This paper has been accepted and is currently in production.
It will appear shortly on 10.2196/82221
The final accepted version (not copyedited yet) is in this tab.
Online Information Behavior Regarding COVID-19 Vaccination: A Cluster Analysis of User Groups and their Association with Vaccination Behavior
ABSTRACT
Background:
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of effective health communica-tion and reliable information for crisis management, particularly following the intro-duction of vaccinations. Varied attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and an over-whelming amount of online information complicated communication and pandemic management. Previous studies have often focused on general vaccination behavior and its correlation with vaccination attitudes, establishing a link between information-seeking and vaccination decisions. However, there is insufficient analysis distinguish-ing specific user groups based on their actual online information behavior regarding COVID-19 vaccination and examining its correlation with vaccination behavior.
Objective:
This study aims to fill this research gap by identifying user groups based on their in-formation behavior and investigating its influence on vaccination uptake.
Methods:
As part of the INCOVI study, 1000 individuals were surveyed online (November 26th to December 8th, 2021) regarding their internet usage related to COVID-19 vaccina-tion. A hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted to identify user groups. Logistic regression analyses were then employed to explore correlations among the user groups and their demographic characteristics, willingness to vaccinate, knowledge of vaccina-tion, and health literacy. Additionally, a logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the influence of user groups and other factors on vaccination behavior.
Results:
Three user groups were identified: Frequent and Critical Information Evaluators (58.4%), who primarily relied on official information sources, exhibited a higher level of health literacy, and were older than the other groups; Infrequent and Passive Recipi-ents (28.5%), who rarely sought information actively and were younger than the other groups; and Frequent and Multi-Channel, Interaction-Focused Users (13.1%), who actively searched across multiple channels and engaged in information exchange. No-tably, the user groups did not significantly differ in knowledge or willingness to vac-cinate. User group affiliation, knowledge, and health literacy did not significantly in-fluence vaccination behavior. The strongest predictor of vaccination was pre-existing willingness to vaccinate. Additionally, women were more likely to be vaccinated than men, and individuals with medium or higher education levels were 6 or 11 times more likely to be vaccinated compared to those with only a basic level of education.
Conclusions:
The results highlight the complexity of the decision-making process regarding vaccina-tions; merely providing access to information does not appear to be the sole determin-ing factor. Individual conviction about vaccination, risk perception, and willingness to adapt to social norms are crucial factors. Segmenting the population into different user groups allows for more targeted communication tailored to the specific needs and be-liefs of each group. For Frequent and Critical Information Evaluators, providing well-founded and detailed information on public channels is important. Infrequent and Pas-sive Recipients benefit from straightforward formats, such as short explanatory videos, while Frequent and Multi-Channel, Interaction-Focused Users are better reached through interactive offerings on social media.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.