The State of Vaccine Skepticism in 4 Maps

Interactive graphic reveals data from a recent study on vaccine confidence around the world

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


A couple of weeks ago a paper about public confidence in vaccines was published in EBioMedicine. Researchers had asked some 66,000 people in 67 countries about their attitudes toward vaccines. The results were somewhat surprising, and for many who reported the story, France became an instant punch line, as its residents emerged as the least confident of all about vaccine safety. As the lead author of the study, Heidi Larson, points out, “Public trust in immunization is an increasingly important global health issue. Losses in confidence in vaccines and immunization programs can lead to vaccine reluctance and refusal, risking disease outbreaks and challenging immunization goals in high- and low-income settings.”

When I learned about the paper, I was intrigued, and wondered what the associated data might look like. I scanned a few news articles covering the study, expecting to see some interesting data visualizations summarizing the findings. However, the most I found was a figure from the paper including a static map, color coded by the percentage of respondents in each country who deemed vaccines unsafe. While this image was fairly informative, it seemed disproportionately focused on the topic of safety, whereas the survey also included interesting questions about vaccines’ importance, effectiveness, and compatibility with religious beliefs.

Eager to see more of the data visualized, I took matters into my own hands. After obtaining a full set of raw data from the researchers, I used the data visualization tool D3 to build the interactive graphic shown below. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The area designated as China in these maps refers to mainland China. Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Credit: AMANDA MONTANEZ; Source: “The State of Vaccine Confidence 2016: Global insights through a 67-country survey,” by Heidi J. Larson, et al., in EBioMedicine; September 13, 2016

It’s pretty interesting to explore and compare the four maps. One peculiar conflict emerges from Southeast Asia, where the public seemingly has little doubt as to the safety, importance, or effectiveness of vaccines, yet may eschew them on religious grounds. I am also perplexed by the instances where respondents apparently deemed vaccines important for children to have, but not effective. As so often happens with data-driven graphics, the visualization not only reveals information, but also raises new questions along the way.

Amanda Montañez is senior graphics editor and been at Scientific American since 2015. She produces and art directs information graphics for the Scientific American website and print magazine. Montañez has a bachelor's degree in studio art from Smith College and a master's in biomedical communications from the University of Toronto. Before starting in journalism, she worked as a freelance medical illustrator. Follow her on Bluesky @unamandita.bsky.social

More by Amanda Montañez

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe