The bright and dark sides of social media use during COVID-19 lockdown: Contrasting social media effects through social liability vs. social support

There exist ongoing discussions regarding whether, when, or why heightened reliance on social media becomes benefits or drawbacks, especially in times of crisis. Using the concepts of social liability, social support, and cognitive appraisal theory, this study examines distinct theoretical pathways through which the relational use of social media has contrasting impacts on cognitive appraisals of and emotional responses to the COVID-19 lockdown. We collected online survey data from 494 social media users in the U.S. during the COVID-19 lockdown. The results based on structural equation modeling (SEM) showed double-edged social media effects. When social media use results in perceived social support, it has a favorable impact on coping appraisals of the COVID-19 lockdown. This, in turn, is associated with lower levels of negative affective responses, such as anger, anxiety, and loneliness. In contrast, when social media use results in increased social liability (i.e., obligation to provide support to others), it negatively impacts cognitive appraisals and affective responses. The study makes significant contributions by unpacking two distinct theoretical mechanisms underlying social media effects: particularly social liability which has been underexplored but was found to be an essential concept to explain the dualistic impact of social media.

The effects of worry, risk perception, information-seeking experience, and trust in misinformation on COVID-19 fact-checking: a survey study in China

Health misinformation is a serious problem that can cause confusion and risk-taking behaviors, undermining public health efforts. Fact-checking has been highlighted as an effective tool for coping with the challenge of misinformation. However, few studies have examined the factors influencing individuals' health fact-checking behaviors. Using the comprehensive model of information seeking, we conducted a two-wave panel survey in China during the COVID-19 pandemic and explored the underlying process that might hinder COVID-19 fact-checking. The results showed that risk perception and worry about COVID-19 triggered a negative COVID-19 information-seeking experience, which reduced COVID-19 fact-checking. Moreover, the propensity to trust COVID-19 misinformation played a moderating role, such that negative information-seeking experience had a stronger negative effect on fact-checking behaviors for people with a greater propensity to trust misinformation. This study demonstrates the dark side of cognitive and affective responses to risks and health information-seeking experiences. The findings offer important implications for future health communication initiatives to effectively promote health fact-checking behaviors.

The Effect of Social Media on Stress among Young Adults during COVID-19 Pandemic: Taking into Account Fatalism and Social Media Exhaustion.

Social media has been widely used as an important source of health information, particularly during public health crises. However, findings regarding social media's impact on young adults' mental health are mixed. There is a need to identify social mechanisms underlying the effect of social media on mental health outcomes. Our study breaks new ground by proposing and testing a moderated mediation pathway from social media use to stress in young adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a two-wave online panel survey in the context of China. With a general basis of the Street's three-stage model, our results indicated that social media failed to directly affect young adults' stress. Instead, fatalism completely mediated this relationship. Also, one's perceived social media exhaustion negatively moderated this mediation pathway. The findings have significant theoretical and practical implications for the use of social media to promote health, well-being, and quality of life among young people during public health crises.