ArticleScientific reports2025
Trust in institutions and misinformation susceptibility both independently explain vaccine skepticism.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Authority endorsements backfire and social norms fail to increase vaccination intent in post-COVID Kazakhstan.SSM - population health · 2026Article
- Status of immunology education and establishment of American Association of Immunologists-recommended immunology content guidelines for undergraduate medical education in the United States.ImmunoHorizons · 2026Article
- Preserving the future of vaccine science in the USA.Nature microbiology · 2026Article
- Ivermectin-Benzimidazole Prescribing Following Celebrity Endorsement.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Improving Vaccine Knowledge Among Adolescents: A Pre-Post School-Based Educational Intervention in Southern Italy.Vaccines · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Herd immunity for preventable childhood infectious diseases such as measles and mumps has come under threat in numerous countries, due to declining vaccination rates. This decline underscores the urgent need to understand the underlying mechanisms of vaccine skepticism. Institutional (dis)trust and belief in (vaccine) misinformation have been proposed as important factors, but their interconnectedness and potential mutual influence have remained elusive. Importantly, higher trust has been hypothesized to serve as a "buffer" against the adverse effects of misinformation belief. In this preregistered study (N = 1356, probability sample of Dutch households), we address these questions using validated, high-quality measures of vaccine attitudes, trust, and misinformation susceptibility. We find that specific trust in the government with respect to vaccinations is a much stronger predictor of vaccine skepticism than general trust in institutions. Moreover, susceptibility to misinformation is significantly associated with vaccine skepticism under all model specifications. Contrary to expectations, we find no evidence for the "buffer" hypothesis, suggesting that, while correlated, misinformation susceptibility and trust are distinctly related to vaccine skepticism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.