| Abstract: |
The rapid circulation of health misinformation on social media
platforms such as Facebook has become a central concern for vaccine
communication research globally and in Nigeria specifically, where
the 2023 introduction of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine
into the national immunisation schedule has been accompanied by
persistent misinformation about infertility, promiscuity, and vaccine
safety. While empirical studies increasingly document the prevalence
and correlates of such misinformation, comparatively few studies in
the Nigerian context undertake a systematic, comparative theoretical
synthesis of the frameworks used to explain how misinformation
translates into reduced vaccine uptake. This paper addresses that gap
through a library-based (desk) review synthesising secondary
literature, peer-reviewed empirical studies, foundational theoretical
texts, and institutional reports on three theories commonly applied to
vaccine-related health behaviour: the Health Belief Model (HBM), the
Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), and the Social Amplification of
Risk Framework (SARF). Using thematic documentary analysis
rather than primary data collection, the review traces the origins, core
constructs, empirical applications, and critiques of each framework,
with particular attention to HPV vaccine misinformation in Nigerian
and comparable low- and middle-income settings. The review finds
that HBM best explains the cognitive endpoint at which
misinformation-inflated barriers and diminished perceived benefits
reduce vaccination likelihood, TPB best explains the intervening
social-psychological mechanism by which peer-shared
misinformation reshapes attitudes and subjective norms, and SARF
best explains the upstream communicative process by which a single
false claim is magnified through algorithmic and social amplification
into population-level hesitancy. A comparative analytical matrix and
an integrated conceptual pathway are presented, along with a
discussion of persistent gaps in the literature. The review concludes
that the three frameworks are complementary rather than competing
and recommends deliberate theoretical triangulation in future research
on social-media-mediated vaccine hesitancy |
