Survey finds physicians show stronger intergroup bias than public on vaccines

Photo by Sasun Bughdaryan / Unsplash

medRxiv Published April 26, 2026 Medically reviewed April 26, 2026 Study authors: Murakami, M.; Ohtake, F. DOI ↗ By Dr. Amelia Tan, PhD · Internal Medicine & Chronic Disease

Key Takeaway

Recognize that physicians may exhibit stronger intergroup bias than the public regarding vaccines, warranting awareness and communication strategies.

This review summarizes findings from an online survey conducted in Japan, which included 492 physicians and 5,252 members of the general public. The survey examined intergroup bias related to vaccines for influenza, measles, HPV, and COVID-19. Participants were categorized by physician status and agreement group, and the primary outcome was intergroup bias.

The results showed that intergroup bias was significantly positive in both agreement and disagreement groups across all vaccine types, with a higher effect size in the agreement group. Notably, physicians exhibited higher intergroup bias than the general public. The authors did not report any limitations, adverse events, or funding sources.

As an observational survey, these findings cannot establish causality. The authors suggest that interventions to raise physicians' awareness of their own bias, alongside communication strategies for vaccine-hesitant individuals, are needed. Clinicians should interpret these results with caution given the study's design and lack of reported limitations.

Study Details

EvidenceLevel 5

PublishedApr 2026

View Original Abstract ↓

While vaccination conflicts have become apparent, physicians' attitudes toward those with differing views remain unclear. Through an online survey of 492 physicians and 5,252 members of the general public in Japan in February 2026, we investigated attitudes toward four vaccines (influenza, measles, HPV, and COVID-19). Intergroup bias was assessed as ingroup minus outgroup attitudes using a feeling thermometer. Multilevel regression examined associations with agreement group and physician status. Intergroup bias was significantly positive in both agreement and disagreement groups across all vaccine types, and was higher in the agreement group. Physicians exhibited higher intergroup bias than the general public. These findings indicate that vaccination conflict is bidirectional: physicians, often viewed as targets of hostility from vaccine-hesitant individuals, themselves exhibit greater intergroup bias toward those with opposing views. Interventions to raise physicians' awareness of their own bias, alongside communication strategies for vaccine-hesitant individuals, are needed.