincing. Traditional media like television and radio were reported by 44%. Newspapers/magazines (online or print) and talks with physicians were each found the most convincing by around one third. About one fifth were persuaded by public authority's flyers or websites. Less than a tenth each was convinced by social media/messenger services, brochures from pharmacies and health insurances, talks with pharmacy staff or online health portals. Significant differences emerged between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Unvaccinated people were four times more likely to report social media and messenger services as convincing compared to vaccinated people. Reporting talks with doctors and flyers/websites from public authorities as very persuasive significantly reduced the likelihood of being unvaccinated. The findings suggest that in future health crises, information should be disseminated through diverse sources, using both traditional and digital media, as well as interpersonal communication. Proactive science communication on social media and messenger services is crucial to counteract misinformation and disinformation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2025-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0333268
Primary Topic
Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The persuasiveness of different sources of information on the decision to vaccinate. A cross-sectional study in Germany during the pandemic at the turn of the year 2021/2022

Sarah Jane Böttger, Susanne Jordan, Sabine Zinn
PLoS ONE
Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
article

The persuasiveness of different sources of information on the decision to vaccinate. A cross-sectional study in Germany during the pandemic at the turn of the year 2021/2022

Sarah Jane Böttger, Susanne Jordan, Sabine Zinn
article en

Abstract

Health information about vaccinations is communicated via various sources of information and is crucial for vaccination decisions. Information sources such as interpersonal sources, traditional print and digital media as well as social media offer information about the risks and benefits of vaccination. During health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic was, some information sources provide hanging or contradictory information, alongside with misinformation and disinformation. Little is known about the relationship between the reported persuasiveness of different sources of information for individual vaccination decisions and differences in this between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Utilizing data from 10,284 participants in the "Corona-Monitoring Nationwide" survey in Germany from winter 2021/22, this study explored the relationship between the persuasiveness of information sources and vaccination decisions, considering socio-demographic and pandemic-related factors. For more than half of respondents, talks with family, friends, and acquaintances were the most convincing. Traditional media like television and radio were reported by 44%. Newspapers/magazines (online or print) and talks with physicians were each found the most convincing by around one third. About one fifth were persuaded by public authority's flyers or websites. Less than a tenth each was convinced by social media/messenger services, brochures from pharmacies and health insurances, talks with pharmacy staff or online health portals. Significant differences emerged between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Unvaccinated people were four times more likely to report social media and messenger services as convincing compared to vaccinated people. Reporting talks with doctors and flyers/websites from public authorities as very persuasive significantly reduced the likelihood of being unvaccinated. The findings suggest that in future health crises, information should be disseminated through diverse sources, using both traditional and digital media, as well as interpersonal communication. Proactive science communication on social media and messenger services is crucial to counteract misinformation and disinformation.

PLoS ONEVol. 20(9)
German Institute for Economic Research (DE), Robert Koch Institute (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
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.