Misinformation as a Societal Problem in Times of Crisis: A Mixed-Methods Study with Future Teachers to Promote a Critical Attitude towards Information

Global society is facing major challenges, which are to be met by pursuing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Digitalization processes bring many opportunities for achieving SDGs, but they also bring pitfalls. For example, on one hand, social media makes it easier for more parts of society to participate. On the other hand, the ability to rapidly circulate unfiltered information can lead to the spread of misinformation and subsequently interfere with the achievement of SDGs. This effect could be observed during the COVID-19 pandemic and continues to occur in the context of climate change. Young people are especially likely to be exposed to misinformation on social media. With this in mind, it is enormously important for schools to prepare young people to critically handle the overload of information available online. The aim of this study was to provide future middle and high school teachers with a fruitful approach to foster a critical attitude towards information in classrooms. To this end, we expanded an existing approach by implementing active, technique-based inoculation and technique-based debunking within the COVID-19 content framework in a teacher education course. This implementation was monitored by a mixed-methods study with n = 24 future middle and high school teachers who participated in two courses in subsequent semesters. By performing statistical analysis on pretests and posttests and qualitative content analysis on reflective journal entries, we found that future teachers' self-efficacy expectations for detecting and debunking misinformation, as well as their debunking skills, increased throughout the courses. In addition, our results show that future teachers perceive active, technology-based inoculation as a helpful approach for their future teaching. They feel that this approach can be a way to implement education for sustainable development in schools with a focus on the promotion of critical thinking. In summary, we believe that the approach presented in this article may be beneficial for teaching the critical treatment of information in various thematic contexts. © 2023 by the authors.

Public sector's misinformation debunking during the public health campaign: a case of Hong Kong.

For a public health campaign to succeed, the public sector is expected to debunk the misinformation transparently and vividly and guide the citizens. The present study focuses on COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in Hong Kong, a non-Western society with a developed economy and sufficient vaccine supply but high vaccine hesitancy. Inspired by the Health Belief Model (HBM) and research on source transparency and the use of visuals in the debunking, the present study examines the COVID-19 vaccine misinformation debunking messages published by the official social media and online channels of the public sector of Hong Kong (n = 126) over 18 months (1 November 2020 to 20 April 2022) during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Results showed that the most frequently occurring misinformation themes were misleading claims about the risks and side effects of vaccination, followed by (non-)effectiveness of the vaccines and the (un)-necessity of vaccination. Among the HBM constructs, barriers and benefits of vaccination were mentioned the most, while self-efficacy was the least addressed. Compared with the early stage of the vaccination campaign, an increasing number of posts contained susceptibility, severity or cues to action. Most debunking statements did not disclose any external sources. The public sector actively used illustrations, with affective illustrations outnumbering cognitive ones. Suggestions for improving the quality of misinformation debunking during public health campaigns are discussed.

The Digital Discourse of Romanian Social Media Prosumers during the Covid-19 Pandemic

Social media platforms provide the digital playground for users to manifest a strong form of clicktivism and, at the same time, a deep sense of belonging. In this digital space, users produce discourses with in-built ideologies which have a strong impact on society. Through digitized practices (following, sharing, commenting, posting), users become social actors who design and redesign their behaviour and life choices in relation to the individuals and groups which they follow online on a regular basis. In the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, through the use of social media, various users have become movers and shakers in Romania. This study aims to analyse the new media discourse showing the Romanian people's attitude towards the Covid-19 pandemic in the time span of September-October 2021. As such, the linguistic manifestation of users (including micro-celebrities and public figures) was reflected in the polarization of Romanian society, resulting in people mistrusting authorities, and medical experts and giving voice to users who would not normally have a voice in the matter of a global pandemic.

Promoting COVID-19 vaccine confidence through public responses to misinformation: The joint influence of message source and message content.

OBJECTIVE: During the pandemic healthcare professionals and political leaders routinely used traditional and new media outlets to publicly respond to COVID-19 myths and inaccuracies. We examine how variations in the sources and messaging strategies of these public statements affect respondents' beliefs about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: We analyzed the results of an experiment embedded within a multi-wave survey deployed to US and UK respondents in January-February 2022 to examine these effects. We employ a test-retest between-subjects experimental protocol with a control group. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions reflecting discrete pairings of message source (political authorities vs. healthcare professionals) and messaging strategy (debunking misinformation vs. discrediting mis-informants) or a control condition. We use linear regression to compare the effects of exposure to treatment conditions on changes in respondent beliefs about the potential risks associated with COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: In the UK sample, we observe a statistically significant decrease in beliefs about the risks of COVID-19 vaccines among respondents exposed to debunking messages by healthcare professionals. We observe a similar relationship in the US sample, but the effect was weaker and not significant. Identical messages from political authorities had no effect on respondents' beliefs about vaccine risks in either sample. Discrediting messages critical of mis-informants likewise had no influence on respondent beliefs, regardless of the actor to which they were attributed. Political ideology moderated the influence of debunking statements by healthcare professionals on respondent vaccine attitudes in the US sample, such that the treatment was more effective among liberals and moderates than among conservatives. CONCLUSIONS: Brief exposure to public statements refuting anti-vaccine misinformation can help promote vaccine confidence among some populations. The results underscore the joint importance of message source and messaging strategy in determining the effectiveness of responses to misinformation.

One Dose Is Not Enough: The Beneficial Effect of Corrective COVID-19 Information Is Diminished If Followed by Misinformation.

The World Health Organization (WHO) released a series of mythbuster infographics to combat misinformation during the COVID-19 infodemic. While the corrective effects of such debunking interventions have typically been examined in the immediate aftermath of intervention delivery; the durability of these corrective effects and their resilience against subsequent misinformation remains poorly understood. To this end, we asked younger and older adults to rate the truthfulness and credibility of 10 statements containing misinformation about common COVID-19 myths, as well as their willingness to share the statements through social media. They did this three times, before and after experimental interventions within a single study session. In keeping with established findings, exposure to the WHO's myth-busting infographics-(a) improved participants' ratings of the misinformation statements as untruthful and uncredible and (b) reduced their reported willingness to share the statements. However, within-subject data revealed these beneficial effects were diminished if corrective information was presented shortly by misinformation, but the effects remained when further corrective information was presented. Throughout the study, younger adults rated the misinformation statements as more truthful and credible and were more willing to share them. Our data reveal that the benefit of COVID-19 debunking interventions may be short-lived if followed shortly by misinformation. Still, the effect can be maintained in the presence of further corrective information. These outcomes provide insights into the effectiveness and durability of corrective information and can influence strategies for tackling health-related misinformation, especially in younger adults.

Strategies and effectiveness of the chinese government debunking covid-19 rumors on sina weibo: Evaluating from emotions

The Chinese government refuted rumors on social media for infodemic management when COVID-19 outbroke. This study selected 80 government accounts on Sina Weibo and collected 501 valid anti-rumor posts with comments from 18 January to 29 February 2020. This paper evaluated the effectiveness of rumor debunking from the public emotions reflected in the comments. This study also examined the influence of different anti-rumor strategies, such as fact-checking, rumor response modes, and presentation forms, on the effectiveness of rumor debunking. The findings revealed that fact-checking, combined response mode and text presentation could improve the effectiveness of rumor debunking to some extent. Further analysis of the public emotions indicated a correlation between the trust in government and the effectiveness of rumor debunking. These findings suggested building a multiparticipant response mechanism with medical institutions and media to mitigate the COVID-19 infodemic through targeted strategies, thus further increasing the government's credibility via information governance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

The differential effects of a governmental debunking campaign concerning COVID-19 vaccination misinformation.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic debunking misinformation has been one of the most employed strategies used to address vaccine hesitancy. We investigated whether - and for whom - debunking is effective or even counterproductive in decreasing misinformation belief and vaccination hesitancy. METHOD: We conducted a randomized controlled trial (N = 588) utilizing a real-world debunking campaign from the German Ministry of Health. We considered the condition (debunking vs. control) as between-subjects factor, assessed misinformation belief (pretest vs. posttest) as a repeated-measures factor and vaccination intention as a dependent variable. Preregistered subgroup analyses were conducted for different levels of a priori misinformation belief and general vaccination confidence. RESULTS: The analyses revealed differential effects on misinformation belief and vaccination intention in participants with low, medium, and high a priori belief: A debunking effect on misinformation belief (dRM = -0.80) was only found in participants with a medium a priori belief and did not extend to these participants' vaccination intentions. Among participants with a high a priori misinformation belief, explorative analysis revealed a small unintended backfiring effect on vaccination intentions (ηp2 = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that debunking is an effective communication strategy to address moderate levels of misinformation beliefs, but it does not constitute a one-fits-all strategy to reduce vaccination hesitancy among the general public. Although countering misinformation should certainly be an integral part of public health communication, additional initiatives, which address individual concerns with targeted and authentic communication, should be taken to enhance the impact on hesitant populations and avoid backfiring effects.

Health-Related Rumor Control through Social Collaboration Models: Lessons from Cases in China during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Widely spread health-related rumors may mislead the public, escalate social panic, compromise government credibility, and threaten public health. Social collaboration models that maximize the functions and advantages of various agents of socialization can be a promising way to control health-related rumors. Existing research on health-related rumors, however, is limited in studying how various agents collaborate with each other to debunk rumors. This study utilizes content analysis to code the text data of health-related rumor cases in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study found that socialized rumor-debunking models could be divided into the following five categories: the government-led model, the media-led model, the scientific community-led model, the rumor-debunking platform-led model, and the multi-agent collaborative model. In addition, since rumors in public health crises often involve different objects, rumor refutation requires various information sources; therefore, different rumor-debunking models apply. This study verifies the value of socialized collaborative rumor debunking, advocates and encourages the participation of multiple agents of socialization and provides guidance for establishing a collaborative rumor-debunking model, thereby promoting efficient rumor-debunking methods and improving the healthcare of society.

Vaccine hesitancy, misinformation in the era of Covid-19: Lessons from the past.

Background: As the world has challenged/argued with the Covid-19 pandemic over the last two years, there has been an increase in vaccine misinformation. Although immunity against Covid-19 infection is limited to 4-6 months and requires at least three doses of vaccine to be maximally effective, the current vaccination campaign in industrialized countries shows that vaccinated citizens experience greater immunological protection against severe forms of the disease than unvaccinated citizens. Methodology: A perusal of the literature was performed in order to reconstruct the communication methods applied in the managing of the Covid-19 pandemic; the management of the current pandemic was compared with the management of another scourge of the past: poliomyelitis. Results/Discussion: In order to raise public awareness on public health issues, it is essential that governments and institutions communicate scientific data to all sections of the population in an unambiguous way. In this sense, it is essential to apply "prebunking", which is a layered defense system available to society that prevents misinformation before it is spread. This is to avoid the subsequent debunking of false information, which generates insecurity and fuels fears. Belief in medical misinformation represents a meaningful problem for public health efforts to fight Covid-19 through vaccination. Conclusion/Perspectives: In this sense an example of proper management of one of the many epidemics of the recent past, poliomyelitis, should make us reflect on the effectiveness of past approaches. This testimony from the past can provide us with food for thought regarding how to face the present Covid-19 pandemic and to prepare for the future. Certainly, it shows us how the awful pandemics/epidemics from the past was handled and finally overcome, despite perceived risk and vaccine hesitancy.

The Challenge of Debunking Health Misinformation in Dynamic Social Media Conversations: Online Randomized Study of Public Masking During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The spread of false and misleading health information on social media can cause individual and social harm. Research on debunking has shown that properly designed corrections can mitigate the impact of misinformation, but little is known about the impact of correction in the context of prolonged social media debates. For example, when a social media user takes to Facebook to make a false claim about a health-related practice and a health expert subsequently refutes the claim, the conversation rarely ends there. Often, the social media user proceeds by rebuking the critic and doubling down on the claim. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of such extended back and forth between false claims and debunking attempts on observers' dispositions toward behavior that science favors. We tested competing predictions about the effect of extended exposure on people's attitudes and intentions toward masking in public during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic and explored several psychological processes potentially underlying this effect. METHODS: A total of 500 US residents took part in an online experiment in October 2020. They reported on their attitudes and intentions toward wearing masks in public. They were then randomly assigned to one of four social media exposure conditions (misinformation only vs misinformation+correction vs misinformation+correction+rebuke vs misinformation+correction+rebuke+second correction), and reported their attitudes and intentions for a second time. They also indicated whether they would consider sharing the thread if they were to see it on social media and answered questions on potential mediators and covariates. RESULTS: Exposure to misinformation had a negative impact on attitudes and intentions toward masking (ß=-.35, 95% CI -.42 to -.29; P<.001). Moreover, initial debunking of a false claim generally improved attitudes and intentions toward masking (ß=.35, 95% CI .16 to .54; P<.001). However, this improvement was washed out by further exposure to false claims and debunking attempts (ß=-.53, 95% CI -.72 to -.34; P<.001). The latter result is partially explained by a decrease in the perceived objectivity of truth. That is, extended exposure to false claims and debunking attempts appear to weaken the belief that there is an objectively correct answer to how people ought to behave in this situation, which in turn leads to less positive reactions toward masking as the prescribed behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals and science advocates face an underappreciated challenge in attempting to debunk misinformation on social media. Although engaging in extended debates with science deniers and other purveyors of bunk appears necessary, more research is needed to address the unintended consequences of such engagement.

Exploring how online responses change in response to debunking messages about COVID-19 on WhatsApp

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred a concurrent outbreak of false information online. Debunking false information about a health crisis is critical as misinformation can trigger protests or panic, which necessitates a better understanding of it. This exploratory study examined the effects of debunking messages on a COVID-19-related public chat on WhatsApp in Singapore. Design/methodology/approach: To understand the effects of debunking messages about COVID-19 on WhatsApp conversations, the following was studied. The relationship between source credibility (i.e. characteristics of a communicator that affect the receiver's acceptance of the message) of different debunking message types and their effects on the length of the conversation, sentiments towards various aspects of a crisis, and the information distortions in a message thread were studied. Deep learning techniques, knowledge graphs (KG), and content analyses were used to perform aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) of the messages and measure information distortion. Findings: Debunking messages with higher source credibility (e.g. providing evidence from authoritative sources like health authorities) help close a discussion thread earlier. Shifts in sentiments towards some aspects of the crisis highlight the value of ABSA in monitoring the effectiveness of debunking messages. Finally, debunking messages with lower source credibility (e.g. stating that the information is false without any substantiation) are likely to increase information distortion in conversation threads. Originality/value: The study supports the importance of source credibility in debunking and an ABSA approach in analysing the effect of debunking messages during a health crisis, which have practical value for public agencies during a health crisis. Studying differences in the source credibility of debunking messages on WhatsApp is a novel shift from the existing approaches. Additionally, a novel approach to measuring information distortion using KGs was used to shed insights on how debunking can reduce information distortions. © 2022, Emerald Publishing Limited.

Evaluating Rumor Debunking Effectiveness During the COVID-19 Pandemic Crisis: Utilizing User Stance in Comments on Sina Weibo.

Background: The spread of rumors related to COVID-19 on social media has posed substantial challenges to public health governance, and thus exposing rumors and curbing their spread quickly and effectively has become an urgent task. This study aimed to assist in formulating effective strategies to debunk rumors and curb their spread on social media. Methods: A total of 2,053 original postings and 100,348 comments that replied to the postings of five false rumors related to COVID-19 (dated from January 20, 2020, to June 28, 2020) belonging to three categories, authoritative, social, and political, on Sina Weibo in China were randomly selected. To study the effectiveness of different debunking methods, a new annotation scheme was proposed that divides debunking methods into six categories: denial, further fact-checking, refutation, person response, organization response, and combination methods. Text classifiers using deep learning methods were built to automatically identify four user stances in comments that replied to debunking postings: supporting, denying, querying, and commenting stances. Then, based on stance responses, a debunking effectiveness index (DEI) was developed to measure the effectiveness of different debunking methods. Results: The refutation method with cited evidence has the best debunking effect, whether used alone or in combination with other debunking methods. For the social category of Car rumor and political category of Russia rumor, using the refutation method alone can achieve the optimal debunking effect. For authoritative rumors, a combination method has the optimal debunking effect, but the most effective combination method requires avoiding the use of a combination of a debunking method where the person or organization defamed by the authoritative rumor responds personally and the refutation method. Conclusion: The findings provide relevant insights into ways to debunk rumors effectively, support crisis management of false information, and take necessary actions in response to rumors amid public health emergencies.

A media intervention applying debunking versus non-debunking content to combat vaccine misinformation in elderly in the Netherlands: A digital randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: As several COVID-19 vaccines are rolled-out globally, it has become important to develop an effective strategy for vaccine acceptance, especially in high-risk groups, such as elderly. Vaccine misconception was declared by WHO as one of the top 10 health issues in 2019. Here we test the effectiveness of applying debunking to combat vaccine misinformation, and reduce vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: Participants were recruited via a daily news show on Dutch Television, targeted to elderly viewers. The study was conducted in 980 elderly citizens during the October 2020 National Influenza Vaccination Campaign. Borrowing from the recent literature in behavioural science and psychology we conducted a two-arm randomized blinded parallel study, in which participants were allocated to exposure to a video containing social norms, vaccine information plus debunking of vaccination myths (intervention group, n = 505) or a video only containing vaccine information plus social norm (control group, n = 475). Participants who viewed either of the video's and completed both a pre- and post-intervention survey on vaccination trust and knowledge, were included in the analysis. The main outcomes of this study were improvement on vaccine knowledge and awareness. FINDINGS: Participants were recruited from the 13th of October 2020 till the 16th of October 2020 and could immediately participate in the pre-intervention survey. Subsequently, eligible participants were randomly assigned to an interventional video and the follow-up survey, distributed through email on the 18th of October 2020, and available for participation till the 24th of October 2020. We found that exposure to the video with addition of debunking strategies on top of social norm modelling and information resulted in substantially stronger rejection of vaccination misconceptions, including the belief that: (1) vaccinations can cause Autism Spectrum Disorders; (2) vaccinations weaken the immune system; (3) influenza vaccination would hamper the COVID-19 vaccine efficacy. Additionally, we observed that exposure to debunking in the intervention resulted in enhanced trust in government. INTERPRETATION: Utilizing debunking in media campaigns on top of vaccine information and social norm modeling is an effective means to combat misinformation and distrust associated with vaccination in elderly, and could help maximize grounds for the acceptance of vaccines, including the COVID-19 vaccines. FUNDING: Dutch Influenza Foundation.