信任、疫苗犹豫和COVID-19大流行:现象学视角

IF 1.4 2区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Tarun Kattumana
{"title":"信任、疫苗犹豫和COVID-19大流行:现象学视角","authors":"Tarun Kattumana","doi":"10.1080/02691728.2022.2115325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Vaccine hesitancy has been a major cause for concern throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The World Health Organization have previously addressed vaccine hesitancy via the ‘3C model’ (Convenience, Complacency, and Confidence). Recent scholarship has added two more ‘Cs’ (Context and Communication) to formulate a ‘5C model’ that is more equipped to adapt to the uncertainties of the pandemic. This paper focuses on the four ‘Cs’ that explicitly concerns trust (Complacency, Confidence, Context, and Communication) and phenomenologically distinguishes confidence from trust. Experts view vaccines in terms of confidence, where the prospect of an undesirable outcome is extremely rare. Hence, not vaccinating and compromising herd immunity is seen to be unreasonable. Hesitant individuals contest the expert perspective and view vaccines in terms of trust, where the prospect of disappointment is likely. From this perspective, to vaccinate is to take a risk, and it is within reason to have the freedom to choose otherwise. This paper focuses on the hesitant perspective to identify the two social indicators of trust in vaccines most prominently shown during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Global North: (i) the expert reaction to hesitant concerns and (ii) the loss of freedom in relation to vaccine requirements.","PeriodicalId":51614,"journal":{"name":"Social Epistemology","volume":"36 1","pages":"641 - 655"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trust, Vaccine Hesitancy, and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Phenomenological Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Tarun Kattumana\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02691728.2022.2115325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Vaccine hesitancy has been a major cause for concern throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The World Health Organization have previously addressed vaccine hesitancy via the ‘3C model’ (Convenience, Complacency, and Confidence). Recent scholarship has added two more ‘Cs’ (Context and Communication) to formulate a ‘5C model’ that is more equipped to adapt to the uncertainties of the pandemic. This paper focuses on the four ‘Cs’ that explicitly concerns trust (Complacency, Confidence, Context, and Communication) and phenomenologically distinguishes confidence from trust. Experts view vaccines in terms of confidence, where the prospect of an undesirable outcome is extremely rare. Hence, not vaccinating and compromising herd immunity is seen to be unreasonable. Hesitant individuals contest the expert perspective and view vaccines in terms of trust, where the prospect of disappointment is likely. From this perspective, to vaccinate is to take a risk, and it is within reason to have the freedom to choose otherwise. This paper focuses on the hesitant perspective to identify the two social indicators of trust in vaccines most prominently shown during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Global North: (i) the expert reaction to hesitant concerns and (ii) the loss of freedom in relation to vaccine requirements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51614,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Epistemology\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"641 - 655\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Epistemology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2022.2115325\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Epistemology","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2022.2115325","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要在整个新冠肺炎大流行期间,疫苗犹豫一直是令人担忧的主要原因。世界卫生组织此前曾通过“3C模式”(方便、自满和信心)解决疫苗犹豫问题。最近的学术研究又增加了两个“C”(上下文和沟通),以制定一个“5C模型”,该模型更适合适应疫情的不确定性。本文重点研究了明确涉及信任的四个“C”(自满、自信、语境和沟通),并从现象学上区分了信任和信任。专家们从信心的角度看待疫苗,在信心方面,出现不良结果的可能性极为罕见。因此,不接种疫苗和损害群体免疫被认为是不合理的。犹豫不决的人质疑专家的观点,并从信任的角度看待疫苗,这可能会让人失望。从这个角度来看,接种疫苗就是冒险,有理由自由选择其他方式。本文侧重于犹豫不决的观点,以确定在全球北方新冠肺炎大流行期间最突出的两个对疫苗信任的社会指标:(i)专家对犹豫不决的担忧的反应和(ii)与疫苗需求有关的自由丧失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trust, Vaccine Hesitancy, and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Phenomenological Perspective
ABSTRACT Vaccine hesitancy has been a major cause for concern throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The World Health Organization have previously addressed vaccine hesitancy via the ‘3C model’ (Convenience, Complacency, and Confidence). Recent scholarship has added two more ‘Cs’ (Context and Communication) to formulate a ‘5C model’ that is more equipped to adapt to the uncertainties of the pandemic. This paper focuses on the four ‘Cs’ that explicitly concerns trust (Complacency, Confidence, Context, and Communication) and phenomenologically distinguishes confidence from trust. Experts view vaccines in terms of confidence, where the prospect of an undesirable outcome is extremely rare. Hence, not vaccinating and compromising herd immunity is seen to be unreasonable. Hesitant individuals contest the expert perspective and view vaccines in terms of trust, where the prospect of disappointment is likely. From this perspective, to vaccinate is to take a risk, and it is within reason to have the freedom to choose otherwise. This paper focuses on the hesitant perspective to identify the two social indicators of trust in vaccines most prominently shown during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Global North: (i) the expert reaction to hesitant concerns and (ii) the loss of freedom in relation to vaccine requirements.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
17.60%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Social Epistemology provides a forum for philosophical and social scientific enquiry that incorporates the work of scholars from a variety of disciplines who share a concern with the production, assessment and validation of knowledge. The journal covers both empirical research into the origination and transmission of knowledge and normative considerations which arise as such research is implemented, serving as a guide for directing contemporary knowledge enterprises. Social Epistemology publishes "exchanges" which are the collective product of several contributors and take the form of critical syntheses, open peer commentaries interviews, applications, provocations, reviews and responses
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信