Does partisan media make a pawn of mistrust? Institutional trust and preventive covid-19 health behaviors in a polarized pandemic

In a rapidly developing crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic, people are often faced with contradictory or changing information and must determine what sources to trust. Across five time points (N = 5902) we examine how trust in various sources predicts COVID-19 health behaviors. Trust in experts and national news predicted more engagement with most health behaviors from April 2020 to March 2022 and trust in Fox news, which often positioned itself as counter to the mainstream on COVID-19, predicted less engagement. However, we also examined a particular public health behavior (masking) before and after the CDC announcement recommending masks on 3 April 2020 (which reversed earlier expert advice discouraging masks for the general public). Prior to the announcement, trust in experts predicted less mask-wearing while trust in Fox News predicted more. These relationships disappeared in the next 4 days following the announcement and reversed in the 2 years that follow, and emerged for vaccination in the later time points. We also examine how the media trusted by Democrats and Republicans predicts trust in experts and in turn health behaviors. Broadly we consider how the increasingly fragmented epistemic environment has implications for polarization on matters of public health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Burden of mental distress in the US associated with trust in media for COVID-19 information.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, news and social media outlets have played a major role in dissemination of information. This analysis aimed to study the association between trust in social and traditional media and experiences of mental distress among a representative sample of US adults. Data for this study came from National Pandemic Pulse, a cross-sectional, nationally representative survey that sampled participants on the Dynata platform. Participants included 6435 adults surveyed between 15-23 December 2020. Ordinal logistic regression analyses examined the associations of trust in (i) social media, (ii) print media, (iii) broadcast TV and (iv) cable TV, for COVID-19-related information with self-reported mental distress (4-item Patient Health Questionnaire), controlling for sociodemographics and census region. Compared with those who distrusted social media, those who trusted social media had 2.09 times (95% CI = 1.84-2.37) greater adjusted odds of being in a more severe category of mental distress. In contrast, compared with those who distrusted print media, those who trusted print media had 0.80 times (95% CI = 0.69-0.93) lower adjusted odds of being in a more severe category of mental distress. No significant associations were found between mental distress and trust in broadcast or cable TV for accessing news about COVID-19. Trust in different news outlets may be associated with mental distress during public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic. Future studies should explore mechanisms behind these associations, including adherence to best practices for crisis reporting among different media sources and exposure of individuals to misinformation.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, both, traditional channels like print, TV and cable news, as well as social media, have been major sources to obtain news about the pandemic. In this manuscript, we study the association between trust in social and traditional media and symptoms of mental distress among a nationally representative sample of 6435 US adults surveyed in December 2020. Our findings show that those who reported trusting traditional print media were less likely to report more severe mental distress. Conversely, those who reported trusting social media were more likely to report more severe levels of mental distress. This highlights the urgent need for understanding the diffusion patterns of misinformation and rumors that circulate on social media, and consumers' reactions to them. It is important that during a public health emergency, we follow best practices for crisis communication to reduce panic, address uncertainty, promote protective behaviors and mental health.

Dealing With the COVID-19 Infodemic: Distress by Information, Information Avoidance, and Compliance With Preventive Measures.

In the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, media reports have caused anxiety and distress in many. In some individuals, feeling distressed by information may lead to avoidance of information, which has been shown to undermine compliance with preventive health behaviors in many health domains (e.g., cancer screenings). We set out to examine whether feeling distressed by information predicts higher avoidance of information about COVID-19 (avoidance hypothesis), and whether this, in turn, predicts worse compliance with measures intended to prevent the spread of COVID-19 (compliance hypothesis). Thus, we conducted an online survey with a convenience sample (N = 1,059, 79.4% female) and assessed distress by information, information avoidance, and compliance with preventive measures. Furthermore, we inquired about participants' information seeking behavior and media usage, their trust in information sources, and level of eHealth literacy, as well as generalized anxiety. We conducted multiple linear regression analyses to predict distress by information, information avoidance, and compliance with preventive measures. Overall, distress by information was associated with better compliance. However, distress was also linked with an increased tendency to avoid information (avoidance hypothesis), and this reduced compliance with preventive measures (compliance hypothesis). Thus, distress may generally induce adaptive behavior in support of crisis management, unless individuals respond to it by avoiding information. These findings provide insights into the consequences of distress by information and avoidance of information during a global health crisis. These results underscore that avoiding information is a maladaptive response to distress by information, which may ultimately interfere with effective crisis management. Consequently, we emphasize the need to develop measures to counteract information avoidance.