Addressing Antivaccine Sentiment on Public Social Media Forums Through Web-Based Conversations Based on Motivational Interviewing Techniques: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Health misinformation shared on social media can have negative health consequences; yet, there is a dearth of field research testing interventions to address health misinformation in real time, digitally, and in situ on social media. OBJECTIVE: We describe a field study of a pilot program of "infodemiologists" trained with evidence-informed intervention techniques heavily influenced by principles of motivational interviewing. Here we provide a detailed description of the nature of infodemiologists' interventions on posts sharing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines, present an initial evaluation framework for such field research, and use available engagement metrics to quantify the impact of these in-group messengers on the web-based threads on which they are intervening. METHODS: We monitored Facebook (Meta Platforms, Inc) profiles of news organizations marketing to 3 geographic regions (Newark, New Jersey; Chicago, Illinois; and central Texas). Between December 2020 and April 2021, infodemiologists intervened in 145 Facebook news posts that generated comments containing either false or misleading information about vaccines or overt antivaccine sentiment. Engagement (emojis plus replies) data were collected on Facebook news posts, the initial comment containing misinformation (level 1 comment), and the infodemiologist's reply (level 2 reply comment). A comparison-group evaluation design was used, with numbers of replies, emoji reactions, and engagements for level 1 comments compared with the median metrics of matched comments using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Level 2 reply comments (intervention) were also benchmarked against the corresponding metric of matched reply comments (control) using the Wilcoxon signed rank test (paired at the level 1 comment level). Infodemiologists' level 2 reply comments (intervention) and matched reply comments (control) were further compared using 3 Poisson regression models. RESULTS: In total, 145 interventions were conducted on 132 Facebook news posts. The level 1 comments received a median of 3 replies, 3 reactions, and 7 engagements. The matched comments received a median of 1.5 (median of IQRs 3.75) engagements. Infodemiologists made 322 level 2 reply comments, precipitating 189 emoji reactions and a median of 0.5 (median of IQRs IQR 0) engagements. The matched reply comments received a median of 1 (median of IQRs 2.5) engagement. Compared to matched comments, level 1 comments received more replies, emoji reactions, and engagements. Compared to matched reply comments, level 2 reply comments received fewer and narrower ranges of replies, reactions, and engagements, except for the median comparison for replies. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, empathy-first communication strategies based on motivational interviewing garnered less engagement relative to matched controls. One possible explanation is that our interventions quieted contentious, misinformation-laden threads about vaccines on social media. This work reinforces research on accuracy nudges and cyberbullying interventions that also reduce engagement. More research leveraging field studies of real-time interventions is needed, yet data transparency by technology platforms will be essential to facilitate such experiments.

'They've all endorsed it but I'm just not there:' a qualitative exploration of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy reported by Black and Latinx individuals.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine reasons for vaccine hesitancy among online communities of US-based Black and Latinx communities to understand the role of historical racism, present-day structural racism, medical mistrust and individual concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy. DESIGN: A qualitative study using narrative and interpretive phenomenological analysis of online bulletin board focus groups. SETTING: Bulletin boards with a focus-group-like setting in an online, private, chat-room-like environment. PARTICIPANTS: Self-described vaccine hesitant participants from US-based Black (30) and Latinx (30) communities designed to reflect various axes of diversity within these respective communities in the US context. RESULTS: Bulletin board discussions covered a range of topics related to COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 vaccine hesitant participants expressed fears about vaccine safety and doubts about vaccine efficacy. Elements of structural racism were cited in both groups as affecting populations but not playing a role in individual vaccine decisions. Historical racism was infrequently cited as a reason for vaccine hesitancy. Individualised fears and doubts about COVID-19 (short-term and long-term) safety and efficacy dominated these bulletin board discussions. Community benefits of vaccination were not commonly raised among participants. CONCLUSIONS: While this suggests that addressing individually focused fear and doubts are central to overcoming COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Black and Latinx groups, addressing the effects of present-day structural racism through a focus on community protection may also be important.

Community-oriented Motivational Interviewing (MI): A novel framework extending MI to address COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in online social media platforms.

Researchers have linked circulating misinformation in online platforms to low COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Two disparate literatures provide relevant initial guidance to address the problem. Motivational Interviewing (MI) effectively reduces vaccine hesitancy in clinical environments; meanwhile, social scientists note inoculation, rebuttal, and appeals to accuracy are persuasive in digital contexts. A tension is inherent in these approaches. MI in digital forums may induce an 'illusory truth effect,' wherein falsehoods appear more accurate through repetition. Yet, rebutting misinformation directly may elicit backfire or reactance effects, motivating some to amplify their presentation of misinformation. Building on Identity Process Theory, we propose a theoretical framework for conducting MI-based infodemiology interventions among digital communities that conceptualizes the community in toto (rather than one specific person) as the unit of focus. Case examples from interventions on public Facebook posts illustrate three processes unique to such interventions: 1) Navigating tension between addressing commenters and "bystanders"; 2) Activating pro-vaccine bystanders; and 3) Reframing uncertainty or information individuals might find concerning or threatening according to implied collective values. This paper suggests community-oriented MI can maximize persuasive effects on bystanders while minimizing potential reactance from those with committed beliefs, thereby guiding community-oriented public health messaging interventions enacted in digital environments.