Rethinking How We Talk About Vaccines
Rethinking How We Talk About Vaccines
Health campaigns often rely on stories, that is, personal narratives that tug at the heart and bring statistics to life. But are stories always the best way to encourage behavior change? Our research explored that very question in the context of HPV vaccination.
What’s the Deal with Message Format?
What’s the Deal with Message Format?
In health communication, messages often fall into two camps: narratives and non-narratives. Narratives are character-driven stories, like a parent describing their child’s vaccine experience. Non-narratives, on the other hand, are straightforward, fact-based statements, such as infographics or bullet points. While stories tend to grab attention, facts may offer clarity. We wanted to know which is more persuasive, and under what conditions.
Parents, Posts, and a Twitter Experiment
Parents, Posts, and a Twitter Experiment
We recruited nearly 600 parents with children aged 9–14 who hadn’t yet started the HPV vaccine series. Participants were randomly assigned to read either a narrative or non-narrative set of Twitter posts (when X was still called Twitter) about HPV vaccination. But there was a twist: we also asked them where they stood in their decision-making—whether they hadn’t considered the vaccine, were thinking about it, or were ready to act.
So, What Did We Learn?
So, What Did We Learn?
The short version: timing matters. For parents who weren’t ready to consider the vaccine, plain facts (non-narratives) were actually more persuasive than stories. But for those already contemplating or planning to vaccinate, either format worked. In other words, health promotion isn’t about pushing one message—it’s about sending the right one, at the right moment.
Explore the full study here.
