  The current development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 is unprecedented. Little
is known, however, about the nuanced public opinions on the vaccines on social
media. We adopt a human-guided machine learning framework using more than six
million tweets from almost two million unique Twitter users to capture public
opinions on the potential vaccines for SARS-CoV-2, classifying them into three
groups: pro-vaccine, vaccine-hesitant, and anti-vaccine. We aggregate opinions
at the state and country levels, and find that the major changes in the
percentages of different opinion groups roughly correspond to the major
pandemic-related events. Interestingly, the percentage of the pro-vaccine group
is lower in the Southeast part of the United States. Using multinomial logistic
regression, we compare demographics, social capital, income, religious status,
political affiliations, geo-locations, sentiment of personal pandemic
experience and non-pandemic experience, and county-level pandemic severity
perception of these three groups to investigate the scope and causes of public
opinions on vaccines. We find that socioeconomically disadvantaged groups are
more likely to hold polarized opinions on potential COVID-19 vaccines. People
who have the worst personal pandemic experience are more likely to hold the
anti-vaccine opinion. Next, by conducting counterfactual analyses, we find that
the U.S. public is most concerned about the safety, effectiveness, and
political issues regarding potential vaccines for COVID-19, and improving
personal pandemic experience increases the vaccine acceptance level. We believe
this is the first large-scale social media-based study to analyze public
opinions on potential COVID-19 vaccines that can inform more effective vaccine
distribution policies and strategies.
