School of Social Science, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.
Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Subiaco, WA 6008, Australia.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 May 22;15(5):1044. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15051044.
This article is an in-depth analysis of the social nature of vaccine decision-making. It employs the sociological theory of Bourdieu and Ingram to consider how parents experience non-vaccination as a valued form of capital in specific communities, and how this can affect their decision-making. Drawing on research conducted in two Australian cities, our qualitative analysis of new interview data shows that parents experience disjuncture and tugs towards 'appropriate' forms of vaccination behavior in their social networks, as these link to broader behaviors around food, school choices and birth practices. We show how differences emerge between the two cities based on study designs, such that we are able to see some parents at the center of groups valorizing their decisions, whilst others feel marginalized within their communities for their decisions to vaccinate. We draw on the work of philosopher Mark Navin to consider how all parents join epistemic communities that reward compliance and conformity with the status quo and consider what this means for interventions that seek to influence the flow of pro-vaccine information through vaccine-critical social groups.
本文深入分析了疫苗决策的社会性。它运用布尔迪厄和英格拉姆的社会学理论,探讨了父母如何将非疫苗接种视为特定社区中一种有价值的资本形式,以及这如何影响他们的决策。本研究在澳大利亚的两个城市进行,通过对新访谈数据的定性分析表明,父母在其社交网络中经历了脱节和对“适当”疫苗接种行为的拉扯,因为这些行为与食物、学校选择和生育实践等更广泛的行为有关。我们展示了基于研究设计的两个城市之间的差异,以至于我们能够看到一些父母处于群体中心,他们对自己的决策表示赞赏,而另一些父母则因为决定接种疫苗而在社区中感到边缘化。我们借鉴了哲学家马克·纳文的观点,认为所有父母都加入了认识论社区,这些社区奖励与现状的一致性和顺从性,并考虑这对试图通过疫苗关键的社会群体来影响支持疫苗的信息流动的干预措施意味着什么。