Using Expert Sources to Correct Health Misinformation in Social Media

This study tests whether the number (1 vs. 2) and the source (another user vs. the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]) of corrective responses affect successful reduction of misperceptions. Using an experimental design, our results suggest that while a single correction from another user did not reduce misperceptions, the CDC on its own could correct misinformation. Corrections were more effective among those higher in initial misperceptions. Notably, organizational credibility was not reduced when correcting misinformation, making this a low-cost behavior for public health organizations. We recommend that expert organizations like the CDC immediately and personally rebut misinformation about health issues on social media.

[1]  Douglas J. Rupert,et al.  Correction of misleading information in prescription drug television advertising: The roles of advertisement similarity and time delay , 2017, Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP.

[2]  S. Chaiken.  Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. , 1980 .

[3]  H. Al-Abdely,et al.  Zika , 2016, Saudi Medical Journal.

[4]  Emily K. Vraga,et al.  How individual sensitivities to disagreement shape youth political expression on Facebook , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[5]  Zion Tsz Ho Tse,et al.  Social Media's Initial Reaction to Information and Misinformation on Ebola, August 2014: Facts and Rumors , 2016, Public health reports.

[6]  D. Brossard.  New media landscapes and the science information consumer , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Fabio Giglietto,et al.  Fakes, News and the Election: A New Taxonomy for the Study of Misleading Information within the Hybrid Media System , 2016 .

[8]  A. Kata.  A postmodern Pandora's box: anti-vaccination misinformation on the Internet. , 2010, Vaccine.

[9]  Kate Starbird,et al.  Rumors, False Flags, and Digital Vigilantes: Misinformation on Twitter after the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombing , 2014 .

[10]  A. Hayes.  Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach , 2013 .

[11]  Kevin Munger.  Tweetment Effects on the Tweeted: Experimentally Reducing Racist Harassment , 2017 .

[12]  Emily K. Vraga,et al.  I do not believe you: how providing a source corrects health misperceptions across social media platforms , 2017 .

[13]  Jenine K. Harris,et al.  Are Public Health Organizations Tweeting to the Choir? Understanding Local Health Department Twitter Followership , 2014, Journal of medical Internet research.

[14]  Vincent R. Racaniello,et al.  Scientists: Engage the Public! , 2015, mBio.

[15]  Ethan Porter,et al.  The Elusive Backfire Effect: Mass Attitudes’ Steadfast Factual Adherence , 2019 .

[16]  Emily K. Vraga,et al.  In Related News, That Was Wrong: The Correction of Misinformation Through Related Stories Functionality in Social Media , 2015 .

[17]  B. Nyhan,et al.  When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions , 2010 .

[18]  Jennifer Jerit,et al.  Partisan Perceptual Bias and the Information Environment , 2012 .

[19]  Elia Gabarron,et al.  Ebola, Twitter, and misinformation: a dangerous combination? , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[20]  R. Kelly Garrett,et al.  The Partisan Brain , 2015 .

[21]  Chei Sian Lee,et al.  News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  Jeong Yeob Han,et al.  Cancer Talk on Twitter: Community Structure and Information Sources in Breast and Prostate Cancer Social Networks , 2014, Journal of health communication.

[23]  Zizi Papacharissi.  Without You, I'm Nothing: Performances of the Self on Twitter , 2012 .

[24]  Jihyang Choi.  News Internalizing and Externalizing , 2016 .

[25]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  The Benefits of Facebook "Friends: " Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[26]  Annice E Kim,et al.  The Use of Social Media by State Tobacco Control Programs to Promote Smoking Cessation: A Cross-Sectional Study , 2014, Journal of medical Internet research.

[27]  Matthew S. VanDyke,et al.  Set It and Forget It , 2015 .

[28]  L. Bode.  Political News in the News Feed: Learning Politics from Social Media , 2016 .

[29]  Brian E. Weeks,et al.  Political persuasion on social media: Tracing direct and indirect effects of news use and social interaction , 2016, New Media Soc..

[30]  Jae Eun Chung,et al.  A Smoking Cessation Campaign on Twitter: Understanding the Use of Twitter and Identifying Major Players in a Health Campaign , 2016, Journal of health communication.

[31]  Stephan Winter,et al.  They Came, They Liked, They Commented: Social Influence on Facebook News Channels , 2015, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[32]  Teresa A. Myers,et al.  Does Engagement in Advocacy Hurt the Credibility of Scientists? Results from a Randomized National Survey Experiment , 2017 .

[33]  Emily A. Thorson.  Belief Echoes: The Persistent Effects of Corrected Misinformation , 2016 .

[34]  Kajsa E. Dalrymple,et al.  “Facts, Not Fear” , 2016 .

[35]  Salvatore Rubino,et al.  Zika virus: a new pandemic threat. , 2016, Journal of infection in developing countries.

[36]  Ashley Muddiman,et al.  Correcting Political and Consumer Misperceptions: The Effectiveness and Effects of Rating Scale Versus Contextual Correction Formats , 2018 .

[37]  Sarah R. Davies,et al.  Constructing Communication , 2008 .

[38]  William Allen,et al.  The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness , 1953 .

[39]  Sharon Dunwoody,et al.  Journalism and Social Media as Means of Observing the Contexts of Science , 2013 .

[40]  Barbara Poblete,et al.  Information credibility on twitter , 2011, WWW.

[41]  E. Austin,et al.  Source v. Content Effects on Judgments of News Believability , 1994 .

[42]  K. Ferdinand,et al.  Zika virus pandemic—analysis of Facebook as a social media health information platform , 2017, American journal of infection control.

[43]  Laurie Hoffman-Goetz,et al.  Tweeting About Prostate and Testicular Cancers: Do Twitter Conversations and the 2013 Movember Canada Campaign Objectives Align? , 2015, Journal of Cancer Education.

[44]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online , 2010 .

[45]  Emily A. Thorson,et al.  The Prevalence, Consequence, and Remedy of Misinformation in Mass Media Systems , 2015 .

[46]  Dieter Pfoser,et al.  Zika in Twitter: Temporal Variations of Locations, Actors, and Concepts , 2017, JMIR public health and surveillance.

[47]  Sean J. Westwood,et al.  Selective Exposure in the Age of Social Media , 2014, Commun. Res..

[48]  A. Hermida,et al.  SHARE, LIKE, RECOMMEND , 2012 .

[49]  K. Giffin.  The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. , 1967, Psychological bulletin.

[50]  Michel L. A. Dückers,et al.  Self-correcting mechanisms and echo-effects in social media: An analysis of the "gunman in the newsroom" crisis , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[51]  David A. Broniatowski,et al.  Zika vaccine misconceptions: A social media analysis. , 2016, Vaccine.

[52]  Sei-Ching Joanna Sin,et al.  Why Students Share Misinformation on Social Media: Motivation, Gender, and Study-level Differences , 2015 .

[53]  Matthew S. Eastin,et al.  Credibility Assessments of Online Health Information: The Effects of Source Expertise and Knowledge of Content , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[54]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[55]  R. Kelly Garrett,et al.  Undermining the Corrective Effects of Media‐Based Political Fact Checking? The Role of Contextual Cues and Naïve Theory , 2013 .

[56]  Nicole C. Krämer,et al.  Who’s right: The author or the audience? Effects of user comments and ratings on the perception of online science articles , 2016 .

[57]  Zion Tsz Ho Tse,et al.  Social Media's Initial Reaction to Information and Misinformation on Ebola , 2016 .

[58]  J. Vucetich,et al.  On Advocacy by Environmental Scientists: What, Whether, Why, and How , 2009, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[59]  Miriam J. Metzger.  Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[60]  Douglas J. Rupert,et al.  Correction of Overstatement and Omission in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising , 2015 .

[61]  Scott H. Burton,et al.  Evaluating Social Media’s Capacity to Develop Engaged Audiences in Health Promotion Settings , 2013, Health Promotion Practice.

[62]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Nonpersuasive communication about matters of greatest urgency: climate change. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[63]  Guido Caldarelli,et al.  Science vs Conspiracy: Collective Narratives in the Age of Misinformation , 2014, PloS one.

[64]  Shelly Rodgers,et al.  Analyzing Health Organizations' Use of Twitter for Promoting Health Literacy , 2013, Journal of health communication.

[65]  Sara K. Yeo,et al.  Twitter as the social media of choice for sharing science , 2014 .

[66]  V T Covello,et al.  The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study , 1997, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[67]  Sharon Dunwoody,et al.  Public communication of science 2.0 , 2014, EMBO reports.