Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news

"Addiction is Not a Choice." #narcansaveslives: Collective Voice in Harm Reduction on TikTok

Using 100 videos posted to TikTok by harm reduction creators with the hashtags #narcansaveslives and #naloxonesaveslives, this study examines who is posting, what they are saying, and how they are explaining Narcan/naloxone to their followers. Incorporating the concept of reverse agenda setting, we examine how, through hashtags, TikTok creators can set the agenda for what is important to discuss in the harm reduction space. Findings demonstrate that harm reduction creators have developed a collective voice and created an affective public, attempting to educate others, shed stigma, and normalize the conversation around harm reduction. These creators are using TikTok to educate followers about the prevalence of opioid use, the availability of Narcan/naloxone, correcting misinformation, and discussing the reality of recovery. Echoing prior studies, this research illustrates how TikTok has become an essential resource for health questions, including opioid use. Practical implications are also discussed.

Religious proximity and misinformation: Experimental evidence from a mobile phone-based campaign in India

We investigate how religion concordance influences the effectiveness of preventive health campaigns. Conducted during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in two major Indian cities marked by Hindu-Muslim tensions, we randomly assigned a representative sample of slum residents to receive either a physician-delivered information campaign promoting health-related preventive practices, or uninformative control messages on their mobile phones. Messages, introduced by a local citizen (the sender), were cross-randomized to start with a greeting signaling either a Hindu or a Muslim identity, manipulating religion concordance between sender and receiver. We found that doctor messages increased compliance with recommended practices and beliefs in their efficacy. Our findings suggest that the campaign's impact is primarily driven by shared religion between sender and receiver, leading to increased message engagement and compliance with recommended practices. Additionally, we observe that religion concordance helps protect against misinformation.

TikTok as a Source of Health Information and Misinformation for Young Women in the United States: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

TikTok is one of the most-used and fastest-growing social media platforms in the world, and recent reports indicate that it has become an increasingly popular source of news and information in the United States. These trends have important implications for public health because an abundance of health information exists on the platform. Women are among the largest group of TikTok users in the United States and may be especially affected by the dissemination of health information on TikTok. Prior research has shown that women are not only more likely to look for information on the internet but are also more likely to have their health-related behaviors and perceptions affected by their involvement with social media.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a survey of young women in the United States to better understand their use of TikTok for health information as well as their perceptions of TikTok's health information and health communication sources.

METHODS

A web-based survey of US women aged 18 to 29 years (N=1172) was conducted in April-May 2023. The sample was recruited from a Qualtrics research panel and 2 public universities in the United States.

RESULTS

The results indicate that the majority of young women in the United States who have used TikTok have obtained health information from the platform either intentionally (672/1026, 65.5%) or unintentionally (948/1026, 92.4%). Age (959/1026, 93.47%; r=0.30; P<.001), education (959/1026, 93.47%; ρ=0.10; P=.001), and TikTok intensity (ie, participants' emotional connectedness to TikTok and TikTok's integration into their daily lives; 959/1026, 93.47%; r=0.32; P<.001) were positively correlated with overall credibility perceptions of the health information. Nearly the entire sample reported that they think that misinformation is prevalent on TikTok to at least some extent (1007/1026, 98.15%), but a third-person effect was found because the young women reported that they believe that other people are more susceptible to health misinformation on TikTok than they personally are (t1025=21.16; P<.001). Both health professionals and general users were common sources of health information on TikTok: 93.08% (955/1026) of the participants indicated that they had obtained health information from a health professional, and 93.86% (963/1026) indicated that they had obtained health information from a general user. The respondents showed greater preference for health information from health professionals (vs general users; t1025=23.75; P<.001); the respondents also reported obtaining health information from health professionals more often than from general users (t1025=8.13; P<.001), and they were more likely to act on health information from health professionals (vs general users; t1025=12.74; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that health professionals and health communication scholars need to proactively consider using TikTok as a platform for disseminating health information to young women because young women are obtaining health information from TikTok and prefer information from health professionals.

+Ciencia: a training program to increase evidence-based science communication and literacy for Hispanic high school and undergraduate students

Science misinformation represents a significant challenge for the scientific community. Hispanic communities are particularly vulnerable due to language barriers and the lack of accessible information in Spanish. We identified that a key step toward enhancing the accessibility of information for non-native English-speaking communities involves imparting science communication education and training to Hispanic youth. Our goal was to provide them with the skills to become science ambassadors who can effectively engage with their communities and bridge communication gaps. To address this, we developed the first science communication training program in Spanish for Hispanic high school and undergraduate students in Puerto Rico. The program called +Ciencia aims to provide training and education on science communication for Hispanic minorities through experiential and collaborative learning. In the short term, our multifaceted approach works to counter misinformation and promote science literacy within the broader community. Over the long term, our grassroots efforts with students will evolve into a generation of professionals equipped with strong engagement skills and comprehensive training in science communication with a specific focus on Hispanic audiences. Herein, we describe the components of this educational program and provide open access to educational materials and articles developed by three cohorts.

"I Do Not Trust Health Information Shared by My Parents": Credibility Judgement of Health (Mis)information on Social Media in China

The surge of health misinformation on social media poses a threat to public health. This qualitative study reports how users process health misinformation from the dominant strong-tie social media, WeChat, in China. We conducted ten on-site focus groups involving 76 adult participants. Drawing on the apomediation theory and the dual processing model of credibility assessment, we found the heuristic approach to processing health information was the dominant route of engagement. We identified four categories of credibility assessment cues, including (1) expertise, authority, and commercial intent of original sources, (2) expertise of apomediaries (i.e. social media information sharers) and generational bias, (3) clickbait and sensational content versus objective scientific style, and (4) disconfirmation versus confirmation bias. We highlight that apomediaries are playing an increasingly important role in informing credibility judgment. Specifically, younger adults have formed a generational bias of deeming older apomediaries as cues of lower credibility.

Individuals, Collectives, and Individuals in Collectives: The Ineliminable Role of Dependence

Our beliefs are inextricably shaped through communication with others. Furthermore, even conversation we conduct in pairs may itself be taking place across a wider, connected social network. Our communications, and with that our thoughts, are consequently typically those of individuals in collectives. This has fundamental consequences with respect to how our beliefs are shaped. This article examines the role of dependence on our beliefs and seeks to demonstrate its importance with respect to key phenomena involving collectives that have been taken to indicate irrationality. It is argued that (with the benefit of hindsight) these phenomena no longer seem surprising when one considers the multiple dependencies that govern information acquisition and the evaluation of cognitive agents in their normal (i.e., social) context.

Fake news research trends, linkages to generative artificial intelligence and sustainable development goals

In the digital age, where information is a cornerstone for decision-making, social media's not-so-regulated environment has intensified the prevalence of fake news, with significant implications for both individuals and societies. This study employs a bibliometric analysis of a large corpus of 9678 publications spanning 2013-2022 to scrutinize the evolution of fake news research, identifying leading authors, institutions, and nations. Three thematic clusters emerge: Disinformation in social media, COVID-19-induced infodemics, and techno-scientific advancements in auto-detection. This work introduces three novel contributions: 1) a pioneering mapping of fake news research to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), indicating its influence on areas like health (SDG 3), peace (SDG 16), and industry (SDG 9); 2) the utilization of Prominence percentile metrics to discern critical and economically prioritized research areas, such as misinformation and object detection in deep learning; and 3) an evaluation of generative AI's role in the propagation and realism of fake news, raising pressing ethical concerns. These contributions collectively provide a comprehensive overview of the current state and future trajectories of fake news research, offering valuable insights for academia, policymakers, and industry.

Knowledge through social networks: Accuracy, error, and polarisation

This paper examines the fundamental problem of testimony. Much of what we believe to know we know in good part, or even entirely, through the testimony of others. The problem with testimony is that we often have very little on which to base estimates of the accuracy of our sources. Simulations with otherwise optimal agents examine the impact of this for the accuracy of our beliefs about the world. It is demonstrated both where social networks of information dissemination help and where they hinder. Most importantly, it is shown that both social networks and a common strategy for gauging the accuracy of our sources give rise to polarisation even for entirely accuracy motivated agents. Crucially these two factors interact, amplifying one another's negative consequences, and this side effect of communication in a social network increases with network size. This suggests a new causal mechanism by which social media may have fostered the increase in polarisation currently observed in many parts of the world.

COVID-19 coverage from six network and cable news sources in the United States: Representation of misinformation, correction, and portrayals of severity

The COVID-19 pandemic in the United States is marked by divisions in perceptions of disease severity as well as misperceptions about the virus and vaccine that vary along ideological and political party lines. Perceptual differences may be due to differences in the information about the virus that individuals are exposed to within their own identity-affirming ideological news bubbles. This content analysis of six different national network transcripts highlights differences in coverage of severity, and the prevalence of misinformation and its correction that are consistent with previously established preferred news channels of conservatives/Republicans and liberals/Democrats and their perceptions and misperceptions about the pandemic. Results contribute to the growing body of country-specific COVID-19 media studies that allow for comparisons across nations with different cultures and media systems, as these factors play a pivotal role in national responses and experiences.

Understanding ethics of reporting health related events in media: A qualitative phenomenological study in Karachi and Peshawar

Objective

The specific objectives of this study were to identify the ethical issues in reporting of health-related events in media and suggest ways to improve it.

Method

This was a qualitative phenomenological study conducted by APPNA Institute of Public Health, Jinnah Sindh Medical University in collaboration with Institute of Public Health, Khyber Medical University from January to April 2022. A total of 38 focus group discussions and in-depth interviews were conducted either face to face at place of convenience of interviewees or online. The participants were health reporters, healthcare workers (HCWs), and representatives of law enforcement agencies in two cities i.e., Karachi and Peshawar. Data were analyzed by using the deductive and inductive approaches, by four independent experts including the Principal Investigator (PI) and three research fellows.

Results

Ethical issues related to health reporting in the field included interference of the reporters in rescue efforts during an emergency and interference in emergency medical care of the victims. In reporting, careless disregard for patient confidentiality and privacy; using unreliable sources of information; using wrong terminology; sensationalizing the news and jumping to conclusions in cases of malpractice were reported as main problems. Negative influences on health reporting included poor training of the reporters on health reporting ethics, organizational pressures, and lack of cooperation by relevant health authorities.

Conclusion

The quality of health reporting can be improved by building the capacity of health reporters in understanding the ethical issues and their social responsibilities toward health.

What Are They Thinking? Exploring College Students' Mental Processing and Decision-Making About COVID-19 (Mis)Information on Social Media

More and more, people are abandoning the active pursuit of news, assuming instead that important information will be pushed to them via their social media networks. This approach to news makes people susceptible to the vast amounts of misinformation online, yet research on the effects of this kind of engagement is mixed. More research is needed on technology incidental learning effects, defined as changes in knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors as a result of being exposed to information while pursuing goals other than learning (e.g., entertainment). In this study, we examined how 51 college students responded to incidental exposure to accurate and inaccurate COVID-19 information delivered via a simulated social media environment. Participants' verbalizations during think-aloud protocols indicated numerous mental processes including cognition, metacognition, epistemic cognition, motivation, and emotions. Positively valenced mental processing was more often expressed with accurate COVID-19 information and negatively valenced mental processing was more often verbalized with misinformation. Negatively valenced evaluations of knowledge claims and sources predicted less engagement with COVID-19 misinformation posts. However, in many cases the relations among verbalized mental processing and behavioral responses were complex or non-obvious. For example, participants' positive metacognition and epistemic cognition verbalizations decreased their likelihood of engaging with accurate COVID-19 information, whereas positive interest was associated with an increased likelihood of engaging with misinformation. Our findings have implications for how to accurately infer people's beliefs and intentions from their social media behaviors and how to design interventions to help people be more active and thoughtful consumers of online information.

Heuristic Information Processing as a Mediating Factor in the Process of Exposure to COVID-19 Vaccine Information and Misinformation Sharing on Social Media

Social media use for risk communication during the COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable concerns about an overabundance of information, particularly misinformation. However, how exposure to COVID-19 information on social media can lead to subsequent misinformation sharing during the pandemic has received little research attention. This study adopted the social amplification of risk framework to delineate how exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information on social media can be associated with individuals' misinformation sharing through heuristic information processing. The role of social media trust was also examined. Results from an online survey (N = 1488) of Chinese Internet users revealed that exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information on social media was associated with misinformation sharing, mediated by both affect heuristics (i.e., negative affect toward the COVID-19 pandemic in general) and availability heuristics (i.e., perceived misinformation availability). Importantly, both high and low levels of trust in social media strengthened the mediating associations. While a low level of trust strengthened the association between exposure to COVID-19 vaccine information on social media and the affect heuristics, a high level of trust strengthened its association with the availability heuristics, both of which were associated with misinformation sharing. Our findings suggest that heuristic information processing is essential in amplifying the spread of misinformation after exposure to risk information on social media. It is also suggested that individuals should maintain a middle level of trust in social media, being open while critical of risk information on social media.

Comparing the effects of simple and refutational narratives in misinformation correction: The moderating roles of correction placement and issue involvement

The study examines whether adding a refutational ending to narrative messages improves correction effectiveness and how the effect differs depending on whether the correction message is presented before or after exposure to misinformation. A 2 (narrative format: simple vs refutational narrative) × 2 (correction placement: prebunking vs debunking) between-subjects online experiment (N = 281) with US participants was conducted to correct misinformation about human papilloma virus vaccines. The results suggested that the refutational narrative was more effective in reducing misbeliefs in prebunking, whereas the simple narrative was more effective in debunking. This interaction was further moderated by issue involvement. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

(Why) Is Misinformation a Problem?

In the last decade there has been a proliferation of research on misinformation. One important aspect of this work that receives less attention than it should is exactly why misinformation is a problem. To adequately address this question, we must first look to its speculated causes and effects. We examined different disciplines (computer science, economics, history, information science, journalism, law, media, politics, philosophy, psychology, sociology) that investigate misinformation. The consensus view points to advancements in information technology (e.g., the Internet, social media) as a main cause of the proliferation and increasing impact of misinformation, with a variety of illustrations of the effects. We critically analyzed both issues. As to the effects, misbehaviors are not yet reliably demonstrated empirically to be the outcome of misinformation; correlation as causation may have a hand in that perception. As to the cause, advancements in information technologies enable, as well as reveal, multitudes of interactions that represent significant deviations from ground truths through people's new way of knowing (intersubjectivity). This, we argue, is illusionary when understood in light of historical epistemology. Both doubts we raise are used to consider the cost to established norms of liberal democracy that come from efforts to target the problem of misinformation.

Characterizing the semantic features of climate change misinformation on Chinese social media

Climate change misinformation leads to significant adverse impacts and has become a global concern. Identifying misinformation and investigating its characteristics are of great importance to counteract misinformation. Therefore, this study aims to characterize the semantic features (frames and authority references) of climate change misinformation in the context of Chinese social media. Posts concerning climate change were collected from Weibo between January 2010 and December 2020. First, veracity, frames, and authority references were manually labeled. Then, we applied logistic regression to examine the relationship between information veracity and semantic features. The results revealed that posts concerning environmental and health impact and science and technology were more likely to be misinformation. Moreover, posts referencing non-specific authority sources are more likely to be misinformed than posts making no references to any authority references. This study provides a theoretical understanding of the semantic characteristics of climate change misinformation and practical suggestions for combating them.

Selective and deceptive citation in the construction of dueling consensuses

The COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to study science communication and, in particular, the transmission of consensus. In this study, we show how "science communicators," writ large to include both mainstream science journalists and practiced conspiracy theorists, transform scientific evidence into two dueling consensuses using the effectiveness of masks as a case study. We do this by compiling one of the largest, hand-coded citation datasets of cross-medium science communication, derived from 5 million Twitter posts of people discussing masks. We find that science communicators selectively uplift certain published works while denigrating others to create bodies of evidence that support and oppose masks, respectively. Anti-mask communicators in particular often use selective and deceptive quotation of scientific work and criticize opposing science more than pro-mask communicators. Our findings have implications for scientists, science communicators, and scientific publishers, whose systems of sharing (and correcting) knowledge are highly vulnerable to what we term adversarial science communication.

Impact of misinformation in the evolution of collective cooperation on networks

Human societies are organized and developed through collective cooperative behaviours. Based on the information in their environment, individuals can form collective cooperation by strategically changing unfavourable surroundings and imitating superior behaviours. However, facing the rampant proliferation and spreading of misinformation, we still lack systematic investigations into the impact of misinformation on the evolution of collective cooperation. Here, we study this problem by classical evolutionary game theory. We find that the existence of misinformation generally impedes the emergence of collective cooperation on networks, although the level of cooperation is slightly higher for weak social cooperative dilemma below a proven threshold. We further show that this possible advantage diminishes as social connections become denser, suggesting that the detrimental effect of misinformation further increases when 'social viscosity' is low. Our results uncover the quantitative effect of misinformation on suppressing collective cooperation, and pave the way for designing possible mechanisms to improve collective cooperation.

Deepfakes and scientific knowledge dissemination

Science misinformation on topics ranging from climate change to vaccines have significant public policy repercussions. Artificial intelligence-based methods of altering videos and photos (deepfakes) lower the barriers to the mass creation and dissemination of realistic, manipulated digital content. The risk of exposure to deepfakes among education stakeholders has increased as learners and educators rely on videos to obtain and share information. We field the first study to understand the vulnerabilities of education stakeholders to science deepfakes and the characteristics that moderate vulnerability. We ground our study in climate change and survey individuals from five populations spanning students, educators, and the adult public. Our sample is nationally representative of three populations. We found that 27-50% of individuals cannot distinguish authentic videos from deepfakes. All populations exhibit vulnerability to deepfakes which increases with age and trust in information sources but has a mixed relationship with political orientation. Adults and educators exhibit greater vulnerability compared to students, indicating that those providing education are especially susceptible. Vulnerability increases with exposure to potential deepfakes, suggesting that deepfakes become more pernicious without interventions. Our results suggest that focusing on the social context in which deepfakes reside is one promising strategy for combatting deepfakes.

The Influence of Social Media and Institutional Trust on Vaccine Hesitancy in France: Examining Direct and Mediating Processes

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) remains an ongoing challenge in French society. This project explored how institutional trust and preference for information via social media (PISM) drive hesitancy. Across a large, nationally represented population, our findings show that PISM and trust are strongly correlated measures, with both independently predicting VH. Subsequent mediation tests show that social media operates as primarily an indirect contributor to VH through trust. Additional tests involving VH and non-VH typologies revealed that institutional trust consistently predicts greater general support for vaccines and reduced distrust in vaccination. Conversely, PISM directly drives vaccine distrust, with its impact on non-hesitancy fully mediated by institutional trust. Overall, these findings point to the relevance for researchers and public health deciders to address the nature by which people utilize social media information resources and how that interacts with levels of trust for national institutions.

Science Communication Training Imparts Confidence and Influences Public Engagement Activity

The impacts of science are felt across all socio-ecological levels, ranging from the individual to societal. In order to adapt or respond to scientific discoveries, novel technologies, or biomedical or environmental challenges, a fundamental understanding of science is necessary. However, antiscientific rhetoric, mistrust in science, and the dissemination of misinformation hinder the promotion of science as a necessary and beneficial component of our world. Scientists can promote scientific literacy by establishing dialogues with nonexperts, but they may find a lack of formal training as a barrier to public engagement. To address this, the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) launched the Art of Science Communication course in 2015 in order to provide scientists at all career stages with introductory science communication training. In 2020, we conducted a retrospective survey of former participants to evaluate how the course had impacted participants' science communication behaviors and their confidence engaging with nonexperts, as well as other benefits to their professional development. We found that scientists were significantly more likely to communicate with nonexpert audiences following the course compared to before (77% versus 51%; P < 0.0001). In addition, quantitative and qualitative data suggested that scientists were more confident in their ability to communicate science after completing the course (median of 8, standard deviation [SD] of 0.98 versus median of 5, SD of 1.57; P < 0.0001). Qualitative responses from participants supported quantitative findings. This suggested that the Art of Science Communication course is highly effective at improving the confidence of scientists to engage with the public and other nonexpert audiences regardless of career status. These data-driven perspectives provide a rationale for the implementation of broadly accessible science communication training programs that promote public engagement with science.

Game-based inoculation versus graphic-based inoculation to combat misinformation: a randomized controlled trial

Misinformation affects various aspects of people's lives, such as politics, entertainment, and social interactions. However, effective intervention measures to combat misinformation are lacking. The inoculation theory has become a prevalent measure of misinformation. This study employed inoculation theory and developed an interactive game to help the public counter misinformation. In this game, players take on the role of the misinformation spreader, intending to add more followers to their virtual accounts using different strategies. A total of 180 Chinese participants were randomly assigned to game-based inoculation, graphic-based inoculation, and control groups. The results indicated that both types of inoculation interventions significantly decreased the perceived credibility and sharing intention of misinformation. Game-based inoculation was more effective than graphic-based inoculation in terms of misinformation perceived credibility, and the intervention effects were stable after 2 weeks. The graphic-based inoculation contained the sleeper effect, which interventions required a period of time to take effect. Neither inoculation produced countereffects on perceived credibility and nor sharing intention of accurate information.

Credibility of vaccine-related content on Twitter during COVID-19 pandemic

During national COVID-19 vaccine campaigns, people continuously engaged on Twitter to receive updates on the latest public health information, and to discuss and share their experiences. During this time, the spread of misinformation was widespread, which threatened the uptake of vaccines. It is therefore critical to understand the reasons behind vaccine misinformation and strategies to mitigate it. The current research aimed to understand the content of misleading tweets and the characteristics of their corresponding accounts. We performed a machine learning approach to identify misinformation in vaccine-related tweets, and calculated the demographic, engagement metrics and bot-like activities of corresponding accounts. We found critical periods where high amounts of misinformation coincided with important vaccine announcements, such as emergency approvals of vaccines. Moreover, we found Asian countries had a lower percentage of misinformation shared compared to Europe and North America. Our results showed accounts spreading misinformation had an overall 10% greater likelihood of bot activity and 15% more astroturf bot activity than accounts spreading accurate information. Furthermore, we found that accounts spreading misinformation had five times fewer followers and three times fewer verified badges than fact-sharing accounts. The findings of this study may help authorities to develop strategies to fight COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and improve vaccine uptake.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Content Analysis of Nigerian YouTube Videos

Vaccination is key to developing herd immunity against COVID-19; however, the attitude of Nigerians towards being vaccinated stalled at the 70% vaccination target. This study engages Theory of Planned Behaviour to analyse the tone of Nigerian YouTube headlines/titles, and the tone of YouTube users' comments to examine the causes of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. YouTube videos uploaded between March 2021 and December 2022 were analysed using a content analytic approach. Results show 53.5% of the videos had a positive tone, while 40.5% were negative, and 6% neutral. Second, findings indicate most of the Nigerian YouTube users' comments were neutral (62.6%), while 32.4%, were negative, and 5% were positive. From the antivaccine themes, analysis shows the people's lack of trust in the government on vaccines (15.7%) and the presence of vaccine conspiracy theories mostly related to expressions of religion and biotechnology (46.08%) were the main causes of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Nigeria. The study presents implications for theory and recommends ways for governments to develop better vaccination communication strategies.

SciSciNet: A large-scale open data lake for the science of science research

The science of science has attracted growing research interests, partly due to the increasing availability of large-scale datasets capturing the innerworkings of science. These datasets, and the numerous linkages among them, enable researchers to ask a range of fascinating questions about how science works and where innovation occurs. Yet as datasets grow, it becomes increasingly difficult to track available sources and linkages across datasets. Here we present SciSciNet, a large-scale open data lake for the science of science research, covering over 134M scientific publications and millions of external linkages to funding and public uses. We offer detailed documentation of pre-processing steps and analytical choices in constructing the data lake. We further supplement the data lake by computing frequently used measures in the literature, illustrating how researchers may contribute collectively to enriching the data lake. Overall, this data lake serves as an initial but useful resource for the field, by lowering the barrier to entry, reducing duplication of efforts in data processing and measurements, improving the robustness and replicability of empirical claims, and broadening the diversity and representation of ideas in the field.

Explaining Health Misinformation Belief through News, Social, and Alternative Health Media Use: The Moderating Roles of Need for Cognition and Faith in Intuition

Explaining the spread and impact of health misinformation has garnered considerable attention with the uptake of social media and group messaging applications. This study contributes to that line of work by investigating how reliance on multiple digital media may help support or suppress misinformation belief, and how individual differences in misinformation susceptibility condition this process. Alternative health outlets (AH media), advocating home/homeopathic remedies over conventional medicine can be important sources of misinformation, yet are largely ignored previously. In this study, we first test how reliance on different platforms predicts health misinformation belief. Drawing from the elaboration likelihood model, we further investigate how need for cognition (NFC) and faith in intuition (FI) moderate the relationship between news reliance and susceptibility to misinformation. We conducted a survey in Singapore, Turkey, and the U.S (N = 3,664) to measure how these proposed relationships explain misinformed beliefs about vaccines, genetically modified foods and alternative medicine. We found reliance on online legacy news was negatively associated with the likelihood of believing health misinformation, while the reverse was true for social media and AH media. Additionally, those with both greater NFC and FI were more susceptible to health misinformation when they relied on social media and AH media more. In contrast, neither NFC nor FI moderated the relationship between reliance on online legacy news and health misinformation belief. These findings, mostly consistent across countries, also show that extensive reliance on social media and AH media for news mostly overwhelms the individual differences in predicting misinformation belief.

From pandemic to Plandemic: Examining the amplification and attenuation of COVID-19 misinformation on social media

This study examines the proliferation of COVID-19 misinformation through Plandemic-a pseudo-documentary of COVID-19 conspiracy theories-on social media and examines how factors such as (a) themes of misinformation, (b) types of misinformation, (c) sources of misinformation, (d) emotions of misinformation, and (e) fact-checking labels amplify or attenuate online misinformation during the early days of the pandemic. Using CrowdTangle, a Facebook API, we collected a total of 5732 publicly available Facebook pages posts containing Plandemic-related keywords from January 1 to December 19, 2020. A random sample of 600 posts was subsequently coded, and the data were analyzed using negative binomial regression to examine factors associated with amplification and attenuation. Overall, the extended an extended Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF) provided a theoretical lens to understand why certain misinformation was amplified, while others were attenuated. As for posts with misinformation, results showed that themes related to private firms, treatment and prevention of virus transmission, diagnosis and health impacts, virus origins, and social impact were more likely to be amplified. While the different types of misinformation (manipulated, fabricated, or satire) and emotions were not associated with amplification, the type of fact-check labels did influence the virality of misinformation. Specifically, posts that were flagged as false by Facebook were more likely to be amplified, while the virality of posts flagged as containing partially false information was attenuated. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Cross-stage neural pattern similarity in the hippocampus predicts false memory derived from post-event inaccurate information

The misinformation effect occurs when people's memory of an event is altered by subsequent inaccurate information. No study has systematically tested theories about the dynamics of human hippocampal representations during the three stages of misinformation-induced false memory. This study replicates behavioral results of the misinformation effect, and investigates the cross-stage pattern similarity in the hippocampus and cortex using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Results show item-specific hippocampal pattern similarity between original-event and post-event stages. During the memory-test stage, hippocampal representations of original information are weakened for true memory, whereas hippocampal representations of misinformation compete with original information to create false memory. When false memory occurs, this conflict is resolved by the lateral prefrontal cortex. Individuals' memory traces of post-event information in the hippocampus predict false memory, whereas original information in the lateral parietal cortex predicts true memory. These findings support the multiple-trace model, and emphasize the reconstructive nature of human memory.

Multi-Modal Fake News Detection via Bridging the Gap between Modals

Multi-modal fake news detection aims to identify fake information through text and corresponding images. The current methods purely combine images and text scenarios by a vanilla attention module but there exists a semantic gap between different scenarios. To address this issue, we introduce an image caption-based method to enhance the model's ability to capture semantic information from images. Formally, we integrate image description information into the text to bridge the semantic gap between text and images. Moreover, to optimize image utilization and enhance the semantic interaction between images and text, we combine global and object features from the images for the final representation. Finally, we leverage a transformer to fuse the above multi-modal content. We carried out extensive experiments on two publicly available datasets, and the results show that our proposed method significantly improves performance compared to other existing methods.

Discussion of Annotated Research Articles Results in Increases in Scientific Literacy within a Cell Biology Course

As the amount and complexity of scientific knowledge continues to grow, it is essential to educate scientifically literate citizens who can comprehend the process of science and the implications of technological advances. This is especially important when educating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) college students, since they may play a central role in the future of scientific research and its communication. A central part of decoding and interpreting scientific information is the ability to analyze scientific research articles. For this reason, many different approaches for reading scientific research articles have been developed and published. Despite the availability of numerous ways of analyzing scientific research articles, biology students can face challenges that may prevent them from fully comprehending the text. We sought to address student challenges with science vocabulary and content knowledge by adding structural supports to in-classroom article discussions through the use of annotated articles from the Science in the Classroom initiative. We describe the pedagogical approach used for discussing scientific research articles within a required biology course. In this context, we found that students' scientific literacy skills increased at the end of the semester. We also found that, for each article discussed, the majority of students could interpret graphical representations of article results and that they could identify and comprehend components of the experimental design of the study.

Social media: Why sharing interferes with telling true from false

Sharing on social media decreases true-false discrimination but focusing on accuracy helps people recognize what they already know. Process-oriented research offers hope in combatting misinformation.

Does lower use of academic affiliation by university faculty in top U.S. newspapers contribute to misinformation about abortion?

BACKGROUND

University faculty are considered trusted sources of information to disseminate accurate information to the public that abortion is a common, safe and necessary medical health care service. However, misinformation persists about abortion's alleged dangers, commonality, and medical necessity.

METHODS

Systematic review of popular media articles related to abortion, gun control (an equally controversial topic), and cigarette use (a more neutral topic) published in top U.S. newspapers between January 2015 and July 2020 using bivariate analysis and logistic regression to compare disclosure of university affiliation among experts in each topic area.

RESULTS

We included 41 abortion, 102 gun control, and 130 smoking articles, which consisted of 304 distinct media mentions of university-affiliated faculty. Articles with smoking and gun control faculty experts had statistically more affiliations mentioned (90%, n = 195 and 88%, n = 159, respectively) than abortion faculty experts (77%, n = 54) (p = 0.02). The probability of faculty disclosing university affiliation was similar between smoking and gun control (p = 0.73), but between smoking and abortion was significantly less (Ave Marginal Effects - 0.13, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer faculty members disclose their university affiliation in top U.S. newspapers when discussing abortion. Lack of academic disclosure may paradoxically make these faculty appear less 'legitimate.' This leads to misinformation, branding abortion as a 'choice,' suggesting it is an unessential medical service. With the recent U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, and subsequent banning of abortion in many U.S. states, faculty will probably be even less likely to disclose their university affiliation in the media than in the past.

Heterogeneous attitudinal profiles towards gene editing: Evidence from latent class analysis

Advances in gene-editing technology have important implications for the treatment and prevention of disease. Accordingly, it is important to understand public perceptions towards gene editing, as the public's willingness to endorse gene editing may be as important as technological breakthroughs themselves. Previous research has almost exclusively examined attitudes towards gene editing on specific issues, but has not addressed how attitudes towards gene editing across a range of issues coalesce in individuals: that is, the degree to which discrete, heterogeneous attitudinal profiles exist versus a simple support/oppose continuum. Here, we addressed this issue using latent class analysis on data from The Pew Research Center (N = 4726; US residents) across a wide range of gene-editing topics. We found that attitudes towards gene editing cohere into 10 distinct latent classes that showed some evidence of a support/oppose continuum, but also for clear qualitative differences between each class, even with support or oppose classes, on a number of issues. The most opposed classes significantly differed from the supporter classes in age, sex, political ideology and self-rated knowledge. These findings provide evidence that attitudes towards gene editing are heterogeneous and public discourse, as well as policy making need to consider a range of arguments when evaluating this technology.

Teaching evidence-based medicine in Mexico: a systematic review of medical doctor curriculums at a national level

OBJECTIVES

To assess the teaching of evidence-based medicine (EBM) in medical curriculums. As a secondary objective, we assessed the representativeness of science courses related to EBM.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review. Accredited curriculums by the Mexican Council for the Accreditation of Medical Education.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We provided a descriptive analysis of the required or elective EBM courses and EBM-related courses, academic credits and teaching period. EBM-related courses included research methodology, epidemiology, biostatistics, clinical research, public health, clinical epidemiology, scientific dissemination and health informatics to explore scientific education and training offered by medical schools. Additionally, we examined the curriculum's structure, location, type of institution, total programme duration and academic credits. Data collection occurred from December 2020 to February 2021.

RESULTS

We identified 171 registered curriculums, of which we assessed 60 unique programmes (50% public) in our analysis. We identified 16 EBM single courses on the fifth and sixth semesters, of which 12 (20%) were mandatory and 4 were electives (6.7%). The allocated academic credits for EBM courses are minimal, without difference between public or private institutions, representing 0.08% of the total curriculum. Public health, epidemiology, research methodology and biostatistics courses are offered with greater frequency (55% or less) and curricular value (0.6% or less). In some cases, they are taught as combined courses. Clinical research, health informatics and clinical epidemiology are taught less than EBM, while scientific dissemination is nil.

CONCLUSION

In Mexico, EBM teaching is limited to only one of five curriculums with minimal curricular value. A comprehensive curricular review is necessary across programmes to incorporate EBM as a first step to improve medical education and, consequently, public health. We call to action through an online, collaborative platform with several applications to optimise teaching of EBM.

REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The systematic review protocol is excluded from the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews since this platform only accepts systematic reviews with health-related outcomes. Review protocol registration: https://osf.io/3xm2q/.

Scientific Misinformation and Mistrust of COVID-19 Preventive Measures among the UK Population: A Pilot Study

The popularisation of complex biomedical concepts brought about by COVID-19 has led to the rapid proliferation and diffusion of scientific misinformation, particularly among individuals with inadequate levels of scientific and digital literacy. A cross-sectional online survey of a UK population sample was conducted to address three key aims: to verify whether there is a correlation between participants' belief in false information around COVID-19 and adherence to preventive measures; to investigate whether participants' scientific misinformation and preventive behaviour are associated with their demographic characteristics; and to evaluate whether participants' scientific misinformation and preventive behaviour can predict their likelihood of having contracted COVID-19. Non-parametric data analysis highlighted a strong negative correlation between participants' belief in misinformation and their trust in preventive measures. Both variables were significantly associated with participants' education levels, but not with their religious beliefs. Remarkably, neither science misinformation levels nor the trust in preventive measures were statistically associated with the likelihood of having contracted COVID-19. Taken together, these findings reinforce the urgency of ensuring that the population is equipped with adequate scientific literacy to enable them to evaluate the reliability of scientific information and recognise the importance of individual preventive behaviours to minimise community spread of infectious diseases.

Realtime user ratings as a strategy for combatting misinformation: an experimental study

Because fact-checking takes time, verdicts are usually reached after a message has gone viral and interventions can have only limited effect. A new approach recently proposed in scholarship and piloted on online platforms is to harness the wisdom of the crowd by enabling recipients of an online message to attach veracity assessments to it. The intention is to allow poor initial crowd reception to temper belief in and further spread of misinformation. We study this approach by letting 4000 subjects in 80 experimental bipartisan communities sequentially rate the veracity of informational messages. We find that in well-mixed communities, the public display of earlier veracity ratings indeed enhances the correct classification of true and false messages by subsequent users. However, crowd intelligence backfires when false information is sequentially rated in ideologically segregated communities. This happens because early raters' ideological bias, which is aligned with a message, influences later raters' assessments away from the truth. These results suggest that network segregation poses an important problem for community misinformation detection systems that must be accounted for in the design of such systems.

Collateral damage from debunking mRNA vaccine misinformation

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the scientific community has been understandably eager to combat misinformation about issues such as vaccine safety. In highly polarized information environments, however, even well-intentioned messages have the potential to produce adverse effects. In this study, we connect different disciplinary strands of social science to derive and experimentally test the novel hypothesis that although particular efforts to debunk misinformation about mRNA vaccines will reduce relevant misperceptions about that technology, these correctives will harm attitudes toward other types of vaccines. We refer to this as the "collateral damage hypothesis." Our study specifically examines a corrective message stating that "mRNA vaccines do not contain live virus," and our results offer some support for our hypothesis, with the corrective triggering increased societal risk perceptions of live vaccines. We also find that the effect is, predictably, most evident among those whose vaccine acceptance is low. Building on the theoretical grounding we outline, we test a "damage control" adjustment to the corrective message and present evidence supporting that it mitigates the collateral damage.

Network segregation and the propagation of misinformation

How does the ideological segregation of online networks impact the spread of misinformation? Past studies have found that homophily generally increases diffusion, suggesting that partisan news, whether true or false, will spread farther in ideologically segregated networks. We argue that network segregation disproportionately aids messages that are otherwise too implausible to diffuse, thus favoring false over true news. To test this argument, we seeded true and false informational messages in experimental networks in which subjects were either ideologically integrated or segregated, yielding 512 controlled propagation histories in 16 independent information systems. Experimental results reveal that the fraction of false information circulating was systematically greater in ideologically segregated networks. Agent-based models show robustness of this finding across different network topologies and sizes. We conclude that partisan sorting undermines the veracity of information circulating on the Internet by increasing exposure to content that would otherwise not manage to diffuse.

Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: The role of anxiety during COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic went hand in hand with what some have called a "(mis)infodemic" about the virus on social media. Drawing on partisan motivated reasoning and partisan selective sharing, this study examines the influence of political viewpoints, anxiety, and the interactions of the two on believing and willingness to share false, corrective, and accurate claims about COVID-19 on social media. A large-scale 2 (emotion: anxiety vs relaxation) × 2 (slant of news outlet: MSNBC vs Fox News) experimental design with 719 US participants shows that anxiety is a driving factor in belief in and willingness to share claims of any type. Especially for Republicans, a state of heightened anxiety leads them to believe and share more claims. Our findings expand research on partisan motivated reasoning and selective sharing in online settings, and enhance the understanding of how anxiety shapes individuals' processing of risk-related claims in issue contexts with high uncertainty.

Who spread COVID-19 (mis)information online? Differential informedness, psychological mechanisms, and intervention strategies

Based on a regional survey conducted in five cities of China (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Chengdu, and Wuhan) in January 2020 and a national survey experiment conducted in 31 provinces of China in December 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, we investigated the intentions for the misinformed, uninformed, and informed individuals to spread COVID-19 related (mis)information online and the psychological factors affecting their distinct sharing behaviors. We found that (1) both misinformed and uninformed individuals were more likely to spread misinformation and less likely to share fact as compared with the informed ones; (2) the reasons for the misinformed individuals to spread misinformation resembled those for the informed ones to share truth, but the uninformed ones shared misinformation based on different motivations; and (3) information that arouses positive emotions were more likely to go viral than that arouses negative feelings in the context of COVID-19, regardless of facticity. The implications of these findings were discussed in terms of how people react to misinformation when coping with risk, and intervention strategies were proposed to combat COVID-19 or other types of misinformation in risk scenarios.

Learning about informal fallacies and the detection of fake news: An experimental intervention

The philosophical concept of informal fallacies-arguments that fail to provide sufficient support for a claim-is introduced and connected to the topic of fake news detection. We assumed that the ability to identify informal fallacies can be trained and that this ability enables individuals to better distinguish between fake news and real news. We tested these assumptions in a two-group between-participants experiment (N = 116). The two groups participated in a 30-minute-long text-based learning intervention: either about informal fallacies or about fake news. Learning about informal fallacies enhanced participants' ability to identify fallacious arguments one week later. Furthermore, the ability to identify fallacious arguments was associated with a better discernment between real news and fake news. Participants in the informal fallacy intervention group and the fake news intervention group performed equally well on the news discernment task. The contribution of (identifying) informal fallacies for research and practice is discussed.

What College Biology Students Know about How Vaccines Work

Vaccines are an important and societally relevant biology topic, but it is unclear how much college biology students know about how vaccines work and what inaccurate ideas they have about that process. Therefore, we asked more than 600 college students taking biology courses at various levels to explain, "How does a vaccine work?" in a free-response format. Based on authoritative sources and responses from immunology and other biology faculty, we created a rubric to gauge the basic knowledge and accuracy present in student responses. Basic knowledge was defined as knowing that vaccines mimic the pathogen, elicit an active immune response, and provide protection against future infection. Accuracy was defined as the absence of scientifically inaccurate ideas. We found that advanced biology majors score significantly higher in basic knowledge and accuracy when compared with all other student groups, but there were no differences between entering biology majors, pre-health majors, and non-pre-health majors. We also uncovered a variety of inaccurate ideas, with the most common being that vaccines contain the original, unmodified pathogen. These results provide a new way to gauge college student understanding of how a vaccine works and enrich our understanding of what college students know about this process.

How Academic Medicine Can Amplify Truth Amid the Noise of Misinformation, Inaccuracies, and Lies

Inaccurate statements and lies from public figures and political and government leaders have the power to exacerbate dangerous upheavals in our political, health care, and social environments. The widespread misinformation, inaccuracies, and lies about the COVID-19 pandemic (about the origin of the virus, the severity of illness, vaccination, and "cures," to name a few) illustrate the potentially disastrous consequences of false information. Academic medicine must recognize the dangers of such lies and inaccuracies, particularly those related to health, and must understand their sources in traditional and social media and how and why many in the public accept them. Academic health professionals have a unique responsibility to promote and defend the truth in medicine and science, help the public to understand the sources of inaccurate scientific information, and find ways to debunk falsehoods spread by politicians and media outlets. Inaccurate information and lies have threatened the health of the population, the function of health systems, and the training of the future health workforce. They must be combatted by truth telling through scholarly work, clinical activities, and educating health professions trainees at all levels. Academic medicine's institutions should also consider joining the communities they serve and their medical specialty organizations to engage in political advocacy whenever possible. Health professions journals have an important role in highlighting and clarifying important topics and sustaining conversations on them within the academic medicine community. Across all its missions and activities, academic medicine must do its best to combat today's poisonous misinformation, inaccuracies, and lies, and to enter the larger social and political struggles that will determine the health of society and the future.

[Conspiracy as a surrogate for religion? Religiosity, spirituality, and affinity towards conspiracy myths in times of crisis]

In times of crisis, alternative interpretations of the world that challenge the public sphere gain impact. During the COVID-19 pandemic, such narratives spread in the form of conspiracy myths. They give explanations for complex questions by assuming that social events are planned and controlled by secret elites. Moreover, they are often based on pseudo-transcendental explanations that defy scrutiny but fill fateful events with meaning. In this context, the question arises whether conspiracy myths contain religious or spiritual elements. In this study, we use a representative population survey conducted in April 2022 in German- and French-speaking Switzerland (n = 1221) to examine the relationship between spirituality, religiosity, and affinity toward conspiracy myths. The results show that emotional concern during the COVID-19 pandemic is an important predictor related to conspiracy affinity. The more negative the emotional concern, the higher the affinity towards conspiracy myths. Conversely, positive emotions during the pandemic negatively affect conspiracy affinity. While religious affiliations and religiosity hardly influence conspiracy affinity, spirituality turns out to be the most important predictor in our study. We conclude that in secularized societies spirituality without involvement in traditional religious communities can result in an increased openness to conspiracy myths as a surrogate for religion.