Media habits predict vaccination and trust in science — and not always how you’d expect

A new study published in Scientific Reports suggests that people who consume a more ideologically diverse mix of news sources are more likely to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and to trust science—regardless of their personal political beliefs. At the same time, consuming more conservative media was associated with lower vaccine uptake and less trust in science. Importantly, the negative influence of conservative media appeared to be weaker among individuals with a more ideologically varied media diet.

The research was conducted during a period when COVID-19 vaccines were widely available but public uptake had stalled. With vaccine hesitancy contributing to preventable deaths and ongoing strain on healthcare systems, the researchers sought to understand how different patterns of media consumption shaped public health behavior—especially beyond the influence of demographic factors and political ideology.

“While living through the COVID-19 pandemic, my collaborators and I could see the shift in discourse around government guidance, vaccines, and the politicization of COVID-19 disease across news media,” said study author Marrissa (Dani) Grant, a social psychology PhD student at CU Boulder.

“And because people were often socially isolated during lockdowns, it seemed like people were developing these parasocial relationships with political pundits and commentators. News more intensely became a social outlet for people, and their identities were getting wrapped up in the topics their trusted news sources talked about—like vaccination, masking, and social distancing. There was also this growing sense of tribalism, and the news media often seemed to be at the center of it all.”

To examine these questions, the researchers surveyed over 1,600 adults in the United States in spring 2022, a time when booster shots were widely available but not yet universally adopted. Participants reported their vaccination status, their trust in science, their political ideology, and how frequently they consumed news from a variety of media outlets. These outlets ranged from left-leaning sources like MSNBC to right-leaning ones like Fox News and the Daily Wire.

Each respondent’s media diet was evaluated in two main ways: the overall ideological tilt of the news sources they consumed and the ideological diversity of those sources. The researchers also examined whether these media patterns could explain differences in trust in science.

The findings revealed a consistent pattern. People who consumed more conservative media were less likely to be fully vaccinated and boosted. This relationship held even after accounting for age, education, ethnicity, cognitive reflection, and personal ideology. In contrast, individuals who reported consuming a broader mix of ideologically different news outlets were more likely to have received the vaccine and a booster shot.

Moreover, consuming a diverse media diet appeared to weaken the negative link between conservative media consumption and vaccine uptake. Among people who consumed mostly conservative media and little else, the odds of being vaccinated and boosted were significantly lower. But among those who mixed conservative media with liberal or centrist sources, the likelihood of being vaccinated was higher—even if they still favored right-leaning outlets overall.

A similar pattern emerged in analyses of trust in science. Conservative media use was associated with lower trust in scientific institutions. Yet this effect was less pronounced for people who consumed a wider variety of news sources. Unexpectedly, ideological diversity on its own was slightly associated with lower trust in science.

“We found a small negative correlation between diverse news consumption and trust in science, which at the start was quite surprising to me,” Grant told PsyPost. “But this finding suggests trust in science is not as simple an idea as you might initially think.”

“Are you referring to trust in science as an institution or your belief that scientists themselves can approach their work with integrity and have the best intentions for the public in mind (which historically has not always been the case)? I think this finding shows that trust in science is a complex phenomenon, and news media very likely impacts public trust—but we need to further pick apart the construct of trust in science more to make sense of that relationship.”

To ensure that these associations weren’t simply due to existing individual differences, the researchers revisited data collected from the same participants in 2020. At that time, respondents had reported their intentions to get a future COVID-19 vaccine and their media habits.

By comparing their earlier intentions and media use with actual vaccination behavior in 2022, the researchers found that changes in media consumption mattered. People who shifted toward a more ideologically diverse media diet or reduced their reliance on conservative outlets were more likely to follow through with vaccination.

This pattern also held when controlling for previous intentions to get vaccinated. For example, two people with similar conservative ideologies and comparable reluctance in 2020 differed in their vaccination status in 2022 depending on how their media habits changed. Those who broadened their media diet or reduced their conservative media exposure were more likely to get vaccinated.

The researchers also replicated their findings in a separate sample from the United Kingdom. Though overall levels of vaccine hesitancy were lower in the UK, the relationship between media diversity and vaccination intentions remained. In both countries, consuming a greater variety of ideological perspectives was linked to higher willingness to receive a vaccine.

To further explore what might be driving these associations, the researchers analyzed whether the reliability or sensationalism of news content influenced the results. Conservative outlets, on average, received lower reliability ratings from third-party media analysts, and participants who consumed less reliable media were also less likely to be vaccinated.

When media reliability was added to the statistical models, the effect of conservative media on vaccination weakened, suggesting that part of the link may be explained by the lower factual quality of some conservative outlets. Still, the positive effect of ideological diversity remained even after controlling for reliability and threat-based language in media content.

This study provides evidence that where people get their news—and how ideologically varied their sources are—matters for health behaviors and scientific trust. While personal ideology continues to play a role, these findings suggest that media habits shape how people think about public health guidance, especially during times of crisis. Encouraging broader media exposure may be one strategy to reduce the polarization of vaccine attitudes and build resilience against misinformation.

“Lots of people have experienced disagreement—sometimes heated and painful—about polarized topics with loved ones. And too often we come to the conclusion that those we disagree with are a lost cause,” Grant told PsyPost. “We believe that no amount of evidence will change their minds.”

“I think this work shows us that this often just isn’t true. When people engage with ideologically diverse media, they are exposed to new information, evidence, and perspectives. They can take this all in and update their beliefs about the world.”

However, the researchers acknowledged some limitations. The study was observational, meaning it cannot determine whether media habits directly caused changes in vaccine behavior. People who choose more ideologically diverse media may differ in unmeasured ways, such as openness to new information or influence from social networks.

“It is very important to keep in mind that this is a correlational study,” Grant noted, “and we must always remember that correlation does not equal causation!”

The researchers also hope to refine the concept of ideological diversity. It’s still unclear whether all types of diversity are equally helpful.

“For example, does cross-cutting correspond differently with outcomes compared to ideologically consistent media consumption? And what about high reliability versus low reliability diets?” Grant explained.

“I also hope to investigate the psychological processes that help explain the connection between ideologically diverse media diets and other polarized topics, like belief in human-caused climate change and support for climate mitigation policies. What is being conveyed that changes people’s minds?”

“Do people who consume diverse media develop the ability to better distinguish between good and bad argumentation?” Grant continued. “Are they better able to distinguish between misinformation and truth? Or are they gleaning something else, like cultivating more accurate estimates of social norms around community vaccination behaviors and public trust in vaccines?”

The study, “Ideological diversity of media consumption predicts COVID-19 vaccination,” was authored by Marrissa D. Grant, David M. Markowitz, David K. Sherman, Alexandra Flores, Stephan Dickert, Kimin Eom, Gabriela M. Jiga-Boy, Tehila Kogut, Marcus Mayorga, David Oonk, Eric J. Pedersen, Beatriz Pereira, Enrico Rubaltelli, Paul Slovic, Daniel Västfjäll, and Leaf Van Boven.