Association of COVID-19 Misinformation with Face Mask Wearing and Social Distancing in a Nationally Representative US Sample

Misinformation and perception of COVID-19 and risk assessment among people in Pakistan: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

During the coronavirus pandemic, misinformation was circulated through technology and social media on a large scale. Since people rely on media to keep connected and informed, misinformation can prevent them from staying safe.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the quality of information reaching Pakistanis, the effect of information/misinformation on people's perception, and its relationship with risky health behaviours in different demographical groups.

METHODS

A community sample of N= 103 Pakistanis was assessed using a mixed-method cross-sectional survey research design to investigate their sources of knowledge/information, perceptions of coronavirus-related facts, and risky health behaviours.

RESULTS

Content analysis of the material that participants read/watched indicated the possible effect of media on people's perception of COVID-19. Specific demography (e.g., increasing age) and people's tendency to believe misinformation/information may indicate risky health behaviours pertaining to coronavirus infection.

DISCUSSION

Findings showed how the models considered (social cognitive theory, biological warfare conspiracy theory, theory of planned behaviour, protection motivation theory, the health belief model, and biopsychosocial model) may be relevant to examination of the effects of misinformation on different demographic groups.

CONCLUSION

The findings and models need to be verified on larger, more representative samples of Pakistanis using a large-scale survey based on the insights obtained from this pilot study.

Identifying Population Segments by Differing Levels of COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Evaluating Subsequent Uptake of COVID-19 Prevention Behaviors: Web-Based, Longitudinal, Probability-Based Panel Survey

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted the launch of the US Department of Health and Human Services' COVID-19 Public Education Campaign to boost vaccine confidence and uptake among adults, as vaccines are key to preventing severe illness and death.

OBJECTIVE

Past segmentation research relevant to COVID-19 behavior has found important differences in attitudes, sociodemographics, and subsequent COVID-19 prevention behaviors across population segments. This study extends prior work by incorporating a more comprehensive set of attitudes, behaviors, and sociodemographic variables to identify population segments by differing levels of COVID-19 vaccine confidence and evaluate differences in their subsequent uptake of COVID-19 prevention behaviors.

METHODS

Data were obtained from 5 waves (January 2021 to June 2022) of a web-based longitudinal, probability-based panel survey of US adults (N=4398) administered in English and in Spanish. Participants were recruited from NORC at the University of Chicago's national AmeriSpeak panel and were invited to participate across multiple waves. Latent class cluster analysis estimated segments of respondents based on over 40 COVID-19 attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and sociodemographics as reported in wave 1. Survey-weighted cross-tabulations and bivariate regression analyses assessed differences in COVID-19 vaccine uptake, booster uptake, mask use, and social distancing in all segments across all 5 survey waves.

RESULTS

A total of 6 segments (hardline nonintenders, prevention-compliant nonintenders, burned-out waiters, anxious waiters, skeptical confidents, and ready confidents) were identified, which differed by their COVID-19 vaccine confidence, prevention-related attitudes and behaviors, and sociodemographics. Cross-tabulations and regression results indicated significant segment membership differences in COVID-19 vaccine and booster timing, mask use, and social distancing. Results from survey-weighted cross-tabulations comparing COVID-19 vaccine and booster uptake across segments indicate statistically significant differences in these outcomes across the 6 segments (P<.001). Results were statistically significant for each segment (P<.01 for booster uptake among burned-out waiters; P<.001 for all other coefficients), indicating that, on average, respondents in segments with lower intentions to vaccinate reported later receipt of COVID-19 vaccines and boosters relative to the timing of vaccine and booster uptake among ready confidents.

CONCLUSIONS

Results extend previous research by showing that initial beliefs and behaviors relevant to COVID-19 vaccination, mask use, and social distancing are important for understanding differences in subsequent compliance with recommended COVID-19 prevention measures. Specifically, we found that across respondent segments, the probability of vaccine and booster uptake corresponded with both COVID-19 vaccine confidence and mask use and social distancing compliance; more compliant segments were more likely to get vaccinated or boosted than less compliant segments given similar levels of vaccine confidence. These findings help identify appropriate audiences for campaigns. Results highlight the use of a comprehensive list of attitudes, behaviors, and other individual-level characteristics that can serve as a basis for future segmentation efforts relevant to COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

Examining the Effects of Social Media Warning Labels on Perceived Credibility and Intent to Engage with Health Misinformation: The Moderating Role of Vaccine Hesitancy

Despite the robust scientific evidence affirming the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, the proliferation of misinformation on social media platforms poses a threat by potentially exacerbating vaccine hesitancy. In response, certain social media platforms have taken measures to flag posts containing such misinformation with warning labels, aiming to dispel false beliefs. This present study employs a survey experiment (N = 304) to examine the effectiveness of two distinct warning labels - disputed and neutral warning labels - in the Twitter (the social media platform now known as X) context, specifically targeting misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. This study investigates the nuanced effects of vaccine hesitancy on the perceived credibility of debunked misinformation posts following the application of warning flags. The results demonstrated that disputed labels significantly reduced the perceived credibility of misinformation regarding anti-COVID-19 vaccines in comparison to posts without any labeling. Nevertheless, individuals exhibiting higher levels of vaccine hesitancy tended to view the misinformation as more credible than their counterparts with lower levels of hesitancy. These findings present the efficacy of warning labels in combatting misinformation on social media platforms, particularly among those who are least hesitant about vaccination.

Linking Opinions Shared on Social Media About COVID-19 Public Health Measures to Adherence: Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys of Twitter Use in Canada

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of public health measures (PHMs) depends on population adherence. Social media were suggested as a tool to assess adherence, but representativeness and accuracy issues have been raised.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this repeated cross-sectional study were to compare self-reported PHM adherence and sociodemographic characteristics between people who used Twitter (subsequently rebranded X) and people who did not use Twitter.

METHODS

Repeated Canada-wide web-based surveys were conducted every 14 days from September 2020 to March 2022. Weighted proportions were calculated for descriptive variables. Using Bayesian logistic regression models, we investigated associations between Twitter use, as well as opinions in tweets, and self-reported adherence with mask wearing and vaccination.

RESULTS

Data from 40,230 respondents were analyzed. As self-reported, Twitter was used by 20.6% (95% CI 20.1%-21.2%) of Canadians, of whom 29.9% (95% CI 28.6%-31.3%) tweeted about COVID-19. The sociodemographic characteristics differed across categories of Twitter use and opinions. Overall, 11% (95% CI 10.6%-11.3%) of Canadians reported poor adherence to mask-wearing, and 10.8% (95% CI 10.4%-11.2%) to vaccination. Twitter users who tweeted about COVID-19 reported poorer adherence to mask wearing than nonusers, which was modified by the age of the respondents and their geographical region (odds ratio [OR] 0.79, 95% Bayesian credibility interval [BCI] 0.18-1.69 to OR 4.83, 95% BCI 3.13-6.86). The odds of poor adherence to vaccination of Twitter users who tweeted about COVID-19 were greater than those of nonusers (OR 1.76, 95% BCI 1.48-2.07). English- and French-speaking Twitter users who tweeted critically of PHMs were more likely (OR 4.07, 95% BCI 3.38-4.80 and OR 7.31, 95% BCI 4.26-11.03, respectively) to report poor adherence to mask wearing than non-Twitter users, and those who tweeted in support were less likely (OR 0.47, 95% BCI 0.31-0.64 and OR 0.96, 95% BCI 0.18-2.33, respectively) to report poor adherence to mask wearing than non-Twitter users. The OR of poor adherence to vaccination for those tweeting critically about PHMs and for those tweeting in support of PHMs were 4.10 (95% BCI 3.40-4.85) and 0.20 (95% BCI 0.10-0.32), respectively, compared to non-Twitter users.

CONCLUSIONS

Opinions shared on Twitter can be useful to public health authorities, as they are associated with adherence to PHMs. However, the sociodemographics of social media users do not represent the general population, calling for caution when using tweets to assess general population-level behaviors.

Intellectual humility as a tool to combat false beliefs: An individual-based approach to belief revision

False beliefs pose significant societal threats, including health risks, political polarization and even violence. In two studies (N = 884) we explored the efficacy of an individual-based approach to correcting false beliefs. We examined whether the character virtue of intellectual humility (IH)-an appreciation of one's intellectual boundaries-encourages revising one's false beliefs in response to counter-information. Our research produced encouraging but also mixed findings. Among participants who held false beliefs about the risks of vaccines (Study 1) and the 2020 US Election being rigged (Study 2), those with higher IH explored more information opposing these false beliefs. This exploration of opposing information, in turn, predicted updating away from these inaccurate health and political beliefs. IH did not directly predict updating away from false beliefs, however, suggesting that this effect-if it exists-may not be particularly powerful. Taken together, these results provide moderate support for IH as a character trait that can foster belief revision but, simultaneously, suggest that alternate pathways to combat false beliefs and misinformation may be preferred.

Should Communication Campaigns Promoting Vaccination Address Misinformation Beliefs? Implications from a Nationally Representative Longitudinal Survey Study among U.S. Adults

Public health communication campaign planners must carefully consider whether misinformation beliefs are important to target and, ideally, correct. Guided by the reasoned action approach, we hypothesized that behavior-specific beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination would account for any observed relationship between general coronavirus misinformation beliefs (misinformation beliefs that are not specific to the anticipated consequences of COVID-19 vaccination) and subsequent vaccine uptake. To test our hypothesis, we used panel data from a two-wave nationally representative sample of U.S. adults pre- and post-vaccine availability (T1: July 2020, T2: April/June 2021, analytic sample: n = 665). Contrary to our hypothesis, we find a residual observed relationship between general coronavirus misinformation beliefs and subsequent vaccine uptake (AOR = 0.40, SE = 0.10). Intriguingly, our post-hoc analyses do show that after also adjusting for T2 behavioral beliefs, this association was no longer significant. With this and other justifications, we recommend that messages promoting vaccination prioritize targeting relevant behavioral beliefs.

Liberals are Believers: Young People Assign Trust to Social Media for COVID-19 Information

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged existing health communication strategies as more people turn to social media as a primary health information source. Although many studies have explored how young people use social media, this study examined how sociodemographic factors and political ideology are associated with use and trust in social media as a source for COVID-19 information among young adults, and how use and trust in social media as a COVID-19 information source are associated with their beliefs about COVID-19. In Spring 2021, an online survey was conducted among 2,105 18-29-year-old students at an urban university in California. Our findings show that younger, female, non-binary, Asian, and Black/African American students are most likely to obtain and trust COVID-19 information on social media. Results also suggest that liberal students are more likely to turn to social media as a source for COVID-19 information compared to conservatives. However, conservative students who use social media as a source for information were more likely to believe false health information about prevention measures and the vaccine and to have lower perceived effectiveness of COVID-19 prevention behaviors and vaccination compared to liberals.

Ethics of Nudging in the COVID-19 Crisis and the Necessary Return to the Principles of Shared Decision Making: A Critical Review

Nudging, a controversial technique for modifying people's behavior in a predictable way, is claimed to preserve freedom of choice while simultaneously influencing it. Nudging had been largely confined to situations such as promoting healthy eating choices but has been employed in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis in a shift towards measures that involve significantly less choice, such as shoves and behavioral prods. Shared decision making (SDM), a method for direct involvement and autonomy, is an alternative approach to communicate risk. Predominantly peer-reviewed scientific publications from standard literature databases like PubMed, PsycInfo, and Psyndex were evaluated in a narrative review. The so-called fear nudges, as well as the dissemination of strongly emotionalizing or moralizing messages can lead to intense psycho-physical stress. The use of these nudges by specialized units during the COVID-19 pandemic generated a societal atmosphere of fear that precipitated a deterioration of the mental and physical health of the population. Major recommendations of the German COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) study, which are based on elements of nudging and coercive measures, do not comply with ethical principles, basic psychological principles, or evidence-based data. SDM was misused in the COVID-19 crisis, which helped to achieve one-sided goals of governments. The emphasis on utilitarian thinking is criticized and the unethical behavior of decision makers is explained by both using the concept of moral disengagement and the maturity level of coping strategies. There should be a return to an open-ended, democratic, and pluralistic scientific debate without using nudges. It is therefore necessary to return to the origins of SDM.

Covid-19 skepticism and public health norms during refugee assistance: does skepticism always lead to poor safety protocol adherence?

BACKGROUND

Skepticism about COVID-19's existence or severity has spread as fast as the disease itself, and in some populations has been shown to undermine protective public health behaviors that can mitigate infection. For populations that are especially vulnerable to COVID spread and severity, such as refugees, COVID skepticism is particularly problematic.

METHODS

We examine data collected from observations of humanitarian services provided to refugees in Lebanon, Türkiye, and Jordan to determine if skepticism is related to adherence to specific health-protective protocols (masking, social distancing, and hand sanitizing), and whether the effects of COVID skepticism are mediated by particular populations of refugees or the country in which those refugees receive assistance.

RESULTS

We found that community skepticism (the frequency of COVID skepticism expressed by others within a service location) is associated with lower adherence to certain protocols and not others. We also found that with certain protocols, the country in which refugees receive services mediates the relationship between community skepticism and protocol adherence, but for other protocols the relationship between skepticism and adherence is independent of either country in which refugees reside or the refugee population being served.

CONCLUSIONS

The existence of skepticism about COVID-19 does not always lead to an unwillingness to take protective measures to avoid infection. The mechanisms underlying the relationship between skepticism and adherence to health-protective protocols vary based on the type of protocol in question. In order to increase protocol adherence, the specific variables predicting adherence to different protocols need to be assessed in order to increase adherence and improve public health during humanitarian services.

Social Representations and Symbolic Coping: A Cross-Cultural Discourse Analysis of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Newspapers

This study used a framework grounded in social representations theory to investigate cross-cultural variation and consistency in the discursive construction of the COVID-19 pandemic by the mass media, in the week following WHO's declaration of a global pandemic in March 2020. News reports from media outlets in the United Kingdom and China were sourced, with articles from the most popular media sources selected for analysis. Four discourses were identified to be the most prominent representations present throughout these accounts: war; other illnesses; a general emergency; an unknown situation. The findings demonstrated consistency with past research, highlighting how the sociogenesis of social representations in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic followed a similar pattern to other novel infectious disease outbreaks. Consistency between UK and Chinese media accounts was identifiable throughout the construction of these discourses; however, variation was detectable regarding use of culturally relevant anchors for existing illness representations, along with Chinese media accounts constructing images of a comparatively optimistic local situation, whilst depicting the rest of the world as in the midst of a global emergency. Future research has the potential to build on these findings by going beyond media representations to explore actual lay population beliefs, attitudes, and opinions, considering how they compare to the representations portrayed in mass-mediated news reports.

Beliefs in COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation Among Unvaccinated Black Americans: Prevalence, Socio-Psychological Predictors, and Consequences

Health-related misinformation is a major threat to public health and particularly worrisome for populations experiencing health disparities. This study sets out to examine the prevalence, socio-psychological predictors, and consequences of beliefs in COVID-19 vaccine misinformation among unvaccinated Black Americans. We conducted an online national survey with Black Americans who had not been vaccinated against COVID-19 (N = 800) between February and March 2021. Results showed that beliefs in COVID-19 vaccine misinformation were prevalent among unvaccinated Black Americans with 13-19% of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing with various false claims about COVID-19 vaccines and 35-55% unsure about the veracity of these claims. Conservative ideology, conspiracy thinking mind-set, religiosity, and racial consciousness in health care settings predicted greater beliefs in COVID-19 vaccine misinformation, which were associated with lower vaccine confidence and acceptance. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Exploring the Barriers and Facilitators of Mask-Wearing Behavior During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Taiwan, the United States, the Netherlands, and Haiti: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

This study explored the barriers and facilitators of mask-wearing behaviors during the pandemic in Taiwan, the United States, the Netherlands, and Haiti.

METHODS

Face-to-face interviews were conducted in Taiwan and online interviews were conducted with participants in the United States, the Netherlands, and Haiti.

RESULTS

In general, the habit of wearing a mask before coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported by Taiwanese participants. Additionally, Taiwanese participants perceived that wearing a mask was a social responsibility during the pandemic, suggesting that the collectivistic context might influence mask-wearing behavior. Unlike the Taiwanese population, some people in the United States and the Netherlands were reluctant to wear masks due to perceived restrictions on their freedom. Participants from Haiti mentioned that people who wore masks encountered violence, bullying, and discrimination. The results of this study suggest that political leadership and mask mandates have a strong impact on people's mask-wearing behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings have valuable implications for the design of diverse behavioral interventions to enhance mask-wearing as part of infectious disease preparedness. Additionally, the findings from these countries offer valuable insights for the development of effective public health interventions to enhance society's resilience during the current pandemic and future infectious disease outbreaks.

Misinformation, Risk Perceptions, and Intention to Seek Information About Masks: The Moderating Roles of Gender and Reflective Judgment

The current study has three main purposes: to examine 1) the impact of theory-driven corrective messages using individual vs. collective frames on information-seeking intention 2) the mediating role of risk perceptions and 3) the moderating role of reflection and gender. Our findings from a randomized experimental study and Hayes' moderated, moderated mediation model show collective frames were associated with high-risk perceptions among women, which in turn led to higher information seeking intention. The second moderator reveals that people who scored higher on reflection were more willing to seek information. Our findings have critical implications for misinformation research by demonstrating the importance of theoretically driven messages in understanding misperceptions as well as people's information seeking behavior.

Behavioral Beliefs Predict Recommended Behaviors, Especially When Trust in Public Health Sources is Low: Evidence from a Longitudinal Study of Three COVID-19 Prevention Behaviors Among U.S. Adults

Public distrust in official sources of health information and uncertainty about novel guidelines may discourage engagement in recommended disease prevention practices. The current study tests the hypothesis that building confidence in positive behavioral outcomes may support recommendation following even in the context of low trust in recommendation sources. This set of longitudinal studies examines the main and interaction effects of trust in official sources and behavioral beliefs in their prediction of recommended COVID-19 prevention behaviors (facemask wearing, social distancing, vaccination). Repeated measurement data were collected from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults in May/June 2020 (T1; n = 1074), July 2020 (T2; n = 889), and April/June 2021 (T3; n = 750). All five tests, using lagged linear regression, found negative interactions between trust and behavioral beliefs, as hypothesized; three were significant (T1-T2: facemask wearing B=-0.10, SE = 0.04; T1-T3: social distancing B=-0.20, SE = 0.06; T2-T3 vaccination B=-0.27, SE = 0.10) and two were consistent albeit not significant (T1-T3: social distancing B=-0.13, SE = 0.08; T1-T3: facemask wearing B=-0.11, SE = 0.06). Supporting hypotheses, trust in recommendation sources predicted behavior most among those who were less certain about behavioral outcomes and confidence in behavioral benefits predicted behavior most among those with low trust in recommendation sources. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Tracking COVID-19 vaccination expectancies and vaccination refusal in the United States

To identify factors that predict COVID-19 vaccination refusal and show how expectancies affect vaccination acceptance for non-vaccinated adults, we used a monthly repeated cross-sectional sample from June/2021 to October/2021 to collect data on vaccination behaviors and predictor variables for 2,116 US adults over 50 years of age. Selection bias modeling - which is required when data availability is a result of behavioral choice - predicts two outcomes: (1) no vaccination vs. vaccination for the entire sample and (2) the effects of expectancy indices predicting vaccination Refuser vs. vaccination Accepters for the unvaccinated group. Vaccine refusers were younger and less educated, endorsed common misconceptions about the COVID-19 epidemic, and were Black. Vaccination expectancies were related to vaccination refusal in the unvaccinated eligible group: negative expectancies increased vaccine refusal, while positive expectancies decreased it. We conclude that behavior-related expectancies (as opposed to more stable psychological traits) are important to identify because they are often modifiable and provide a point of intervention, not just for COVID-19 vaccination acceptance but also for other positive health behaviors.

Relations of behavioral inhibition and activation system sensitivities with vaccination outcomes: Investigating the mediating role of vaccine hesitancy in older adults

The study of behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and behavioral activation system (BAS) sensitivities has produced a multitude of models and frameworks to better understand decision-making and behavior. We extend this research to the study of a vaccination by exploring the relation of BIS and BAS sensitivities with vaccination willingness, receipt, and word-of-mouth. We also assess whether dimensions of vaccine hesitancy mediate these relations, testing whether they are viable explanatory mechanisms. By conducting a multi-wave survey study, our results support that BIS sensitivity does not meaningfully relate to vaccine hesitancy or vaccination outcomes. On the other hand, BAS sensitivity related to detrimental vaccination outcomes, and these effects were mediated by vaccine hesitancy dimensions associated with perceptions that vaccines cause health risks and are not needed for healthy individuals. Based on extant BIS and BAS theory, these results suggest that certain people may see refraining from vaccination as a nonpunishment.

Fight COVID Milwaukee protective behaviors and risk communications associated with the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on society, causing significant disruptions to everyday life. Risk communication strategies can play an important role in risk management as they allow individuals to prepare for and respond to public health emergencies appropriately. The aim of this study is to investigate public risk behaviors, perceptions of risk and risk communication, and experiences with COVID-19 to better understand the impact of COVID-19 on our community and to better inform public health decisions about communicating and reducing personal risk. Nine virtual focus groups were conducted with 79 residents of Milwaukee County. Audio transcripts of focus group recordings were qualitatively analyzed using MAXQDA. Predominant themes identified include public risk protective behaviors, the emotional toll associated with lockdown measures, and risk communication. Our findings provide a better understanding of how adults, African American and Hispanic groups in particular, viewed the risk communications and protective behaviors associated with COVID-19, how their lives were impacted by the pandemic, and how to effectively communicate public information about personal risk. These findings can help guide risk communication efforts and public health policy interventions for potential infection outbreaks in the future.

A Scoping Review of Emerging COVID-19 Health Communication Research in Communication and Media Journals

This article reports a scoping review of emerging research on COVID-19 health communication. We reviewed and analyzed 206 articles published in 40 peer-reviewed communication journals between January 2020 to April 2021. Our review identified key study characteristics and overall themes and trends in this rapidly expanding field of research. Our review of health communication scholarship during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic suggests that health communication scholars have risen to the challenges and interrogated important issues in COVID-19 communication at the individual, group, organizational, and societal levels. We identified important gaps that warrant future research attention including experimental research that seeks to test the causal effects of communication, studies that evaluate communication interventions in under-served populations, research on mental health challenges imposed by the pandemic, and investigations on the promise of emerging communication technologies for supporting pandemic mitigation efforts.

Addressing Antivaccine Sentiment on Public Social Media Forums Through Web-Based Conversations Based on Motivational Interviewing Techniques: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Health misinformation shared on social media can have negative health consequences; yet, there is a dearth of field research testing interventions to address health misinformation in real time, digitally, and in situ on social media.

OBJECTIVE

We describe a field study of a pilot program of "infodemiologists" trained with evidence-informed intervention techniques heavily influenced by principles of motivational interviewing. Here we provide a detailed description of the nature of infodemiologists' interventions on posts sharing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines, present an initial evaluation framework for such field research, and use available engagement metrics to quantify the impact of these in-group messengers on the web-based threads on which they are intervening.

METHODS

We monitored Facebook (Meta Platforms, Inc) profiles of news organizations marketing to 3 geographic regions (Newark, New Jersey; Chicago, Illinois; and central Texas). Between December 2020 and April 2021, infodemiologists intervened in 145 Facebook news posts that generated comments containing either false or misleading information about vaccines or overt antivaccine sentiment. Engagement (emojis plus replies) data were collected on Facebook news posts, the initial comment containing misinformation (level 1 comment), and the infodemiologist's reply (level 2 reply comment). A comparison-group evaluation design was used, with numbers of replies, emoji reactions, and engagements for level 1 comments compared with the median metrics of matched comments using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Level 2 reply comments (intervention) were also benchmarked against the corresponding metric of matched reply comments (control) using the Wilcoxon signed rank test (paired at the level 1 comment level). Infodemiologists' level 2 reply comments (intervention) and matched reply comments (control) were further compared using 3 Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

In total, 145 interventions were conducted on 132 Facebook news posts. The level 1 comments received a median of 3 replies, 3 reactions, and 7 engagements. The matched comments received a median of 1.5 (median of IQRs 3.75) engagements. Infodemiologists made 322 level 2 reply comments, precipitating 189 emoji reactions and a median of 0.5 (median of IQRs IQR 0) engagements. The matched reply comments received a median of 1 (median of IQRs 2.5) engagement. Compared to matched comments, level 1 comments received more replies, emoji reactions, and engagements. Compared to matched reply comments, level 2 reply comments received fewer and narrower ranges of replies, reactions, and engagements, except for the median comparison for replies.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, empathy-first communication strategies based on motivational interviewing garnered less engagement relative to matched controls. One possible explanation is that our interventions quieted contentious, misinformation-laden threads about vaccines on social media. This work reinforces research on accuracy nudges and cyberbullying interventions that also reduce engagement. More research leveraging field studies of real-time interventions is needed, yet data transparency by technology platforms will be essential to facilitate such experiments.

A planned behavior theory-based explanatory model of protective behavior against COVID-19, with an age perspective

In this study, an explanatory model of protective behaviors against COVID-19 transmission based on the theory of planned behavior is tested using a sample of 904 individuals by adding two relevant variables in the COVID-19 context: skepticism and responsibility toward COVID-19 transmission. Responsibility and the intention to behave in a protective way act as mediators in predicting protective behaviors. The model is invariant between younger and older people, although some path differences were found: the perception that individuals have about the extent to which their reference group adopts protective behaviors directly influences individual protective behavior for younger but not older people, for whom subjective social norms were only indirect predictors of such behavior. Additionally, the rates in all the variables showed that the group under 35 took more risks in the context of protective behaviors against COVID-19: they exhibited more skepticism, lower behavioral control, perceived fewer positive social norms regarding protective behaviors, felt less responsible for spreading the disease, had less intention to behave in a protective way, and finally adopted fewer protective behaviors. Developers of intervention strategies and campaigns should contemplate such variables and focus on differences according to age.

True, justified, belief? Partisanship weakens the positive effect of news media literacy on fake news detection

To investigate how people assess whether politically consistent news is real or fake, two studies (N = 1,008; N = 1,397) with adult American participants conducted in 2020 and 2022 utilized a within-subjects experimental design to investigate perceptions of news accuracy. When a mock Facebook post with either fake (Study 1) or real (Study 2) news content was attributed to an alternative (vs. a mainstream) news outlet, it was, on average, perceived to be less accurate. Those with beliefs reflecting News Media Literacy demonstrated greater sensitivity to the outlet's status. This relationship was itself contingent on the strength of the participant's partisan identity. Strong partisans high in News Media Literacy defended the accuracy of politically consistent content, even while recognizing that an outlet was unfamiliar. These results highlight the fundamental importance of looking at the interaction between user-traits and features of social media news posts when examining learning from political news on social media.

The doctor knows or the evidence shows: An online survey experiment testing the effects of source trust, pro-vaccine evidence, and dual-processing in expert messages recommending child COVID-19 vaccination to parents

Increasing child vaccination rates is a critical step toward mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Both distrust in expert sources and concern about the safety and efficacy of vaccines may contribute to parent vaccine hesitancy. The present study is the first to test the effectiveness of building trust and providing evidence supporting child COVID-19 vaccines in recommendation messages for parents. Based on dual-processing theories, emphasis on source trustworthiness and pro-vaccine evidence may each be particularly effective when the other is not present. It was hypothesized that these two approaches would have main and interaction effects on perceived message effectiveness and pro-vaccine beliefs. A between-subjects 2 (trust-building appeal vs. no trust-building appeal) X 2 (pro-vaccine evidence vs. no pro-vaccine evidence) online survey experiment was conducted in December 2021 and January 2022 with United States parents/guardians of children <18 years old (n = 401). As hypothesized, trust and pro-vaccine evidence each had significant simple main effects on both outcomes. Analysis of variance showed a significant negative interaction effect of trust and pro-vaccine evidence on perceived message effectiveness [F(3, 394) = 6.47; η2 = 0.02, p = 0.002; 95% CI (0.01, 0.11)], supporting the dual-processing hypothesis. The interaction effect on pro-vaccine beliefs was also negative but not significant [F(3, 394) = 2.69; η2 = 0.01; p = 0.102; 95% CI (0.00, 0.03)]. Either highlighting evidence supporting vaccines or building trust in expert sources can influence parent vaccine support. Messages which include strong evidence supporting recommended behaviors may influence recommendation acceptance even among those with lower trust in expert sources and establishing trust may reduce the need to describe available evidence.

Strategies to Address COVID-19 Vaccine and Pregnancy Myths

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) poses risks to pregnant women and their infants. The spread of misinformation about COVID-19 vaccination is a barrier to optimizing vaccination rates among women of childbearing age. We conducted an environmental scan to identify misinformation about COVID-19 vaccination, pregnancy, and fertility, and a review to identify evidence to refute misinformation and strategies to correct and prevent the spread of misinformation. Seven identified themes of misinformation are: the vaccine causes female infertility; can cause miscarriage; and can decrease male fertility; mRNA vaccines attack the placenta; pregnant and breastfeeding persons should not get the vaccine; the vaccine can change menstrual cycles; and vaccinated people can spread infertility symptoms to unvaccinated people. Strategies that can be implemented by social media platforms to help prevent misinformation spread and correct existing health misinformation include improving information regulation by modifying community standards, implementing surveillance algorithms, and applying warning labels to potentially misleading posts. Health services organizations and clinicians can implement health misinformation policies, directly recommend vaccinations, provide credible explanations and resources to debunk misinformation, educate patients and populations on spotting misinformation, and apply effective communication strategies. More research is needed to assess longer-term effects of vaccination among women of childbearing age to strengthen the defense against misinformation and to evaluate strategies that aim to prevent and correct misinformation spread about COVID-19 vaccinations.

Television News Media Consumption and Misperceptions about COVID-19 among US Populations at High Risk for Severe Health Outcomes Early in the Pandemic

Research indicates that misperceptions that become part of people's initial mental models about an issue tend to persist and influence their attitudes even after the misperception has been corrected. Recent work on evolving mental models suggests that communication efforts about the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath may be improved by crafting messages that acknowledge biases and misunderstandings about the virus and other infectious diseases that may remain among members of the target audience. This study was designed to provide insight into such biases by: (1) establishing salient categories of COVID-related misperceptions in the earliest months of the pandemic in the United States among (a) the general population, and (b) demographic sub-populations at high risk of severe health outcomes; (2) identifying demographic predictors of misperceptions; and (3) examining the relationship between consumption of different television news outlets and agreement with misperceptions about COVID-19. A national sample of 1,000 adults in the United States (48.1% male; M age = 47.32, SD = 18.01; 72.9% White/Caucasian, 14.3% Black/African American, 15.9% Hispanic/Latinx) completed a survey between March 19 and March 25, 2020. Results identify prevalent classes of salient early COVID-19 misperceptions. Adjusting for numerous covariates, data indicated individuals over the age of 60 held the fewest COVID-related misperceptions among various demographic sub-populations, misperceptions were most prevalent among Black respondents, and increased consumption of television network news was associated with lower levels of misperception. Consumption of some 24-hour news networks (FOX and MSNBC) were significant positive correlates of misperceptions.

Face masks influence emotion judgments of facial expressions: a drift-diffusion model

Face masks slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2, but it has been unknown how masks might reshape social interaction. One important possibility is that masks may influence how individuals communicate emotion through facial expressions. Here, we clarify to what extent-and how-masks influence facial emotion communication, through drift-diffusion modeling (DDM). Over two independent pre-registered studies, conducted three and 6 months into the COVID-19 pandemic, online participants judged expressions of 6 emotions (anger, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness, surprise) with the lower or upper face "masked" or unmasked. Participants in Study 1 (N = 228) correctly identified expressions above chance with lower face masks. However, they were less likely-and slower-to correctly identify these expressions relative to without masks, and they accumulated evidence for emotion more slowly-via decreased drift rate in DDM. This pattern replicated and intensified 3 months later in Study 2 (N = 264). These findings highlight how effectively individuals still communicate with masks, but also explain why they can experience difficulties communicating when masked. By revealing evidence accumulation as the underlying mechanism, this work suggests that time-sensitive situations may risk miscommunication with masks. This research could inform critical interventions to promote continued mask wearing as needed.

Fostering mask-wearing with virality metrics and social media literacy: evidence from the U.S. and Korea

Although social media can pose threats to the public health by spreading misinformation and causing confusion, they can also provide wider access to health information and opportunities for health surveillance. The current study investigates the ways in which preventive health behaviors and norms can be promoted on social media by analyzing data from surveys and experiments conducted in the U.S. and South Korea. Survey results suggest that the pathway from social media use for COVID-19 information to mask-wearing behavior through mask-wearing norms emerges only among individuals with strong perceived social media literacy in the U.S. Experimental findings show that wear-a-mask campaign posts on social media foster mask-wearing norms and behavioral intention when they come with large (vs. small) virality metrics (e.g., Likes, shares) in both the U.S. and South Korea. Additionally, American users are more willing to engage with posts that come with supportive (vs. mixed) comments by Liking, sharing and commenting. The results highlight the need to cultivate social media literacy and opportunities for exploiting social media virality metrics for promoting public health norms and behaviors.

Media Consumption and COVID-19-Related Precautionary Behaviors During the Early Pandemic: Survey Study of Older Adults

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, media sources dedicated significant time and resources to improve knowledge of COVID-19 precautionary behaviors (eg, wearing a mask). Many older adults report using the television, radio, print newspapers, or web-based sources to get information on political news, yet little is known about whether consuming news in the early phase of the pandemic led to behavior change, particularly in older adults.

OBJECTIVE

The goals of this study were to determine (1) whether dosage of news consumption on the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with COVID-19 precautionary behaviors; (2) whether being an ever-user of social media was associated with engagement in COVID-19 precautionary behaviors; and (3) among social media users, whether change in social media use during the early stages of the pandemic was associated with engagement in COVID-19 precautionary behaviors.

METHODS

Data were obtained from a University of Florida-administered study conducted in May and June of 2020. Linear regression models were used to assess the association between traditional news and social media use on COVID-19 precautionary behaviors (eg, mask wearing, hand washing, and social distancing behaviors). Analyses were adjusted for demographic characteristics, including age, sex, marital status, and education level.

RESULTS

In a sample of 1082 older adults (mean age 73, IQR 68-78 years; 615/1082, 56.8% female), reporting 0 and <1 hour per day of media consumption, relative to >3 hours per day, was associated with lower engagement in COVID-19 precautionary behaviors in models adjusted for demographic characteristics (β=-2.00; P<.001 and β=-.41; P=.01, respectively). In addition, increasing social media use (relative to unchanged use) was associated with engagement in more COVID-19 precautionary behaviors (β=.70, P<.001). No associations were found between being an ever-user of social media and engaging in COVID-19 precautionary behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrated an association between higher media consumption and greater engagement in COVID-19 precautionary behaviors in older adults. These findings suggest that media can be effectively used as a public health tool for communication of prevention strategies and best practices during future health threats, even among populations who are historically less engaged in certain types of media.

Cognitive and emotional factors related to COVID-19 among high-risk ethnically diverse adults at the onset of the New York City outbreak: A cross-sectional survey

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among high-risk, racially/ethnically diverse adults at the point in time when New York City (NYC) became the COVID-19 pandemic's global epicenter. The study objective was to assess the threat and coping appraisals (cognitive factors known to correspond with people's willingness to adopt behaviorally focused interventions) and levels of distress, anxiety, and intolerance for uncertainty (emotional factors). Survey respondents were recruited in April 2020 using an online survey with unpaid recruitment on the GetHealthyHeights.org community-oriented website. We also recruited participants that engaged in previous research studies to gain survey responses from community members at higher risk for COVID-19 complications due to comorbidities compared to the general population. Analysis was performed to test for differences in survey responses by comorbidities, age, race, ethnicity, and employment status. Results show that the devastating effects of the pandemic appear to have uniquely impacted minority respondents, who reported significantly higher levels of anxiety and were significantly more likely to report having little control over whether they will get COVID-19 compared with White/non-Hispanic respondents. Minority respondents also had significantly higher mean scores on the behaviorally focused dimension of the intolerance of uncertainty (IU) scale, which measures avoidance and paralysis in the face of uncertainty. In multivariate analysis, IU predicted anxiety levels, and this association was not mediated by cognitive factors (threat and coping appraisals). By conducting this survey early in the pandemic, our study uniquely evaluated cognitive and emotional factors among a racially/ethnically diverse group of NYC residents during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings suggest the need to acknowledge the disparities that appear to exist in pandemic response and for culturally tailored messaging and interventions. Few studies have reported differences by race and ethnicity during pandemic exposure. Therefore, further research on factors that may influence pandemic response among minority populations is needed.

"The Part Played by People" in Times of COVID-19: Interpersonal Communication about Media Coverage in a Pandemic Crisis

The study presented in this article examined individuals' interpersonal communication about media coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic. In times of a severe public health crisis, people rely heavily on media coverage to stay informed. Communicating with others about this coverage can help them gain deeper insights and evaluate pandemic-related information. According to the two-step flow of communication, opinion leaders, such as health experts, play an important role in interpersonal communication by disseminating information, influencing others, and providing orientation. To examine the nature of interpersonal communication about pandemic-related media coverage, we conducted 22 semi-structured interviews. We explored: a) the communicative roles within the informal social network, b) the functions of the communication for the individual, and c) the potential transformations in the trajectory of the pandemic. Findings show that communication with close and more distant social contacts occurred largely on an equal basis, while the rare opinion leaders mainly emerged as information brokers. Communication about media coverage serves the functions of information sharing and retrieving, information validation, and coping with negative emotions. Finally, communication partners, roles, and conversational topics partly changed over time. Our study extends existing research on interpersonal communication about health topics, as well as on the COVID-19 pandemic.

Canadian public perceptions and experiences with information during the COVID-19 pandemic: strategies to optimize future risk communications

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the spread of misinformation worldwide. The purpose of this study was to explore perceptions of misinformation and preferred sources of obtaining COVID-19 information from those living in Canada. In particular, we sought to explore the perceptions of East Asian individuals in Canada, who experienced stigma related to COVID-19 messaging.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative thematic analysis study. Interviews were offered in English, Mandarin and Cantonese. Interviewers probed for domains related to knowledge about COVID-19, preferred sources of information, perceived barriers and facilitators of misinformation, and preferences for communication during a health emergency. Interviews were recorded, translated, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a framework approach. Transcripts were independently double-coded until > 60% agreement was reached. This study received research ethics approval.

RESULTS

Fifty-five interviews were conducted. The majority of participants were women (67%); median age was 52 years. 55% of participants were of East-Asian descent. Participants obtained information about COVID-19 from diverse English and non-English sources including news media, government agencies or representatives, social media, and personal networks. Challenges to seeking and understanding information included: encountering misinformation, making sense of evolving or conflicting public health guidance, and limited information on topics of interest. 65% of participants reported encountering COVID-19  misinformation. East Asian participants called on government officials to champion messaging to reduce stigmatizing and racist rhetoric and highlighted the importance of having accessible, non-English language information sources. Participants provided recommendations for future public health communications guidance during health emergencies, including preferences for message content, information messengers, dissemination platforms and format of messages. Almost all participants preferred receiving information from the Canadian government and found it helpful to utilize various mediums and platforms such as social media and news media for future risk communication, urging for consistency across all platforms.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide insights on Canadian experiences navigating COVID-19 information, where more than half perceived encountering misinformation on platforms when seeking COVID-19 information . We provide recommendations to inform public health communications during future health emergencies.

Predicting College Students’ Preventative Behavior During a Pandemic: The Role of the Health Belief Model, Source Credibility, and Health Literacy

In this study, we examined the effects of perceived source credibility of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and college student health literacy in predicting the likelihood of enacting preventative behaviors related to mitigating COVID-19. Using the Health Belief Model (HBM) as an explanatory tool, we analyzed how perceived source credibility and health literacy levels predict college students’ likelihood to enact preventative behaviors during a public health crisis. Sample population entirely consisted of undergraduate students enrolled in a basic communication course at a large, southern university. The participants completed survey questionnaires about their perceived health literacy, health beliefs, trust in the CDC, perceptions of COVID-19, and demographic measures during the fall 2020 semester. A multiple regression analysis revealed that (a) HBM predictors, health literacy and CDC source credibility accounted for 44% of the variance in likelihood of enacting preventative health behaviors, and (b) health literacy, CDC source credibility, and perceived severity were all positive predictors of enacting preventative health behaviors, while (c) perceived barriers negatively predicted enactment of preventative health behaviors. Perceived susceptibility and perceived benefits were not significant predictors of college student risk mitigation. Our data suggests the importance of health literacy and source credibility in predicting college students’ likelihood to enact preventative behaviors during public health crises.

Localizing COVID-19 Misinformation: A Case Study of Tracking Twitter Pandemic Narratives in Pennsylvania Using Computational Network Science

The recent COVID-19 outbreak has highlighted the importance of effective communication strategies to control the spread of the virus and debunk misinformation. By using accurate narratives, both online and offline, we can motivate communities to follow preventive measures and shape attitudes toward them. However, the abundance of misinformation stories can lead to vaccine hesitancy, obstructing the timely implementation of preventive measures, such as vaccination. Therefore, it is crucial to create appropriate and community-centered solutions based on regional data analysis to address mis/disinformation narratives and implement effective countermeasures specific to the particular geographic area.In this case study, we have attempted to create a research pipeline to analyze local narratives on social media, particularly Twitter, to identify misinformation spread locally, using the state of Pennsylvania as an example. Our proposed methodology pipeline identifies main communication trends and misinformation stories for the major cities and counties in southwestern PA, aiming to assist local health officials and public health specialists in instantly addressing pandemic communication issues, including misinformation narratives. Additionally, we investigated anti-vax actors' strategies in promoting harmful narratives. Our pipeline includes data collection, Twitter influencer analysis, Louvain clustering, BEND maneuver analysis, bot identification, and vaccine stance detection. Public health organizations and community-centered entities can implement this data-driven approach to health communication to inform their pandemic strategies.

Community-oriented Motivational Interviewing (MI): A novel framework extending MI to address COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in online social media platforms

Researchers have linked circulating misinformation in online platforms to low COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Two disparate literatures provide relevant initial guidance to address the problem. Motivational Interviewing (MI) effectively reduces vaccine hesitancy in clinical environments; meanwhile, social scientists note inoculation, rebuttal, and appeals to accuracy are persuasive in digital contexts. A tension is inherent in these approaches. MI in digital forums may induce an 'illusory truth effect,' wherein falsehoods appear more accurate through repetition. Yet, rebutting misinformation directly may elicit backfire or reactance effects, motivating some to amplify their presentation of misinformation. Building on Identity Process Theory, we propose a theoretical framework for conducting MI-based infodemiology interventions among digital communities that conceptualizes the community in toto (rather than one specific person) as the unit of focus. Case examples from interventions on public Facebook posts illustrate three processes unique to such interventions: 1) Navigating tension between addressing commenters and "bystanders"; 2) Activating pro-vaccine bystanders; and 3) Reframing uncertainty or information individuals might find concerning or threatening according to implied collective values. This paper suggests community-oriented MI can maximize persuasive effects on bystanders while minimizing potential reactance from those with committed beliefs, thereby guiding community-oriented public health messaging interventions enacted in digital environments.

Applying Structural Equation Modelling to Understand the Implementation of Social Distancing in the Professional Lives of Healthcare Workers

This study, based on the normalization process theory (NPT), explores the implementation of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)-specifically social distancing (SD)-in the professional lives of healthcare workers in three Pakistani hospitals. We collected and analysed health workers' data using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) and assessed the policy implications of the results. Violations of normality assumptions in the quantitative data and the need for scores of independent variables for follow-up analysis guided the researchers to adopt a structural equation modelling process that involved a stepwise evaluation process for convergent validity, individual item validity, discriminant validity, the structural model relationship, and overall model fitness. Theoretical constructs coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring were found to influence the normalization of SD. The results show that SD was normalized in the professional lives of healthcare workers through strong collective action (resources required) and reflexive monitoring (appraisal) but weak cognitive participation (actors' engagement) and coherence (sense-making). Low and middle-income countries (LMICs) should work more on actors' sense-making and engagement in dealing with healthcare crises that require SD. The research findings can aid policy institutions in better understanding the loopholes in the implementation process and making better policies.

How Anti-Social Personality Traits and Anti-Establishment Views Promote Beliefs in Election Fraud, QAnon, and COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation

Conspiracy theories and misinformation (CTM) became a salient feature of the Trump era. However, traditional explanations of political attitudes and behaviors inadequately account for beliefs in CTM or the deleterious behaviors they are associated with. Here, we integrate disparate literatures to explain beliefs in CTM regarding COVID-19, QAnon, and voter fraud. We aim to provide a more holistic accounting, and to determine which political, psychological, and social factors are most associated with such beliefs. Using a unique national survey, we find that anti-social personality traits, anti-establishment orientations, and support for Donald Trump are more strongly related to beliefs in CTM than traditional left-right orientations or other frequently posited factors, such as education, science literacy, and social media use. Our findings encourage researchers to move beyond the traditional correlates of political behavior when examining beliefs that express anti-social tendencies or a deep skepticism of social and political institutions.

COVID-19 Spotlights Connections between Disease and Multiple Lifestyle Factors

The SARS-CoV-2 virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), and the disease it causes (COVID-19), have had a profound impact on global human society and threaten to continue to have such an impact with newly emerging variants. Because of the widespread effects of SARS-CoV-2, understanding how lifestyle choices impact the severity of disease is imperative. This review summarizes evidence for an involvement of chronic, non-resolving inflammation, gut microbiome disruption (dysbiosis with loss of beneficial microorganisms), and impaired viral defenses, all of which are associated with an imbalanced lifestyle, in severe disease manifestations and post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC). Humans' physiological propensity for uncontrolled inflammation and severe COVID-19 are briefly contrasted with bats' low propensity for inflammation and their resistance to viral disease. This insight is used to identify positive lifestyle factors with the potential to act in synergy for restoring balance to the immune response and gut microbiome, and thereby protect individuals against severe COVID-19 and PASC. It is proposed that clinicians should consider recommending lifestyle factors, such as stress management, balanced nutrition and physical activity, as preventative measures against severe viral disease and PASC.

Which profile of people tends to ignore preventive measures against COVID-19? The role of intelligence and the big five personality traits

Although a considerable amount of research has been done on the role of personality traits in the prediction of compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures, the possible role of intelligence has been studied far less. For this reason, the main goal of the current study was to determine what the predictive role of intelligence is when considered together with the Big Five personality traits. A total of 404 participants answered three instruments: the Overall Personality Assessment Scale (OPERAS), which assesses personality traits, the COmpliance with pandemic COmmands Scale (COCOS), which assesses compliance, and the test of intelligence International Cognitive Ability Resource (ICAR Sample Test). The results show that all variables are correlated with compliance, although the weight of emotional stability on compliance was not significant. The only variable negatively related to compliance was extraversion. The results of the structural equation modelling suggest that intelligence has a direct relationship with compliance, and an indirect relationship through openness to experience. According to the results, intelligence is an important variable that should be considered in the prediction of compliance with these preventive measures.

Shot Talk: Development and Pilot Test of a Theory of Planned Behavior Campaign to Combat College Student COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

Among college students, evidence of relatively lower levels of concern of COVID-19 infection, rapid rates of transmission, and lagging vaccination rates substantiates a need to combat college student COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. This two-phase study comprised formative research, development, and pilot testing of a campaign to combat COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among college students. In phase one, focus group discussions with college students (N = 48) uncovered their specific attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control toward the COVID-19 vaccine. Thematic analysis revealed concerns about vaccine safety, efficacy, cost, and politicization, as well as perceived barriers to accessing information and the vaccine itself. Guided by formative research from phase one and the theory of planned behavior, phase two comprised campaign development and pilot testing. Participants (N = 30) completed a pretest and posttest survey assessing TPB constructs and awareness of information toward COVID-19 vaccination surrounding a two-week peer-to-peer campaign called Shot Talk. Results revealed increases in safety-related attitudes, perceived behavioral control, and awareness of information regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Practical implications for theory-driven campaigns and strategic messaging for primary COVID-19 vaccination and beyond are discussed.

The impact of COVID-19 misinformation and trust in institutions on preventive behaviors

Misinformation related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has the potential to suppress preventive behaviors that mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Early research on the behavioral consequences of COVID-19 misinformation is mixed, and most rely on cross-sectional data. We examined whether believing in COVID-19 misinformation at one time point influences engaging in preventive behaviors later. In addition, we investigated the role of trust in institutions. We conducted a two-wave survey in South Korea and examined the association between belief in COVID-19 misinformation at Wave 1 and preventive behaviors at Wave 2 controlling for preventive behaviors at Wave 1. We also analyzed whether there is an interaction between belief in COVID-19 misinformation and trust in institutions. Belief in COVID-19 misinformation at Wave 1 significantly increased avoidance of preventive behaviors at Wave 2, but after accounting for trust in institutions, this effect disappeared. Rather, trust in institutions significantly decreased avoidance of preventive behaviors. In addition, misinformation increased avoidance of preventive behaviors among those who trusted institutions the most. Results suggest that building trust in institutions is essential in promoting COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Belief in COVID-19 misinformation may have harmful effects, but these effects were pronounced for those who highly trust institutions.

Perceived COVID-19 susceptibility and preventive behaviors: moderating effects of social support in Italy and South Korea

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic hit Italy much harder than South Korea. As a way of explaining the different impact in the two countries, this study examines the moderating role of social support on the relationship between perceived susceptibility and preventive behaviors in the two countries.

METHODS

Surveys were conducted in South Korea (n = 1396) and Italy (n = 487) of participants aged 50 to 89 years.

RESULTS

South Koreans felt higher levels of perceived social support than their Italian counterparts. As would be expected, greater perceived susceptibility was associated with increased preventive behavior. Furthermore, a significant three-way interaction effect was found for perceived susceptibility, social support, and country. For Italians, a person who feels him/herself highly susceptible will increase preventive behaviors, if there is a lot of social support. On the other hand, for South Koreans, those with a low level of susceptibility perform more preventive measures than people with a high level of susceptibility if there is a lot of social support.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insights into how cognitive factors, such as susceptibility and severity, as well as social and environmental factors can be taken into account, and the public be told the real risk and given behavioral guidelines when a pandemic is approaching. Given the critical role of social support as a coping mechanism in crisis situations, societies should mull over ways to increase emotional and instrumental support.

Varieties of corona news: a cross-national study on the foundations of online misinformation production during the COVID-19 pandemic

Misinformation in the media is produced by hard-to-gauge thought mechanisms employed by individuals or collectivities. In this paper, we shed light on what the country-specific factors of falsehood production in the context of COVID-19 Pandemic might be. Collecting our evidence from the largest misinformation dataset used in the COVID-19 misinformation literature with close to 11,000 pieces of falsehood, we explore patterns of misinformation production by employing a variety of methodological tools including algorithms for text similarity, clustering, network distances, and other statistical tools. Covering news produced in a span of more than 14 months, our paper also differentiates itself by its use of carefully controlled hand-labeling of topics of falsehood. Findings suggest that country-level factors do not provide the strongest support for predicting outcomes of falsehood, except for one phenomenon: in countries with serious press freedom problems and low human development, the mostly unknown authors of misinformation tend to focus on similar content. In addition, the intensity of discussion on animals, predictions and symptoms as part of fake news is the biggest differentiator between nations; whereas news on conspiracies, medical equipment and risk factors offer the least explanation to differentiate. Based on those findings, we discuss some distinct public health and communication strategies to dispel misinformation in countries with particular characteristics. We also emphasize that a global action plan against misinformation is needed given the highly globalized nature of the online media environment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42001-022-00193-5.

Impact of mental health, job insecurity, and COVID-19 symptoms on protective behavior changes among White, Black, and other minorities in the US

INTRODUCTION

Job insecurity such as loss of jobs or reduced wages has become a serious social problem in the US since COVID-19 started. Combined with psychological distress and experience of COVID-19 symptoms, the changes of people's protective behaviors vary across states in the US.

METHODS

This research investigated racial differences in the COVID-19 related factors among White, Black, and other minorities in the US, and examined how mental health mediated the impact of job insecurity on protective behaviors, and how the COVID-19 symptoms moderated the mediation effect of mental health. The 731 valid responses in a cross-sectional survey from May 23 to 27, 2020, in the US were analyzed with independent sample t-tests, Pearson's chi-square tests, and path analysis.

RESULTS

The findings showed that there were significant differences in job insecurity and Nonpharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) practice among White, Black, and other minorities. Job insecurity was significantly negatively associated with NPIs practice and was significantly positively associated with mental health. Mental health significantly partially mediated the effect of job insecurity on NPIs practice, in that job insecurity is a better predictor of NPIs practice for individuals with worse mental health than that for individuals with better mental health. Experience of COVID-19 symptoms moderates the mediation effect of mental health on the relationship between job insecurity and NPIs practice, in that mental health is a better predictor of NPIs practice for individuals with a higher experience of COVID-19 symptoms than for individuals with a lower experience of COVID-19 symptoms.

DISCUSSION

The findings in this study shed lights on psychological and behavioral studies of people's behavior changes during a pandemic. The study indicates the importance of treating mental health to promote protective behaviors during a pandemic, as well as advocating for employees by identifying the needs for those whose jobs were negatively impacted the most.

COVID-19 fake news among the general population: motives, sociodemographic, attitude/behavior and impacts – a systematic review

Purpose

This systematic review aims to synthesize the literature reporting the motives, sociodemographic, attitude/behavior and impacts of fake news during the COVID-19 pandemic, targeting the general population worldwide.

Design/methodology/approach

A systematic review approach was adopted based on PRISMA, targeting articles published in five databases from January 2020 to November 2021. The screening resulted in 46 eligible papers.

Findings

Results indicate low level of awareness, knowledge, media/health literacy, low trust in science/scientists and entertainment/socialization to be the main motivating drivers for fake news dissemination, whereas the phenomenon is more prominent among those with low socio-economic status, and males. Negative impacts were reported due to fake news dissemination, especially violation to precautionary measures, negative affections, and low trust in government/news, with many believing that others are more susceptible to fake news than themselves.

Social implications

Considering the pandemic is still on-going and the deleterious consequences of fake news, there is a need for cohort-based interventions from the concerned authorities.

Originality/value

The systematic review covers a wide timeline of 23 months (i.e. up to end of 2022) targeting five well-known databases, hence articles examined are deemed extensive and comprehensive. The review specifically focused on the general population with results revealing interesting motives, sociodemographic profiles, attitude and impact of this phenomenon during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Peer review

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-02-2022-0082.

“Masks do not work”: COVID-19 misperceptions and theory-driven corrective strategies on Facebook

Purpose

One of the most prolific areas of misinformation research is examining corrective strategies in messaging. The main purposes of the current study are to examine the effects of (1) partisan media (2) credibility perceptions and emotional reactions and (3) theory driven corrective messages on people's misperceptions about COVID-19 mask wearing behaviors.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors used a randomized experimental design to test the hypotheses. The data were collected via the survey firm Lucid. The number of participants was 485. The study was conducted using Qualtrics after the research project was exempt by the Institutional Research Board of a large University in the US. The authors conducted an online experiment with four conditions, narrative versus statistics and individual versus collective. The manipulation messages were constructed as screenshots from Facebook.

Findings

The findings of this study show that higher exposure to liberal media was associated with lower misperceptions, whereas higher credibility perceptions of and positive reactions toward the misinformation post and negative emotions toward the correction comment were associated with higher misperceptions. Moreover, the findings showed that participants in the narrative and collective-frame condition had the lowest misperceptions.

Originality/value

The authors tested theory driven misinformation corrective messages to understand the impact of these messages and multiple related variables on misperceptions about COVID-19 mask wearing. This study contributes to the existing misinformation correction literature by investigating the explanatory power of the two well-established media effects theories on misinformation correction messaging and by identifying essential individual characteristics that should be considered when evaluating how misperceptions about the COVID-19 crisis works and gets reduced.

Peer review

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-11-2021-0600

Relationship between Facial Color Changes and Psychological Problems Associated with Lower Back Pain

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine whether a non-contact sensor that detects complexion changes can be used to assess the psychological state of patients with chronic lower back pain (LBP). Materials and Methods: Twenty-six patients with LBP (LBP group; mean age = 68.0 ± 13.9 years) and 18 control subjects without LBP (control group; mean age = 60.8 ± 16.1 years) were included in the study. All the subjects in the two groups wore headphones when asked LBP-related and LBP-unrelated questions. During questioning, the facial image of the subjects was captured using a video camera, and the complexion of the subjects was converted into red, green, and blue (RGB) values. RGB correlation coefficients (RGBCCs; range: 0-1) represent the difference in complexion between LBP-related and LBP-unrelated questions. A high RGBCC indicates that the brain is more activated by LBP-related questions than by LBP-unrelated questions. We also noted the scores of subjects on the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Results: There were no significant differences in RGBCC between the control and LBP groups (0.64 versus 0.56, p = 0.08). In the LBP group, no correlation was observed between RGBCC and each examination item of NRS, JOABPEQ, and HADS. In contrast, a correlation was observed between RGBCC and the rumination subscale of PCS in the LBP group (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient = 0.40, p = 0.04). Conclusions: The complexion of patients with catastrophic thinking changes when the patients are asked LBP-related questions.

Mask wearing on an HBCU campus during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective: Young adults of age 18-29 years old account for the most COVID-19 cases in the US, and ethnic groups were affected disproportionately. Correctly wearing a face mask remains a critical intervention for COVID-19 mitigation. The study aimed to examine how well Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) residents adhered to mask wearing during the pandemic. Methods: We conducted an observational study on an urban HBCU campus and the neighborhoods in Maryland for 13 weeks in spring 2021. Results: Of 1926 (1126 on campus; 800 off campus) persons observed, 89.8% wore masks, with 83.5% covering their mouths and noses. The HBCU campus showed better mask adherence than neighborhoods (92.0% vs. 86.7%). The most common improper mask wearing was nose out, followed by only-on-chin. Cloth and surgical masks were worn the most. Conclusion: The HBCU campus and neighborhood settings presented a high rate of facemask use during the pandemic.

A Health Crisis in the Age of Misinformation: How Social Media and Mass Media Influenced Misperceptions about COVID-19 and Compliance Behavior

The media are important information disseminators in society. Particularly in uncertain times, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, citizens are very "media dependent." The way in which people are informed about the coronavirus heavily depends on the type of media they use. Especially on social media, the share of misinformation is considerable, which might impact the way in which people comply with preventive measures. Our study investigates how media use affects misperceptions about the coronavirus and whether this influences important behavioral determinants as well as compliance behavior itself. The results of a unique 5-wave panel survey (N = 1,741) conducted between April 2020 and October 2020 show that the use of mass media reduces misperceptions. The same was found for Twitter users, whereas Facebook and Instagram users have more misperceptions about the coronavirus. Misperceptions negatively influence the perceived severity, susceptibility and efficacy of preventive measures taken by governments, which may ultimately result in decreased compliance. Our findings underline the important role of media consumption and misperceptions in shaping citizens' beliefs and behavior regarding COVID-19. They re-emphasize the importance of mass media, such as newspapers, television broadcasts or reliable news websites, to inform the public about current affairs. They also imply that platform media might be more heterogeneous in their effects than mass media.

Knowledge acquisition and precautionary behaviors for individual resilience to the COVID-19 pandemic: A study of rural Latin America

The concept of resilience gains prominence as human society faces more frequent and impactful shocks and disturbances. This study seeks to investigate how rural populations build resilience amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A simple theoretical model is presented to illustrate the determinants of knowledge acquisition and precautionary behaviors among rural residents. Based on a High Frequency Phone Survey of 10,583 Latin American adults, this study found that rural residents were less capable of using informal channels (e.g., the internet) to collect COVID-19 information. Younger generations were generally less likely to adopt precautionary behaviors than the elderly. The age disparity, however, was relatively minor for rural populations. Costly preventive measures such as staying at home are less affordable for rural residents. Meanwhile, confidence in government ensures better compliance to ensure public health guidelines. We argue that internet skills, prosociality, and political confidence are necessary to build rural residents' resilience during the pandemic.

Measuring the effects of misinformation exposure and beliefs on behavioural intentions: a COVID-19 vaccination study

Misinformation has been a pressing issue since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, threatening our ability to effectively act on the crisis. Nevertheless, little is known about the actual effects of fake news on behavioural intentions. Does exposure to or belief in misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines affect people's intentions to receive such a vaccine? This paper attempts to address this question via three preregistered experiments (N = 3463). In Study 1, participants (n = 1269) were exposed to fabricated pro- or anti-vaccine information or to neutral true information, and then asked about their intentions to get vaccinated. In Study 2, participants (n = 646) were exposed to true pro- and anti-vaccine information, while Study 3 (n = 1548) experimentally manipulated beliefs in novel misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines by increasing exposure to the information. The results of these three studies showed that exposure to false information about the vaccines had little effect on participants' intentions to get vaccinated, even when multiple exposures led them to believe the headlines to be more accurate. An exploratory meta-analysis of studies 1 and 3, with a combined sample size of 2683, showed that exposure to false information both supporting and opposing COVID-19 vaccines actually increased vaccination intentions, though the effect size was very small. We conclude by cautioning researchers against equating exposure to misinformation or perceived accuracy of false news with actual behaviours.