Conspiracies, misinformation and resistance to public health measures during COVID-19 in white nationalist online communication.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Walter D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10040359 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Conspiracies, misinformation and resistance to public health measures during COVID-19 in white nationalist online communication.
Walter Dror D Ophir Yotam Y Ye Hui H
Vaccine 20230327 17
Recent studies documented alarming growth in antiscientific discourse among extremist groups online and especially the relatively high anti-vaccine attitudes among White Nationalists (WN). In light of accelerated politization of COVID-19 containment measures and the expansion of containment to lockdowns, masking, and more, we examine current sentiment, themes and argumentation in white nationalist discourse, regarding the COVID-19 vaccines and other containment measures. We use unsupervised mach ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic was marked by an infodemic, characterized by the rapid spread of both accurate and false information, which significantly affected public health. This infodemic led to confusion, mistrust in health authorities, noncompliance with health guidelines, and engagement in risky health behaviors. Understanding the dynamics of misinformation during the pandemic is crucial for developing effective public health communication strategies.ObjectiveThis comprehensive analysis aimed to examine the complexities of COVID-19 misinformation. Specifically, it sought to identify the sources and themes of misinformation, the target audiences most affected, and the effectiveness of various public health communication strategies in mitigating misinformation.MethodsThis scoping review used the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and Scopus databases to identify relevant studies. An established, methodical framework for scoping reviews was used to review literature published between December 2019 and September 2023. The inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed studies published in English that address COVID-19 misinformation and its sources, themes, and target audiences, as well as the effectiveness of public health communication strategies.ResultsThe scoping review identified that misinformation significantly impacted mental health, vaccine hesitancy, and health care decision-making. Social media and traditional media were major conduits for spreading misinformation. Key misinformation themes included the origins of the virus, ineffective treatments, and misunderstandings about public health measures. Misinformation sources ranged from social media platforms to traditional media outlets and informal networks. The impact of misinformation was found to vary across different regions and demographic groups, with vulnerable populations being disproportionately affected. Effective strategies to counter misinformation included enhancing health literacy; using digital technology; promoting clear, authoritative communication; and implementing fact-checking mechanisms. In addition, community engagement and targeted health campaigns played a crucial role in addressing misinformation.ConclusionsThe review emphasizes the critical need for accurate and consistent messaging to combat misinformation. Cooperative efforts among policy makers, health professionals, and communication experts are essential for developing effective interventions. Addressing the infodemic is vital for building a well-informed, health-literate society capable of handling misinformation in future global health crises. The study provides valuable insights into the dynamics of misinformation and highlights the importance of robust public health communication strategies. These findings can guide future efforts to mitigate the impact of misinformation during health emergencies.
| S-EPMC11375383 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic proliferated widely on social media platforms during the course of the health crisis. Experts have speculated that consuming misinformation online can potentially worsen the mental health of individuals, by causing heightened anxiety, stress, and even suicidal ideation. The present study aims to quantify the causal relationship between sharing misinformation, a strong indicator of consuming misinformation, and experiencing exacerbated anxiety. We conduct a large-scale observational study spanning over 80 million Twitter posts made by 76,985 Twitter users during an 18.5 month period. The results from this study demonstrate that users who shared COVID-19 misinformation experienced approximately two times additional increase in anxiety when compared to similar users who did not share misinformation. Socio-demographic analysis reveals that women, racial minorities, and individuals with lower levels of education in the United States experienced a disproportionately higher increase in anxiety when compared to the other users. These findings shed light on the mental health costs of consuming online misinformation. The work bears practical implications for social media platforms in curbing the adverse psychological impacts of misinformation, while also upholding the ethos of an online public sphere.
| S-EPMC9109204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic posed many challenges for local health departments (LHDs). This study examines how stay-at-home orders impacted the provision of essential public health services and subsequent increased use of online health communication by LHDs for rural populations in Appalachian Kentucky during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA survey to gather information about provision of essential public health services was administered to five LHDs representing 13 counties between June 2020 and December 2020. Additionally, demographic and health-outcome data from LHD, state health department, and CDC websites were reviewed, alongside health communications posted on LHD social media pages. Using these data, the authors conducted descriptive analyses to assess how essential public health services and health communications were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsIn Appalachian Kentucky, limited internet access was identified by all LHDs as the most common barrier for clients of essential public health services. During stay-at-home orders, the use of telehealth increased participation rates for programs that support parents for optimal growth and development of children. Additionally, social media was the most preferred media source by all LHDs to communicate with the local population to promote health education.ImplicationsBy using publicly available data and conducting interviews with LHDs, alongside examination of the health information they posted online, the study is able to characterize the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on providing essential public health services-successes and challenges. Expanding use of telehealth for essential public health services and increased access to online health communication improves access to care and information for rural populations in Appalachian Kentucky.
| S-EPMC10629872 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 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.ObjectiveThe 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsExposure to misinformation had a negative impact on attitudes and intentions toward masking (β=-.35, 95% CI -.42 to -.29; P<.001). Moreover, initial debunking of a false claim generally improved attitudes and intentions toward masking (β=.35, 95% CI .16 to .54; P<.001). However, this improvement was washed out by further exposure to false claims and debunking attempts (β=-.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.ConclusionsHealth 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.
| S-EPMC8893717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntroducing national lockdown has been effective in containing Covid-19. However, several studies indicated negative impacts of lockdowns on the well-being and mental health of many people. In Austria, the first Covid-19-related lockdown was introduced on 16 March 2020 with most restrictions being lifted 1 month later. Seven months after that, in November 2020, the second full lockdown was implemented. The aim of this study was to compare the perceptions and experiences of the general population related to the first and second Covid-19 lockdowns in Austria.MethodsTwo waves of an online survey were conducted in May and December 2020 asking respondents about their concerns related to the Covid-19 illness, personal experiences of the lockdowns, perceptions of and compliance with imposed public health measures, and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on different aspects of life during the two lockdowns. Descriptive statistics including frequency analysis were used to compare respondents' answers collected in the two waves of the survey. T-test and chi-square tests were used to test differences between the two lockdowns.ResultsFive hundred sixty participants were included in the first wave and a sub-sample of 134 participants in the second wave of data collection. During the second lockdown, study respondents were more concerned about their family members contracting Covid-19 when compared with the first lockdown. Compliance with public health measures was overall lower during the second lockdown, although it varied according to the type of the measure. Closure of schools was seen as the least essential restriction during the second lockdown, while wearing masks gained additional approval between the first and the second lockdown. Larger negative impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic on friendships, leisure activities, education and community were reported during the second lockdown.ConclusionsThe study found that the extended duration of the pandemic and recurring lockdowns restricting freedom of movement and social contacts appear to have caused significant disruptions to many areas of life. Furthermore, declining adherence to most public health measures over time raises a question about the effectiveness of future lockdown measures.
| S-EPMC8331215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe effectiveness of public health measures implemented to mitigate the spread and impact of SARS-CoV-2 relies heavily on honesty and adherence from the general public.ObjectiveTo examine the frequency of, reasons for, and factors associated with misrepresentation and nonadherence regarding COVID-19 public health measures.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study recruited a national, nonprobability sample of US adults to participate in an online survey using Qualtrics online panels (participation rate, 1811 of 2260 [80.1%]) from December 8 to 23, 2021. The survey contained screening questions to allow for a targeted sample of one-third who had had COVID-19, one-third who had not had COVID-19 and were vaccinated, and one-third who had not had COVID-19 and were unvaccinated.Main outcomes and measuresThe survey assessed 9 different types of misrepresentation and nonadherence related to COVID-19 public health measures and the reasons underlying such behaviors. Additional questions measured COVID-19-related beliefs and behaviors and demographic characteristics.ResultsThe final sample included 1733 participants. The mean (SD) participant age was 41 (15) years and the sample predominantly identified as female (1143 of 1732 [66.0%]) and non-Hispanic White (1151 of 1733 [66.4%]). Seven hundred twenty-one participants (41.6%) reported misrepresentation and/or nonadherence in at least 1 of the 9 items; telling someone they were with or about to be with in person that they were taking more COVID-19 preventive measures than they actually were (420 of 1726 [24.3%]) and breaking quarantine rules (190 of 845 [22.5%]) were the most common manifestations. The most commonly endorsed reasons included wanting life to feel normal and wanting to exercise personal freedom. All age groups younger than 60 years (eg, odds ratio for those aged 18-29 years, 4.87 [95% CI, 3.27-7.34]) and those who had greater distrust in science (odds ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.05-1.23]) had significantly higher odds of misrepresentation and/or nonadherence for at least 1 of the 9 items.Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey study of US adults, nearly half of participants reported misrepresentation and/or nonadherence regarding public health measures against COVID-19. Future work is needed to examine strategies for communicating the consequences of misrepresentation and nonadherence and to address contributing factors.
| S-EPMC9552890 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7500894 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Understanding how different online communities engage with COVID-19 misinformation is critical for public health response. For example, misinformation confined to a small, isolated community of users poses a different public health risk than misinformation being consumed by a large population spanning many diverse communities. Here we take a longitudinal approach that leverages tools from network science to study COVID-19 misinformation on Twitter. Our approach provides a means to examine the breadth of misinformation engagement using modest data needs and computational resources. We identify a subset of accounts from different Twitter communities discussing COVID-19, and follow these 'sentinel nodes' longitudinally from July 2020 to January 2021. We characterize sentinel nodes in terms of a linked domain preference score, and use a standardized similarity score to examine alignment of tweets within and between communities. We find that media preference is strongly correlated with the amount of misinformation propagated by sentinel nodes. Engagement with sensationalist misinformation topics is largely confined to a cluster of sentinel nodes that includes influential conspiracy theorist accounts. By contrast, misinformation relating to COVID-19 severity generated widespread engagement across multiple communities. Our findings indicate that misinformation downplaying COVID-19 severity is of particular concern for public health response. We conclude that the sentinel node approach can be an effective way to assess breadth and depth of online misinformation penetration.
| S-EPMC9194351 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClear, accurate, and transparent risk communication is critical to providing policy makers and the public with directions to effectively implement public health strategies during a health emergency.ObjectiveWe aimed to explore the public's preferred sources of obtaining COVID-19 information, perceptions on the prevalence and drivers of misinformation during the pandemic, and suggestions to optimize health communications during future public health emergencies.MethodsWe administered a web-based survey that included Likert scale, multiple choice and open-ended response questions to residents of Ontario, Canada. We aimed to recruit a sample that reflected population diversity with respect to age and gender. Data were collected between June 10, 2020, and December 31, 2020, and were analyzed using descriptive statistics; open-ended data were analyzed using content analysis. Subgroup analyses to explore perceptions by age and gender were conducted using ordinal regression.ResultsA total of 1823 individuals participated in the survey (n=990, 54% women; n=703, 39% men; n=982, 54% aged 18-40 years; n=518, 28% aged 41-60 years; and n=215, 12% aged ≥61 years). Participants most commonly obtained COVID-19 information from local television news (n=1118, 61%) followed by social media (n=938, 51%), national or international television news (n=888, 49%), and friends and family (n=835, 46%). Approximately 55% (n=1010) of the participants believed they had encountered COVID-19-related misinformation; 70% (n=1284) of the participants reported high levels of trust in health authority websites and health care providers; 66% (n=1211) reported high levels of trust in health ministers or public health organizations. Sources perceived to be less trustworthy included friends and family, talk radio, social media, as well as blogs and opinion websites. Men were more likely to report encountering misinformation and to trust friends or family (odds ratio [OR] 1.49, 95% CI 1.24-1.79) and blogs or opinion websites (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.50), compared to women. Compared to those aged 18-40 years, participants aged ≥41years were more likely to trust all assessed information sources, with the exception of web-based media sources, and less likely to report encountering misinformation. Of those surveyed, 58% (n=1053) had challenges identifying or appraising COVID-19 information.ConclusionsOver half of our participants perceived that they had encountered COVID-19 misinformation, and 58% had challenges identifying or appraising COVID-19 information. Gender and age differences in perceptions of misinformation and trust in information sources were observed. Future research to confirm the validity of these perceptions and to explore information-seeking patterns by population subgroups may provide useful insights on how to optimize health communication during public health emergencies.
| S-EPMC10241226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for reliable information, especially around vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy is a growing concern and a great threat to broader public health. The prevalence of social media within our daily lives emphasizes the importance of accurately analyzing how health information is being disseminated to the public. TikTok is of particular interest, as it is an emerging social media platform that young adults may be increasingly using to access health information.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to examine and describe the content within the top 100 TikToks trending with the hashtag #covidvaccine.MethodsThe top 250 most viewed TikToks with the hashtag #covidvaccine were batch downloaded on July 1, 2021, with their respective metadata. Each TikTok was subsequently viewed and encoded by 2 independent reviewers. Coding continued until 100 TikToks could be included based on language and content. Descriptive features were recorded including health care professional (HCP) status of creator, verification of HCP status, genre, and misinformation addressed. Primary inclusion criteria were any TikToks in English with discussion of a COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsOf 102 videos included, the median number of plays was 1,700,000, with median shares of 9224 and 62,200 followers. Upon analysis, 14.7% (15/102) of TikToks included HCPs, of which 80% (12/102) could be verified via social media or regulatory body search; 100% (15/15) of HCP-created TikToks supported vaccine use, and overall, 81.3% (83/102) of all TikToks (created by either a layperson or an HCP) supported vaccine use.ConclusionsAs the pandemic continues, vaccine hesitancy poses a threat to lifting restrictions, and discovering reasons for this hesitancy is important to public health measures. This study summarizes the discourse around vaccine use on TikTok. Importantly, it opens a frank discussion about the necessity to incorporate new social media platforms into medical education, so we might ensure our trainees are ready to engage with patients on novel platforms.
| S-EPMC9620417 | biostudies-literature