Irrational Beliefs about COVID-19: A Scoping Review

Does social empathy moderate fear-induced minority blaming during the COVID-19 pandemic?

This study investigated the minority-blaming phenomenon in South Korea during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic amplified fear, discrimination, and structural inequalities among minoritized groups during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study identified who was blamed for the spread of COVID-19 and the sociodemographic characteristics associated with this blame. Additionally, it examines the roles of individual and interpersonal fear and social empathy in minority blaming. We measured the fear of COVID-19 at both individual and interpersonal levels. Individual fear was assessed through personal health concerns, while the fear of transmitting the virus to others was measured as interpersonal fear. Social empathy was defined by macro perspective-taking, cognitive empathy, self-other awareness, and affective responses. The study was conducted through an online survey involving a quota sample of 1,500 South Korean participants aged 19-69 years, based on age, gender, and residential area. The response was collected in December 2020, when mass infections in specific communities received attention from mass and social media before the national spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Analytical strategies, including OLS and hierarchical regression models, were employed to examine the roles of socioeconomic factors, individual and interpersonal fear, and social empathy in minority blaming. This study found varying correlations between sociodemographic factors and attitudes toward ethnic, religious, sexual, economic, and age-minority groups. Individual fear of contracting COVID-19 was associated with increased blame across all minority groups. In contrast, interpersonal fear was associated with increased blame only for ethnic and religious minority groups. Similarly, social empathy presented mixed associations, as it displayed a buffering role on blaming ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities when considered alongside interpersonal fear, yet mildly intensified blame for economic and age minorities. These findings provide an understanding on fear-induced minority blaming during the pandemic and the potential role of social empathy in mitigating blame.

Managing the unknown or the art of preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in workplaces in a context of evolving science, precarious employment, and communication barriers. A qualitative situational analysis in Quebec and Ontario

Introduction

The issue of communications in the public space, and in particular, in the workplace, became critical in the early stages of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and was exacerbated by the stress of the drastic transformation of the organization of work, the speed with which new information was being made available, and the constant fear of being infected or developing a more severe or even fatal form of the disease. Although effective communication is the key to fighting a pandemic, some business sectors were more vulnerable and affected than others, and the individuals in particular socio-demographic and economic categories were proportionately more affected by the number of infections and hospitalizations, and by the number of deaths. Therefore, the aim of this article is to present data related to issues faced by essential workers interacting with the public and their employers to mitigate the contagion of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) at work.

Methods

Following the constructivist paradigm, an interpretative qualitative design was used to conduct one-on-one interviews with precarious/low-wage, public-contact workers (N = 40), managers (N = 16), and key informants (N = 16) on topics related to their work environments in the context of COVID-19 prevention.

Results

This article has highlighted some aspects of communication in the workplace essential to preventing COVID-19 outbreaks (e.g., access to information in a context of fast-changing instructions, language proficiency, transparency and confidentiality in the workplace, access to clear guidelines). The impact of poor pre-pandemic working relations on crisis management in the workplace also emerged.

Discussion

This study reminds us of the need to develop targeted, tailored messages that, while not providing all the answers, maintain dialog and transparency in workplaces.

To trust or not to trust in the thrall of the COVID-19 pandemic: Conspiracy endorsement and the role of adverse childhood experiences, epistemic trust, and personality functioning

RATIONALE

Conspiracy endorsement is a public health challenge for the successful containment of the COVID-19 pandemic. While usually considered a societal phenomenon, little is known about the equally important developmental backdrops and personality characteristics like mistrust that render an individual prone to conspiracy endorsement. There is a growing body of evidence implying a detrimental role of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) - a highly prevalent developmental burden - in the development of epistemic trust and personality functioning. This study aimed to investigate the association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement in the general population, specifically questioning a mediating role of epistemic trust and personality functioning.

METHODS

Based on cross-sectional data from a representative German survey collected during the COVID-19 pandemic (N = 2501), we conducted structural equation modelling (SEM) where personality functioning (OPD-SQS) and epistemic trust (ETMCQ) were included as mediators of the association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement. Bootstrapped confidence intervals (5000 samples, 95%-CI) are presented for all paths.

RESULTS

ACEs were significantly associated with conspiracy endorsement (β = 0.25, p < 0.001) and explained 6% of its variance. Adding epistemic trust and personality functioning as mediators increased the explained variance of conspiracy endorsement to 19% while the direct association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement was diminished (β = 0.12, p < 0.001), indicating an indirect effect of personality functioning and epistemic trust in the association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement. Fit indices confirmed good model fit.

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing an association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement further increases the evidence for early childhood adversities' far-reaching and detrimental effects. By including epistemic trust and personality functioning, these findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms in the way that ACEs may be associated with conspiracy endorsement.

"Trust me, do not trust anyone": how epistemic mistrust and credulity are associated with conspiracy mentality

Previous research shows that the propensity to endorse conspiracy theories is associated with disrupted forms of epistemic trust, i.e., the appropriate openness towards interpersonally communicated information. There are associations, first, with an increased mistrust in several actors and institutions responsible for the communication of information in society, and second, with a pronounced credulity in unreliable sources and implausible phenomena (e.g., superstition, astrology). This study aims to investigate whether these phenomena are associated with specific personality-related disruptions of epistemic trust. Based on selfreported data of 417 individuals (mean = 33.28; standard deviation = 11.11) from a UK population sampled online, the potential relationships between disruptions in epistemic trust and the endorsement of a conspiracy mentality are explored. The epistemic stances characterized by mistrust and credulity (independent variables) are measured with the epistemic trust, mistrust, and credulity questionnaire (ETMCQ), and conspiracy mentality (dependent variable) is measured with the conspiracy mentality questionnaire. In a multiple linear regression model, mistrust is associated with the endorsement of a conspiracy mentality, even when accounting for other contributing factors (e.g., individual narcissism, attachment avoidance and anxiety, authoritarianism, loneliness). In a bootstrapped mediation model controlling for other relevant predictors, the association between credulity and conspiracy mentality is fully mediated by mistrust. In future research, the impact of disrupted epistemic trust on conspiracy beliefs should be investigated in terms of the specific epistemic stances of mistrust and credulity. In this respect, the ETMCQ represents a highly promising instrument to assess individual differences in factors underpinning aspects of conspiracy endorsement.

Belief in COVID-19 related conspiracy theories around the globe: A systematic review

Conspiracy theories have been widespread in public discourses about COVID-19. Belief in conspiracy theories has negative effects on COVID-19 protective and preventive behaviour. However, evidence on the prevalence of belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories, remains fragmented. We conducted a systematic review on the adult general population prevalence of belief in different COVID-19 conspiracy theories at country and regional level around the globe. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar databases (end of search: March 22, 2022). We followed guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We identified 1637 potentially relevant titles in our search and included 33 studies in our review, reflecting conspiracy theory endorsement between March 2020 and August 2021. We found high belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories in most studies: 29 studies measured at least one conspiracy theory belief prevalence ≥20%. For several conspiracy theories, e.g. "Lab origin" or "Destabilization and power gain", prevalence was often between 20 and 50%. Our findings call for increased awareness about COVID-19 conspiracy theories and the need for tailored, context specific conspiracy theory preparedness, prevention and control. Development and integration of a public health oriented communication and infodemic management strategy, alongside the implementation of conspiracy theory endorsement risk assessments are essential for supporting public health policy in future health emergencies.

Attitudes and practices toward COVID-19 precautionary measures: A comparative study of health professionals and public

BACKGROUND

Containment of the COVID-19 pandemic has been impaired by the denial and defiance of preventive recommendations.

AIMS

We aimed to study the attitudes toward COVID-19 social measures among laypersons and healthcare professionals.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in the United Arab Emirates using a self-administered online questionnaire. Both healthcare workers and laypersons were actively recruited. In addition to sociodemographic variables, the questionnaire included questions on anxiety, knowledge, and defiance related to COVID-19.

RESULTS

A total of 615 individuals with a mean age of 32 years (SD, 12) participated. Females comprised 69% and healthcare workers constituted 60% of the study sample. Among laypersons, over 42% reported having social gatherings at home, and 44% admitted to visiting crowded places. More than half of the respondents felt increased anxiety. Previous COVID-19 infection did not affect attitudes or anxiety levels. Knowledge about COVID-19 was higher among those who were more educated (r = .21). Healthcare workers had lower anxiety than laypersons (p = .002). COVID-19 anxiety was higher among older persons and did not decrease with more knowledge. COVID-19 defiance was higher among younger male respondents from larger households and did not correlate with knowledge. Multivariate analysis showed more defiant attitudes at younger ages.

CONCLUSIONS

Anxiety-related to the COVID-19 pandemic is more common in older individuals, whereas younger persons were more likely to deny and defy prevention recommendations despite having knowledge of viral transmission. Voluntary compliance by young individuals requires an engaging communication strategy to generate more compassionate attitudes.

Defining Misinformation and Related Terms in Health-Related Literature: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Misinformation poses a serious challenge to clinical and policy decision-making in the health field. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified interest in misinformation and related terms and witnessed a proliferation of definitions.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to assess the definitions of misinformation and related terms used in health-related literature.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of systematic reviews by searching Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Epistemonikos databases for articles published within the last 5 years up till March 2023. Eligible studies were systematic reviews that stated misinformation or related terms as part of their objectives, conducted a systematic search of at least one database, and reported at least 1 definition for misinformation or related terms. We extracted definitions for the terms misinformation, disinformation, fake news, infodemic, and malinformation. Within each definition, we identified concepts and mapped them across misinformation-related terms.

RESULTS

We included 41 eligible systematic reviews, out of which 32 (78%) reviews addressed the topic of public health emergencies (including the COVID-19 pandemic) and contained 75 definitions for misinformation and related terms. The definitions consisted of 20 for misinformation, 19 for disinformation, 10 for fake news, 24 for infodemic, and 2 for malinformation. "False/inaccurate/incorrect" was mentioned in 15 of 20 definitions of misinformation, 13 of 19 definitions of disinformation, 5 of 10 definitions of fake news, 6 of 24 definitions of infodemic, and 0 of 2 definitions of malinformation. Infodemic had 19 of 24 definitions addressing "information overload" and malinformation had 2 of 2 definitions with "accurate" and 1 definition "used in the wrong context." Out of all the definitions, 56 (75%) were referenced from other sources.

CONCLUSIONS

While the definitions of misinformation and related terms in the health field had inconstancies and variability, they were largely consistent. Inconstancies related to the intentionality in misinformation definitions (7 definitions mention "unintentional," while 5 definitions have "intentional"). They also related to the content of infodemic (9 definitions mention "valid and invalid info," while 6 definitions have "false/inaccurate/incorrect"). The inclusion of concepts such as "intentional" may be difficult to operationalize as it is difficult to ascertain one's intentions. This scoping review has the strength of using a systematic method for retrieving articles but does not cover all definitions in the extant literature outside the field of health. This scoping review of the health literature identified several definitions for misinformation and related terms, which showed variability and included concepts that are difficult to operationalize. Health practitioners need to exert caution before labeling a piece of information as misinformation or any other related term and only do so after ascertaining accurateness and sometimes intentionality. Additional efforts are needed to allow future consensus around clear and operational definitions.

Barriers to and facilitators of populational adherence to prevention and control measures of COVID-19 and other respiratory infectious diseases: a qualitative evidence synthesis

AIMS

To summarise the evidence on barriers to and facilitators of population adherence to prevention and control measures for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other respiratory infectious diseases.

METHODS

A qualitative synthesis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care: Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. We performed an electronic search on MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO from their inception to March 2023.

RESULTS

We included 71 studies regarding COVID-19, pneumonia, tuberculosis, influenza, pertussis and H1N1, representing 5966 participants. The measures reported were vaccinations, physical distancing, stay-at-home policy, quarantine, self-isolation, facemasks, hand hygiene, contact investigation, lockdown, infection prevention and control guidelines, and treatment. Tuberculosis-related measures were access to care, diagnosis and treatment completion. Analysis of the included studies yielded 37 barriers and 23 facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that financial and social support, assertive communication, trust in political authorities and greater regulation of social media enhance adherence to prevention and control measures for COVID-19 and infectious respiratory diseases. Designing and implementing effective educational public health interventions targeting the findings of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this review are key to reducing the impact of infectious respiratory diseases at the population level.

COVID-19, Anti-Intellectualism, and Health Communication: Assessing the Chinese Social Media Platform Sina Weibo

In the digital media era, new media platforms have become the main channels for transmitting medical and health information in China. However, anti-intellectualism limits the effectiveness of disseminating health information. Therefore, in China, the government and health departments have made efforts to determine how to control anti-intellectualism to effectively disseminate medical and health information, given the situation of a global pandemic and its counter-measures. Against this backdrop, this study applied textual analysis to explore the manifestations of anti-intellectualism in network platforms. The key findings indicate that the irrational behavior of anti-intellectuals is manifested in emotional dominance, abusive behavior, overconfidence and trusting rumors. Based on these results, the authors propose some measures to balance the relationship between anti-intellectualism and health communication. The findings of the study have significant implications for improving the effectiveness of health communication in China.

COVID-19 and the Infodemic: An Overview of the Role and Impact of Social Media, the Evolution of Medical Knowledge, and Emerging Problems

The infodemic is an important component of the cyber-risk in regard to the poor and uncontrolled dissemination of information related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to perform a narrative review based on three points of view to allow for an overall picture of this issue. The points of view focused on: (a) the volume of use of social media (a key element of the infodemic) and the position of international health domain bodies; (b) the evolution of scientific production in the life sciences; (c) emerging issues. The research methodology was based on Google and PubMed searches and a qualification process based on a standard checklist and an evaluation of eligibility based on parameters with five score levels applied by two experts (plus one in case of discrepancy). The three points of view stressed the key role of social media as a dissemination tool of the infodemic among citizens. The impact on citizens depends on various social factors and involves indirect (e.g., vaccine avoidance) and direct risks such as mental problems and the risk of suicide. The widespread diffusion of social media, conveyed by mobile technologies, also suggests their use as countermeasures, calibrated based on citizens’ level of both technological and health literacy. Effective and promising countermeasures in this direction are based both on initiatives of contact by apps or SMS and the collection of data based on surveys and finalized to the particular intervention. The review also suggests as further areas of in-depth research: (a) to combat high-level infodemic produced by scientific publications that are not yet official (preprint) or that have undergone peer review with bias/distortion; (b) focusing on the impact of the infodemic considering its spread in different languages.

The COVID-19 Infodemic: Mechanism, Impact, and Counter-Measures—A Review of Reviews

The acceptability of appropriate SARS-CoV-2 pandemic measures including vaccinations is currently being hampered due to significant misinformation all over the globe, also known as the “infodemic” within the pandemic. We asked the following two research questions: (1) What is the current extent of the global infodemic preventing populations from receiving adequate healthcare including COVID-vaccinations? (2) Which are appropriate countermeasures to manage the infodemic in order to guarantee adequate healthcare in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic? Pubmed and Cochrane Library were accessed on 29 October 2021 and searched for reviews and systematic reviews on “COVID-19” and “infodemic”. The literature identified was analyzed with methods of qualitative research focusing on (1) mechanism, (2) impact, and (3) countermeasures to confront the infodemic. The world-wide infodemic is being recognized as a multifaceted problem beyond health and human rights, extending into global political spheres such as societal cohesion and security. The mechanism of the COVID-19 infodemic involves specific factors related to the situation, sender, instrument, and recipient. Although freedom of expression and the right to seek, receive, and impart information through any media is a fundamental human right, the infodemic has a substantial impact on health, another fundamental human right, by causing stress, deception, violence, and harm. Mixed-synergistic pre-impact, trans-impact, and post-impact countermeasures can be taken; the most important is building and maintaining trust.

Social representations of coronavirus/COVID-19 in Italy: Psychosocial anchoring to conspiracy beliefs, vaccine hesitancy, and the psychological dimension

From the societal approach of the Theory of Social Representations, this study aimed to investigate the social representations of coronavirus/COVID-19 among the Italian population. By means of an online questionnaire, 599 individuals participated in the research, with a mean age of 38.09 years (SD = 14.44), 62.1% being women. The instrument was composed of sociodemographic questions, free association technique for the inductive term “coronavirus/COVID-19” and scales on conspiracy beliefs, vaccine hesitancy, and psychological dimension. The results allowed us to identify four social representations: “Citizens driven by Social Representations anchored to factual Covid-19 pandemic data,” with lower vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs, and greater faith in science; “Citizens with low confidence in anti-pandemic preventive measures by government,” with lower agreement with restriction measures; “Emotional people,” with higher agreement with restriction measures and expression of psychological distress; and “Minority group of Citizens driven by denial of Covid-19,” with higher vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs. We discuss the different social representations identified from the psychological and psychosocial anchoring processes in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.