Expert Credibility and Sentiment in Infodemiology of Hydroxychloroquine's Efficacy on Cable News Programs: Empirical Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Infodemic exacerbates public health concerns by disseminating unreliable and false scientific facts to a population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as a therapeutic solution emerged as a challenge to public health communication. Internet and social media spread information about hydroxychloroquine, whereas cable television was a vital source. To exemplify, experts discussed in cable television broadcasts about hydroxychloroquine for treating COVID-19. However, how the experts' comments influenced airtime allocation on cable television to help in public health communication, either during COVID-10 or at other times, is not understood. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine how 3 factors, that is, the credibility of experts as doctors (DOCTOREXPERT), the credibility of government representatives (GOVTEXPERT), and the sentiments (SENTIMENT) expressed in discussions and comments, influence the allocation of airtime (AIRTIME) in cable television broadcasts. SENTIMENT pertains to the information credibility conveyed through the tone and language of experts' comments during cable television broadcasts, in contrast to the individual credibility of the doctor or government representatives because of the degree or affiliations. METHODS: We collected transcriptions of relevant hydroxychloroquine-related broadcasts on cable television between March 2020 and October 2020. We coded the experts as DOCTOREXPERT or GOVTEXPERT using publicly available data. To determine the sentiments expressed in the broadcasts, we used a machine learning algorithm to code them as POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, NEUTRAL, or MIXED sentiments. RESULTS: The analysis revealed a counterintuitive association between the expertise of doctors (DOCTOREXPERT) and the allocation of airtime, with doctor experts receiving less airtime (P<.001) than the nonexperts in a base model. A more nuanced interaction model suggested that government experts with a doctorate degree received even less airtime (P=.03) compared with nonexperts. Sentiments expressed during the broadcasts played a significant role in airtime allocation, particularly for their direct effects on airtime allocation, more so for NEGATIVE (P<.001), NEUTRAL (P<.001), and MIXED (P=.03) sentiments. Only government experts expressing POSITIVE sentiments during the broadcast received a more extended airtime (P<.001) than nonexperts. Furthermore, NEGATIVE sentiments in the broadcasts were associated with less airtime both for DOCTOREXPERT (P<.001) and GOVTEXPERT (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Source credibility plays a crucial role in infodemics by ensuring the accuracy and trustworthiness of the information communicated to audiences. However, cable television media may prioritize likeability over credibility, potentially hindering this goal. Surprisingly, the findings of our study suggest that doctors did not get good airtime on hydroxychloroquine-related discussions on cable television. In contrast, government experts as sources received more airtime on hydroxychloroquine-related discussions. Doctors presenting facts with negative sentiments may not help them gain airtime. Conversely, government experts expressing positive sentiments during broadcasts may have better airtime than nonexperts. These findings have implications on the role of source credibility in public health communications.

Does Seeing What Others Do Through Social Media Influence Vaccine Uptake and Help in the Herd Immunity Through Vaccination? A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

Widespread acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination is the next major step in fighting the pandemic. However, significant variations are observed in the willingness to take the vaccination by citizens across different countries. Arguably, differences in vaccination intentions will be influenced by beliefs around vaccines to influence health. Often perceptions of what others are doing and the information available guide individuals' behaviors for vaccination. This is more so in the digital age with the influence of the internet and media. This study aims to determine the factors that impact willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19. We examined factors associated with acceptance of vaccine based on (1) constructs of the Health Belief Model (HBM), (2) sources of information, (3) social media usage, (4) knowledge of COVID-19 treatment, and (5) perception of government's efforts for mitigation. Randomly sampled online survey data was collected by a global firm between December 2020 and January 2021 from 372 citizens (with a response rate of 96.6%) from multiple regions, including North America, the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. Ordered probit regression suggests that the health belief model constructs hold. Perceived severity of COVID-19 (P < 0.001) and action cues of others taking the vaccine positively influences a subject's vaccine intent (P < 0.001), perceived benefits and perceived efficacy of the vaccine positively influences a subject's vaccine intent (P < 0.001). Perceived barriers negatively influence vaccine intent (P < 0.001). Interestingly as for media usage, mainstream media (e.g., TV, newspaper) (P = 0.006) and social media (P = 0.013) both negatively influence a subject's vaccine intent. Social media platforms that are more entertainment and social-based, such as Whatsapp, Instagram, and YouTube, have a negative and significant influence on vaccine intent (P = 0.061), compared to other more information-based social media platforms (e.g., Twitter, LinkedIn). Knowledge of COVID-19 treatment positively influences vaccine intent (P = 0.023). Lastly, governmental efforts' perceived reliability in mitigation strategy (P = 0.028) and response efforts (P = 0.004) negatively influence vaccine intent. The study highlights the "wait-and-see" action cue from others and leaders in the community. It also informs the importance of shaping media information for vaccination through informative media and social media outlets to counteract any misinformation.

Threat, Coping, and Social Distance Adherence During COVID-19: Cross-Continental Comparison Using an Online Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Social distancing is an effective preventative policy for COVID-19 that is enforced by governments worldwide. However, significant variations are observed in adherence to social distancing across individuals and countries. Due to the lack of treatment, rapid spread, and prevalence of COVID-19, panic and fear associated with the disease causes great stress. Subsequent effects will be a variation around the coping and mitigation strategies for different individuals following different paths to manage the situation. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore how threat and coping appraisal processes work as mechanisms between information and citizens' adherence to COVID-19-related recommendations (ie, how the information sources and social media influence threat and coping appraisal processes with COVID-19 and how the threat and coping appraisal processes influence adherence to policy guidelines). In addition, this study aims to explore how citizens in three different countries (the United States, Kuwait, and South Korea), randomly sampled, are effectively using the mechanisms. METHODS: Randomly sampled online survey data collected by a global firm in May 2020 from 162 citizens of the United States, 185 of Kuwait, and 71 of South Korea were analyzed, resulting in a total sample size of 418. A seemingly unrelated regression model, controlling for several counterfactuals, was used for analysis. The study's focal estimated effects were compared across the three countries using the weighted distance between the parameter estimates. RESULTS: The seemingly unrelated regression model estimation results suggested that, overall, the intensity of information source use for the COVID-19 pandemic positively influenced the threat appraisal for the disease (P<.001). Furthermore, the intensity of social media use for the COVID-19 pandemic positively influenced the coping appraisal for the disease (P<.001). Higher COVID-19 threat appraisal had a positive effect on social distancing adherence (P<.001). Higher COVID-19 coping appraisal had a positive effect on social distancing adherence (P<.001). Higher intensity of COVID-19 knowledge positively influenced social distancing adherence (P<.001). There were country-level variations. Broadly, we found that the United States had better results than South Korea and Kuwait in leveraging the information to threat and coping appraisal to the adherence process, indicating that individuals in countries like the United States and South Korea may be more pragmatic to appraise the situation before making any decisions. CONCLUSIONS: This study's findings suggest that the mediation of threat and coping strategies are essential, in varying effects, to shape the information and social media strategies for adherence outcomes. Accordingly, coordinating public service announcements along with information source outlets such as mainstream media (eg, TV and newspaper) as well as social media (eg, Facebook and Twitter) to inform citizens and, at the same time, deliver balanced messages about the threat and coping appraisal is critical in implementing a staggered social distancing and sheltering strategy.

Citizens' Adherence to COVID-19 Mitigation Recommendations by the Government: A 3-Country Comparative Evaluation Using Web-Based Cross-Sectional Survey Data.

BACKGROUND: Social distancing is an effective preventative policy for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) that is enforced by governments worldwide. However, significant variations are observed in following the policy across individuals and countries. Arguably, differences in citizens' adherence actions will be influenced by their perceptions about government's plans and the information available to guide their behaviors-more so in the digital age in the realm of mass influence of social media on citizens. Insights into the underlying factors and dynamics involved with citizens' adherence process will inform the policy makers to follow appropriate communication and messaging approaches to influence citizens' willingness to adhere to the recommendations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is a comparative evaluation of citizens' adherence process to COVID-19-relevant recommendations by the government. The focus is on how three different countries' (United States, Kuwait, and South Korea) citizens, randomly sampled, respond to governments' pandemic guidance efforts. We draw insights into two categories of perceived government roles in managing the pandemic: (1) citizens' perceptions of government's role in responding to the pandemic and (2) citizens' perceptions of government's business reopening efforts. Undoubtedly, the internet and social media have burgeoned, with differing effects on shaping individuals' views and assessments of the COVID-19 situation; we argue and test for the effects of information sources, social media use, and knowledge on the adherence actions. METHODS: We randomly sampled web-based survey data collected by a global firm in May 2020 from citizens of the United States, Kuwait, and South Korea. A nonlinear ordered probit regression, controlling for several counterfactuals, was used for analysis. The focal estimated effects of the study were compared across countries using the weighted distance between the parameter estimates. RESULTS: The total sample size was 482 respondents, of which 207 (43%) lived in the United States, 181 (38%) lived in Kuwait, and 94 (20%) lived in South Korea. The ordered probit estimation results suggest that overall, perception of government response efforts positively influenced self-adherence (P<.001) and others' adherence (P<.001) to social distancing and sheltering. Perception of government business reopening efforts positively influenced others' adherence (P<.001). A higher intensity of general health information source for COVID-19 had a positive effect on self-adherence (P=.003). A higher intensity of social media source use for COVID-19 positively influenced others' adherence (P=.002). A higher intensity of knowledge on COVID-19 positively influenced self-adherence (P=.008) and negatively influenced others' adherence (P<.001). There were country-level variations-broadly, the United States and Kuwait had better effects than South Korea. CONCLUSIONS: As the COVID-19 global pandemic continues to grow and governmental restrictions are ongoing, it is critical to understand people's frustration to reduce panic and promote social distancing to facilitate the control of the pandemic. This study finds that the government plays a central role in terms of adherence to restrictions. Governments need to enhance their efforts on publicizing information on the pandemic, as well as employ strategies for improved communication management to citizens through social media as well as mainstream information sources.