COVID-19 News and Misinformation: Do They Matter for Public Health Prevention?

An infodemic caused by a rampant spread of a mixture of correct and incorrect information in a connected world creates uncertainty about and dismissal of proven public health measures. Two key factors that can influence COVID-19 preventive behaviors are information and self-efficacy. Misinformation (inaccurate or misleading information) can modify people's attitudes and behaviors and deter them from following preventive behaviors. Self-efficacy, on the other hand, has been linked to the likelihood to engaging in preventive behaviors. This cross-sectional study used a nationally representative survey of Americans from 2020 to determine the associations between (1) COVID-19 news sources and COVID-19 misinformation and (2) COVID-19 misinformation and COVID-19 prevention self-efficacy, using multivariable logistic regression. Results indicate that reliance on conservative sources for COVID-19 news is significantly associated with endorsing COVID-19 misinformation. In contrast, reliance on liberal sources, mainstream print, or social media for COVID-19 news are significantly negatively associated with endorsing COVID-19 misinformation. Furthermore, endorsing COVID-19 misinformation is related to low COVID-19 prevention self-efficacy, which, in turn, can modify COVID-19 preventive behaviors. These findings suggest that customizing health messages to debunk misinformation and increase self-efficacy for preventive behaviors can motivate individuals to comply with preventive behaviors and protect themselves from COVID-19.

Individual and social determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has had a devastating impact and efforts are being made to speed up vaccinations. The growing problem of vaccine hesitancy may affect the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine. We examined the individual, communication and social determinants associated with vaccines uptake. METHODS: Data come from a nationwide online probability-based panel of 1012 representative adults in the United States and the survey was conducted before the vaccines were available. People under the federal poverty level and racial and ethnic minorities were oversampled. Our outcome variables of interest were likelihood of vaccinating self and likelihood of vaccinating people under one's care (such as children) measuring behavioral intentions. Independent variables included perceptions of risk, exposure to different media for COVID-19 news, political party identification, confidence in scientists and social determinants of health. Logistic regression analysis was used to ascertain the effects of independent variables on the two outcome variables. RESULTS: The results indicated that 68 and 65% agreed to get the vaccine for themselves and people under their care, respectively. Risk perceptions (severity of and susceptibility to COVID-19) were significantly associated with vaccine uptake. People who relied on "conservative" news outlets, Republicans, and who had low confidence in scientists are least likely to vaccinate self or children. Non-Hispanic Blacks and those with least schooling were also less likely to receive vaccine for themselves or people in their care. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified race/ethnicity, risk perceptions, exposure to different media for COVID-19 news, party identification and confidence in scientists as factors that would be affecting COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The good news is that these are addressable through strategic public health communications, but a lot of work remains to be done with some urgency.

Adherence to COVID-19 mitigation measures among American adults: the need for consistent and unified messaging.

In the United States, elite and media communications about the risks of, and mitigation strategies for, COVID-19 have been characterized by lack of consensus. In this study, we draw from a nationally representative sample of American adults to examine the associations between exposure to different media and platforms (mainstream, conservative, liberal or social media) and adherence to COVID-19 mitigation measures such as physical distancing and mask use. We also examine the individual and social factors associated with adherence to mitigation measures. We find that exposure to conservative outlets, being republican, having low confidence in scientists and high perception of information overload are associated with low adherence. In contrast, exposure to liberal and mainstream news outlets, being democrat, having high confidence in scientists, and low perception of information overload are associated with high adherence. The findings suggest the need for consistent and unified public health messaging that cuts across partisan splits and the growing skepticism in science.

We Need the Lens of Equity in COVID-19 Communication.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has brought forward the centrality of public communication as a force for information, and in highlighting the differential impact on diverse segments of the society. Information and communication technologies-led developments including social media have previously been discussed as instruments of democratization of knowledge. However, the evidence so far shows that the promise remains unfulfilled as upper socioeconomic groups acquire information at a faster rate than others. The communication inequalities have only reinforced the existing societal fault lines of race, class and place. As the first pandemic of the social media age, COVID-19 has also given rise to an "infodemic", providing fertile ground for the spread of information, misinformation and disinformation. With limited gatekeeping, an immense amount of unprocessed scientific information is being put forward to publics not trained in science. In this commentary, we offer some propositions on how disinformation on COVID-19 has become mainstreamed through social media's spiral of amplification and what role public communication has in an emergency from a lens of equity. We raise the question of whether the tremendous flow of scientific information during the COVID-19 pandemic has a differential impact on different socioeconomic groups. We propose that more systematic research is urgently needed to understand how mis/disinformation originate, spread and what their consequences are. In our view, research in health communication inequalities is foundational to mitigating the current off-line and online ravages of the pandemic.