Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 October 2021 | Story Angie Vorster | Photo Supplied
Angie Vorster is a Clinical Psychologist in the School of Clinical Medicine, University of the Free State (UFS), and believes that the only way to get rid of COVID-19, or at least to continue our lives alongside it, is for all of us to be vaccinated against this deadly virus

Opinion article by Angie Vorster, Clinical Psychologist in the School of Clinical Medicine, University of the Free State.


The World Mental Health Day campaign has chosen ‘Mental Health in an Unequal World’ as the theme for 2021. This is partly to raise awareness of the distinct polarisation between countries and individuals that has been highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic over the past two years.  Access to health-care resources is significantly impinging the ability of countries across the world to address the effects of the pandemic, and stark inequality regarding pivotal elements such as access to vaccines has become visible. Obtaining, storing, and distributing vaccines has proven to add another burden to countries that are already financially and resource-impeded. Yet, once South Africa was lucky enough to secure adequate amounts of vaccines, we were faced with a baffling dilemma. How to get our residents to actually take it? In trying to understand the psychology behind vaccine hesitancy, it is interesting to note that the World Health Organisation listed vaccine hesitancy (delaying or refusing vaccination) as one of the top ten threats to global health – well before the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus. 

Understanding why people refuse or resist vaccination

To understand why people – who are otherwise reasonable, conscientious, and informed individuals – would refuse or resist vaccination, it is helpful to look at the 5C model. The first aspect is confidence – the extent to which the person trusts that the vaccine is safe and will in fact do what it is said to do. Confidence is also affected by the level of trust that the individual has in the system that dispatches the vaccine – consequently, individuals who are hesitant to vaccinate are likely to be suspicious of authority figures and structures. Another factor is the number of constraints that individuals face in accessing the vaccine. If there are many barriers (e.g., unable to afford transport to the vaccination site, unable to take time off work, etc.) in terms of the calculation of costs versus benefits, obviously it would be easier to delay or refuse vaccination. Interestingly, perceived scarcity makes items/events more desirable. Perhaps it is the very fact that the vaccine is free and available that makes people not interested in receiving it. 

Having a sense of collective responsibility and altruism are important characteristics in those who submit to vaccination. People who refuse vaccination tend to be more individualistically orientated and less motivated by the greater good of all, than by their own personal preferences. And this brings us to the final C, which is complacency. People who perceive the risk of COVID-19 as low tend to feel less urgency to vaccinate. Unfortunately, these are the patients who admit to COVID ward front-line workers that they now regret not getting vaccinated when they had the chance; instead, they frequently come to this realisation once their prognosis is terminal and they are facing the harrowing reality of dying, separated from their loved ones. 

And then we all know someone who believes in an ‘alternative’ explanation for the COVID-19 virus and its vaccine. There are many hypotheses as to why people prefer conspiracy theories over scientific truth – some of which include the fact that the science behind understanding viruses and their prevention is quite abstract and too complicated for lay people to understand. Unless they witness the devastating impact of the virus first-hand – it may be difficult to comprehend that an invisible entity can do so much damage. Another explanation is that the truth of a natural disaster such as a pandemic, which can occur at any time, randomly, and without warning, catching humanity off guard, is just too frightening to accept. So, it makes us feel safer to believe that humans ARE in fact in control and actually created COVID-19 for some larger sinister goal. Otherwise, we are left to contemplate how utterly vulnerable we all really are. Instead, we deny reality and substitute it with something that makes us feel a bit better. 

How to encourage all citizens to get vaccinated

So, how do we encourage all citizens to get vaccinated in order for our society to regain some pre-pandemic normality? Force, anger, and frustration (which are undoubtedly justified, particularly by those who work on the front line, and by those who have lost loved ones due to this virus) are not going to get us there. Instead, we need religious and other leaders to set the example and publicly advocate for vaccination. We need to tailor the information to the vast majority of South Africans who are not science-literate, making it accessible and understandable in their home language. Unfortunately, there is a significant percentage who will not be swayed by these actions, and for these fellow South Africans I have the following message:

It does not matter anymore whether or not COVID-19 is in fact the product of a global conspiracy and whether or not the companies that create vaccines do so only for financial gain. It does not matter that this all happened very fast and that we all realised how terribly weak and vulnerable the human body is. What does matter is that this virus is here. In our homes, our schools, cities, and country. And the only way to get rid of it, or at least to continue our lives alongside it, is for all of us to be vaccinated. We have science – facts, not opinions or feelings or theories or beliefs – to tell us that vaccines are safe and effective. In ten years from now, this will be the plague of 2020. I hope that you will be able to say that you were brave, even though you were scared, even though you were unsure, even though you might have been fine without the vaccine, but that you were strong enough and kind enough and human enough to do this small thing for the greater good of humanity. And our children will thank you for restoring connection and hugs, concerts, and playtime at school without distancing and sanitiser and masks. You will have done something important. For your community and your country and in fact, the world. This is your chance to be part of a great victory of humanity over a seemingly insurmountable tide of death and suffering. Our hope lies in you. Take this great responsibility, wear it with pride and importance, and meet us at the other side of COVID-19.

News Archive

Code-switching, tokenism and consumerism in print advertising
2014-10-27

Code-switching, linguistic tokenism and modern consumerism in contemporary South African print advertising. This is the current research focus of two lecturers from the Faculty of the Humanities at the UFS, Prof Angelique van Niekerk and Dr Thinus Conradie.

The act of switching between two or more languages is replete with socio-cultural meaning, and can be deployed to advance numerous communicative strategies, including attempts at signalling cultural familiarity and group affiliation (Chung 2006).

For advertising purposes, Fairclough’s (1989) seminal work on the ideological functions of language remark on the usefulness of code-switching as a means of fostering an advertiser-audience relationship that is conducive to persuasion. In advertising, code-switching is a valuable means with which a brand may be invested with a range of positive associations. In English-dominated media, these associations derive from pre-existing connotations that target audiences already hold for a particular (non-English) language. Where exclusivity and taste, for example, are associated with a particular European language (such as French), advertising may use this languages to invest the advertised brand with a sense of exclusivity and taste.

In addition, empirical experiments with sample audiences (in the field of consumer research) suggest that switching from English to the first language of the target audience, is liable to yield positive results in terms of purchase intentions (Bishop and Peterson 2011). This effect is enhanced under the influence of modern consumerism, in which consumption is linked to the performance of identity and ‘[b]rands are more than just products; they are statements of affiliation and belonging’ (Ngwenya 2011, 2; cf. Nuttall 2004; Jones 2013).

In South African print magazines, where the hegemony of English remains largely uncontested, incorporating components of indigenous languages and Afrikaans may similarly be exploited for commercial ends. Our analysis suggests that the most prevalent form of code-switching from English to indigenous South African languages represents what we have coded as linguistic tokenism. That is, in comparison with the more expansive use of both Afrikaans and foreign languages (such as French), code-switching is used in a more limited manner, and mainly to presuppose community and solidarity with first-language speakers of indigenous languages. In cases of English-to-Afrikaans code-switching, our findings echo the trends observed for languages such as French and German. That is, the language is exploited for pre-existing associations. However, in contrast with French (often associated with prestige) and German (often associated with technical precision), Afrikaans is used to invoke cultural stereotypes, notably a self-satirical celebration of Afrikaner backwardness and/or lack of refinement that is often interpolated with hyper-masculinity.

References


We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept