A Mixed Methods Inquiry into the Role of Tom Hanks' COVID-19 Social Media Disclosure in Shaping Willingness to Engage in Prevention Behaviors

The Impact of Celebrity and Influencer Illness Disclosures

When celebrities, political figures, influencers, or anyone with a large following publicly disclose an illness or die, the news becomes a de facto public health campaign. Until health communicators began studying such disclosures and the effects of the following waves of media coverage, however, it was not known to what extent these events impacted the public. A growing body of research has empirically documented these events and examined the factors that predict which types of audiences are most affected and why. Beyond motivating research opportunities, celebrity and influencer health disclosures or deaths can impact calls to hotlines, views on health-related websites, discussions of related topics on social media, behavioral changes relevant to the disclosure, increased news coverage of celebrity health research, integration of celebrity health narratives into strategic health campaigns, and even policy changes. We provide an overview of research conducted in this area and detail examples of the impact that celebrity health disclosures and studies about those disclosures have had on public discourse and public health.

Social Media as an Effective Provider of Quality-Assured and Accurate Information to Increase Vaccine Rates: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Vaccination programs are instrumental in prolonging and improving people's lives by preventing diseases such as measles, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and influenza from escalating into fatal epidemics. Despite the significant impact of these programs, a substantial number of individuals, including 20 million infants annually, lack sufficient access to vaccines. Therefore, it is imperative to raise awareness about vaccination programs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the potential utilization of social media, assessing its scalability and robustness in delivering accurate and reliable information to individuals who are contemplating vaccination decisions for themselves or on behalf of their children.

METHODS

The protocol for this review is registered in PROSPERO (identifier CRD42022304229) and is being carried out in compliance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Comprehensive searches have been conducted in databases including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Google Scholar. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were deemed eligible for inclusion in this study. The target population encompasses the general public, including adults, children, and adolescents. The defined interventions comprise platforms facilitating 2-way communication for sharing information. These interventions were compared against traditional interventions and teaching methods, referred to as the control group. The outcomes assessed in the included studies encompassed days unvaccinated, vaccine acceptance, and the uptake of vaccines compared with baseline. The studies underwent a risk-of-bias assessment utilizing the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for RCTs, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) assessment.

RESULTS

This review included 10 studies, detailed in 12 articles published between 2012 and 2022, conducted in the United States, China, Jordan, Australia, and Israel. The studies involved platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, and non-general-purpose social media. The outcomes examined in these studies focused on the uptake of vaccines compared with baseline, vaccine acceptance, and the number of days individuals remained unvaccinated. The overall sample size for this review was 26,286, with individual studies ranging from 58 to 21,592 participants. The effect direction plot derived from articles of good and fair quality indicated a nonsignificant outcome (P=.12).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that, in a real-world scenario, an equal number of positive and negative results may be expected due to the interventions' impact on the acceptance and uptake of vaccines. Nevertheless, there is a rationale for accumulating experience to optimize the use of social media with the aim of enhancing vaccination rates. Social media can serve as a tool with the potential to disseminate information and boost vaccination rates within a population. However, relying solely on social media is not sufficient, given the complex structures at play in vaccine acceptance. Effectiveness hinges on various factors working in tandem. It is crucial that authorized personnel closely monitor and moderate discussions on social media to ensure responsible and accurate information dissemination.

A mixed methods study exploring requests for unproven COVID therapies such as ivermectin and healthcare distrust in the rural South

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to contentious discourse regarding unproven COVID-19 therapies (UCTs),(e.g. ivermectin). Despite recommendations against it, ivermectin remains, in some areas, highly demanded. The goal of this study is to understand patient and provider perspectives about UCTs (e.g., ivermectin) and how responses to requests for UCTs impact healthcare distrust. This mixed methods observational study was conducted in a rural healthcare system in the Southern United States. Adults (n = 26) with a history of COVID-19 or clinicians (n = 8) from the same system were interviewed using questionnaires assessing healthcare distrust and qualitatively interviewed exploring perceptions about UCTs. Patient themes were: 1) Importance of anecdotal stories for decision-making; 2) Use of haphazard approaches to 'research'; 3) Strong distrust of government and healthcare organizations; 4) Inherent trust in local healthcare; 5) Decision-making as weighing pros/cons; and 6) Feeling a right to try medications. High survey medians indicated high distrust with differences of 8.5 points for those who requested/used ivermectin versus those who did not (p = 0.027). Clinician themes were: 1) Frustration when patients trust social media over clinicians; 2) Acceptance of community beliefs about UCTs; 3) Distrust originating outside of the healthcare system; 4) Feeling torn about prescribing UCTs to build trust; and 5) Variable educational strategies. When clinicians are perceived as aligned with government, this may void patients' trust of clinicians. Clinicians should leverage trust in local healthcare and distance themselves from distrusted information sources. Ethical questions arise regarding appropriateness of acquiescing to patient requests for ivermectin for building trust.

COVID-19 risk perception and hoax beliefs in the US immediately before and after the announcement of President Trump's diagnosis

A notable challenge of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been public scepticism over the severity of the disease, or even its existence. Such scepticism is politically skewed in the USA, with conservatives more likely to downplay or deny the risks of the virus. However, the hospitalization of President Trump with COVID-19 in October 2020 served as a high-profile exemplar of the reality and risks of the virus, and as such may have influenced opinions, particularly for US conservatives. We investigate whether President Trump testing positive was associated with changes in public attitudes towards the virus. In two studies, we surveyed independent representative US samples before and after the announcement of Trump's illness. In Study 1, measuring risk perceptions of the virus, we find that participants surveyed before and after the announcement did not differ in their risk perception regardless of political orientation. In Study 2, measuring belief that the virus is a hoax, we find that among those on the far right of the political spectrum, hoax belief was lower for those surveyed after the announcement, suggesting that Trump's hospitalization may have affected the beliefs of those most receptive to the President's earlier suggestions that the virus might be a hoax.

Immune moral models? Pro-social rule breaking as a moral enhancement approach for ethical AI

We are moving towards a future where Artificial Intelligence (AI) based agents make many decisions on behalf of humans. From healthcare decision-making to social media censoring, these agents face problems, and make decisions with ethical and societal implications. Ethical behaviour is a critical characteristic that we would like in a human-centric AI. A common observation in human-centric industries, like the service industry and healthcare, is that their professionals tend to break rules, if necessary, for pro-social reasons. This behaviour among humans is defined as pro-social rule breaking. To make AI agents more human-centric, we argue that there is a need for a mechanism that helps AI agents identify when to break rules set by their designers. To understand when AI agents need to break rules, we examine the conditions under which humans break rules for pro-social reasons. In this paper, we present a study that introduces a ‘vaccination strategy dilemma’ to human participants and analyzes their response. In this dilemma, one needs to decide whether they would distribute COVID-19 vaccines only to members of a high-risk group (follow the enforced rule) or, in selected cases, administer the vaccine to a few social influencers (break the rule), which might yield an overall greater benefit to society. The results of the empirical study suggest a relationship between stakeholder utilities and pro-social rule breaking (PSRB), which neither deontological nor utilitarian ethics completely explain. Finally, the paper discusses the design characteristics of an ethical agent capable of PSRB and the future research directions on PSRB in the AI realm. We hope that this will inform the design of future AI agents, and their decision-making behaviour.

A Game of Covid: Strategic Thoughts About a Ludified Pandemic

Many aspects of handling the COVID-19 pandemic bear a resemblance to patterns found in games. We observe point displays and leader boards, the visible assumption of roles, classic archetypes, the collection of resources, and spatial awareness. We argue that these patterns manifest spontaneously as a form of analogical reasoning, because people lack cultural and individual norms as well as cognitive scripts for a pandemic. Trying to find systematic similarities between a novel and a familiar situation is an essential cognitive strategy and a cultural tool, resulting in a spontaneous ludification of this crisis. Unfortunately, most institutions, the media and policymakers focus on attributes that are easy to communicate, not on relations and causal chains. This results in shallow analogies, where the mechanisms and dynamics of COVID-19 are not addressed. This can cause a sense of helplessness, where many people remain passive viewers. A pandemic, however, calls for cooperative action of people who understand the relations between different factors and stakeholders in order to mitigate several negative effects linked to such a crisis. We propose a psychologically founded “Strategic gamification” (here in the context of a pandemic), a form of sense-making that builds on spontaneously emerging ludic elements. By extending upon those elements through the lens of game design, we can shape the mechanics, dynamics and esthetics of a serious context in a more meaningful way. The resulting analogies have better predictive power and are suited to utilize positive aspects of gamification like engagement, elaboration and collaboration.

The "celebrity canary in the coal mine for the coronavirus": An examination of a theoretical model of celebrity illness disclosure effects

RATIONALE

On March 11, 2020, actor Tom Hanks announced via social media that he had been diagnosed with COVID-19. Previous research has found celebrity illness disclosures to influence behavior, but during the uncertainty of a pandemic, the effects of such a disclosure were unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To test the proposed Celebrity Illness Disclosure Effects (CIDE) model, demonstrating how an illness disclosure, communicated through mediated and interpersonal channels, may shape willingness to engage in prevention behaviors.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey (N = 587) 24 hours after Hanks' COVID-19 disclosure.

RESULTS

Findings revealed that celebrity-related perception variables predicted illness-related cognitions and emotions\, which were associated with willingness to enact prevention behaviors. Greater willingness to seek information, stronger perceptions of COVID as a threat, and stronger perceptions of efficacy for dealing with COVID after learning of Hanks' diagnosis predicted stronger willingness to enact prevention behaviors. However, anxiety about COVID predicted lower willingness to enact prevention behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

The CIDE model can serve as a guide for future research in this area. The results can help scholars who aim to better understand the phenomena around celebrities and health communication as well as policymakers who hope to ride the wave of star power to improved public health outcomes.

Stigma Mutation: Tracking Lineage, Variation and Strength in Emerging COVID-19 Stigma

In this article, I propose a novel theoretical framework for conceptualizing pandemic stigma using the metaphor of 'mutation'. This metaphor highlights that stigma is not a static or fixed state but is enacted through processes of continuity and change. The following three orienting concepts are identified: (a) lineage (i.e. origin narratives and initial manifestations are created in relation to existing stigmas, stereotypes, and outgroups), (b) variation (i.e. stigma changes over time in response to new content and contexts), and (c) strength (i.e. stigma can be amplified or weakened through counter- or de-stigmatizing forces). I go on to use this metaphor to offer an analysis of the emergence of COVID-19 stigma. The lineage of COVID-19 stigma includes a long history of contagious disease, resonant with fears of contamination and death. Origin narratives have stigmatized Asian/Chinese groups as virus carriers, leading to socio-political manifestations of discrimination. Newer 'risky' groups have emerged in relation to old age, race and ethnicity, poverty, and weight, whose designation as 'vulnerable' simultaneously identifies them as victims in need of protection but also as a risk to the social body. Counter-stigmatizing trends are also visible. Public disclosure of having COVID-19 by high-status individuals such as the actor Tom Hanks has, in some instances, converted 'testing positive' into shared rather than shamed behaviour in the West. As discourses concerning risk, controllability, and blame unfold, so COVID-19 stigma will further mutate. In conclusion, the metaphor of mutation, and its three concepts of lineage, variation, and strength, offers a vocabulary through which to articulate emergent and ongoing stigma processes. Furthermore, the concept of stigma mutation identifies a clear role for social scientists and public health in terms of process engagement; to disrupt stigma, remaking it in less deadly forms or even to prevent its emergence altogether.