90
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Effects of misinformation on COVID-19 individual responses and recommendations for resilience of disastrous consequences of misinformation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Proliferation of misinformation on social media platforms is faster than the spread of Corona Virus Diseases (COVID-19) and can generates hefty deleterious consequences on health amid a disaster like COVID-19. Drawing upon research on conspiracy theories, credibility evaluations, and misinformation, the current study empirically examines the effects of misinformation beliefs on COVID-19 individual responses. Using a self-administered online survey during COVID-19 pandemic, the study obtained 483 useable responses and after test, finds that, all inclusive, the propagation of misinformation on social media undermines the COVID-19 individual responses. Particularly, credibility evaluation of misinformation strongly predicts the COVID-19 individual responses with positive influences and religious misinformation beliefs as well as conspiracy beliefs come next and influence negatively. The findings and general recommendations will help public in general to be cautious about misinformation, and respective authority of a country in particular for initiating proper safety measures about disastrous misinformation in order to protect the public health from being exploited.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Coronavirus Goes Viral: Quantifying the COVID-19 Misinformation Epidemic on Twitter

          Background Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, misinformation has been spreading uninhibited over traditional and social media at a rapid pace. We sought to analyze the magnitude of misinformation that is being spread on Twitter (Twitter, Inc., San Francisco, CA) regarding the coronavirus epidemic.  Materials and methods We conducted a search on Twitter using 14 different trending hashtags and keywords related to the COVID-19 epidemic. We then summarized and assessed individual tweets for misinformation in comparison to verified and peer-reviewed resources. Descriptive statistics were used to compare terms and hashtags, and to identify individual tweets and account characteristics. Results The study included 673 tweets. Most tweets were posted by informal individuals/groups (66%), and 129 (19.2%) belonged to verified Twitter accounts. The majority of included tweets contained serious content (91.2%); 548 tweets (81.4%) included genuine information pertaining to the COVID-19 epidemic. Around 70% of the tweets tackled medical/public health information, while the others were pertaining to sociopolitical and financial factors. In total, 153 tweets (24.8%) included misinformation, and 107 (17.4%) included unverifiable information regarding the COVID-19 epidemic. The rate of misinformation was higher among informal individual/group accounts (33.8%, p: <0.001). Tweets from unverified Twitter accounts contained more misinformation (31.0% vs 12.6% for verified accounts, p: <0.001). Tweets from healthcare/public health accounts had the lowest rate of unverifiable information (12.3%, p: 0.04). The number of likes and retweets per tweet was not associated with a difference in either false or unverifiable content. The keyword “COVID-19” had the lowest rate of misinformation and unverifiable information, while the keywords “#2019_ncov” and “Corona” were associated with the highest amount of misinformation and unverifiable content respectively. Conclusions Medical misinformation and unverifiable content pertaining to the global COVID-19 epidemic are being propagated at an alarming rate on social media. We provide an early quantification of the magnitude of misinformation spread and highlight the importance of early interventions in order to curb this phenomenon that endangers public safety at a time when awareness and appropriate preventive actions are paramount.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Addressing Health-Related Misinformation on Social Media

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Measuring Belief in Conspiracy Theories: The Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale

              The psychology of conspiracy theory beliefs is not yet well understood, although research indicates that there are stable individual differences in conspiracist ideation – individuals’ general tendency to engage with conspiracy theories. Researchers have created several short self-report measures of conspiracist ideation. These measures largely consist of items referring to an assortment of prominent conspiracy theories regarding specific real-world events. However, these instruments have not been psychometrically validated, and this assessment approach suffers from practical and theoretical limitations. Therefore, we present the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs (GCB) scale: a novel measure of individual differences in generic conspiracist ideation. The scale was developed and validated across four studies. In Study 1, exploratory factor analysis of a novel 75-item measure of non-event-based conspiracist beliefs identified five conspiracist facets. The 15-item GCB scale was developed to sample from each of these themes. Studies 2, 3, and 4 examined the structure and validity of the GCB, demonstrating internal reliability, content, criterion-related, convergent and discriminant validity, and good test-retest reliability. In sum, this research indicates that the GCB is a psychometrically sound and practically useful measure of conspiracist ideation, and the findings add to our theoretical understanding of conspiracist ideation as a monological belief system unpinned by a relatively small number of generic assumptions about the typicality of conspiratorial activity in the world.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Progress in Disaster Science
                Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                2590-0617
                2590-0617
                21 July 2020
                21 July 2020
                : 100119
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Marketing, University of Chittagong, Chittagong 4331, Bangladesh
                [b ]School of Management, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, China
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. zapan@ 123456cu.ac.bd
                Article
                S2590-0617(20)30056-9 100119
                10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100119
                7373041
                34173443
                3762a78e-9cb2-4696-a127-e484cd5baf03
                © 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 3 June 2020
                : 16 July 2020
                : 16 July 2020
                Categories
                Article

                coronavirus,misinformation,social media,covid-19 individual response

                Comments

                Comment on this article