Finding the facts in an infodemic: framing effective COVID-19 messages to connect people to authoritative content.

The public's need for timely and trusted COVID-19 information remains high. Governments and global health agencies such as the WHO have sought to disseminate accurate and timely information to counteract misinformation and disinformation that has arisen as part of an 'infodemic'-the overabundance of information on COVID-19-some accurate and some not. In early 2020, WHO began a collaboration with Google to run online public service announcements on COVID-19, in the form of search ads displayed above results of Google Search queries. Web-based text ads can drive online searchers of COVID-19 information to authoritative COVID-19 content but determining what message is most effective is a challenge. WHO wanted to understand which message framing, that is, the way in which ad information is worded for the public, leads searchers to click through to WHO content. WHO tested 71 text ads in English across four COVID-19 topics using a mix of message frames: descriptive, collective, gain, loss, appeals to values and emphasising reasons. Between 11 September 2020 and 23 November 2020, there were 13 million views of the experimental WHO text ads leading to 1.4 million click-throughs to the WHO website. Within the set of 71 ads, there was a large spread between the most effective and least effective messages; for messages on COVID-19, the best performing framings were more than twice as effective as the worst performing framings (18.7% vs 8.5% engagement rate). Health practitioners can apply the messaging tactics WHO found to be successful to rapidly optimise messages for their own public health campaigns and better reach the public with authoritative information. Similar collaboration between big technology companies and governments and global health agencies has the potential to advance public health.

Empathy-Related Brain Activity in Somatosensory Cortex Protects From Tactile Priming Effects: A Pilot Study.

Empathy influences how we perceive, understand, and interact with our social environment. Previous studies suggested a network of different brain regions as a neural substrate for empathy, including, in particular, insula and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). In addition, a contribution of the somatosensory cortices for this empathy related network has been suggested. This is remarkable, given that other recent studies have revealed a role for the somatosensory cortex in various social tasks. For example, in experiments using tactile priming, incidental haptic sensations are found to influence judgment recommendations. Here, we aimed to test if this engagement of the somatosensory cortices during tactile priming can be predicted by the participant's empathy personality traits. We assessed participant's empathy and personality traits by means of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and NEO-FFI and tested whether trait empathy is associated with the tactile priming effect in social judgments. Results revealed that empathy predicted the tactile priming effect negatively. This was accompanied by a reduced engagement of the somatosensory cortex, which has been shown to be associated with the priming effect. We conclude that empathy seems to protect people from tactile priming effects.

Incidental haptic sensations influence judgment of crimes.

Extralegal factors may influence judicial outcomes. Here we investigated the experience of incidental haptic sensations on the harshness of punishment recommendations. Based on recent theories of embodiment, which claim that cognitive representations are structured by metaphorical mappings from sensory experience, we hypothesized that tactile priming with hard objects would cause subjects to recommend harsher sentences (to be 'hard on crime'). Furthermore, the theory of embodiment predicts that this effect should be based on sensorimotor brain activation during the judging process. In order to test this we presented participants with scenarios that described various crimes while scanning their brain activity with fMRI. Participants were then asked to rate how severely they would sentence the delinquents. Before the scenarios, the participants were primed by touching either a hard or a soft object. Results revealed tha t hard priming led participants to recommend harder punishments. These results were accompanied by activation of somatosensory brain areas during the judging phase. This outcome is in line with simulation assumptions of the embodiment theory and proposes a central role of the sensorimotor cortices for embodied metaphors. Thus, incidental tactile experiences can influence our abstract cognitions and even how hard we are on criminals.