The Politicization of Climate Science: Media Consumption, Perceptions of Science and Scientists, and Support for Policy.

Differential media treatment of climate change, including conservative media's tendency to reject the anthropogenic climate change scientific consensus, has reinforced polarized perceptions of climate change. Studies have found differences in coverage patterns and in perceptions among those relying more heavily on conservative rather than liberal or moderate media. This scholarship has been limited by narrow measurements of media exposure, climate-related outcomes, and the mechanism of effects. We analyzed nationally representative US data (N = 1,181) using measures that included not only reported use of mainstream print, cable, and social media captured in past research, but also science programming, as well as far-right, alternative-health, and Christian media. On average, participants relied more heavily on centrist and liberal media, followed by Fox News and social media. The results corroborate findings associating exposure to centrist media with pro-climate attitudes, and conservative media, including Fox News with the opposite views. Use of far-right outlets was associated with the lowest levels of belief in anthropogenic climate change, perceptions of personal threat, and support for climate-friendly policy. Reliance on science media was associated with pro-climate views. Most associations were mediated via perceptions of science and scientists (using the Factors Associated with Self-Presentation of Science, FASS scale).

International scientific communication on COVID-19 data: management pitfalls understanding.

BACKGROUND: During the pandemic, countries utilized various forms of statistical estimations of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) impact. Differences between databases make direct comparisons and interpretations of data in different countries a challenge. We evaluated country-specific approaches to COVID-19 data and recommended changes that would improve future international collaborations. METHODS: We compared the COVID-19 reports presented on official UK (National Health System), Israeli (Department of Health), Latvian (Center for Disease Prevention and Control) and USA (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) health authorities' websites. RESULTS: Our analysis demonstrated critical differences in the ways COVID-19 statistics were made available to the general and scientific communities. Specifically, the differences in approaches were found in the presentation of the number of infected cases and tests, and percentage of positive cases, the number of severe cases, the number of vaccinated, and the number and percent of deaths. CONCLUSION: Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability principles could guide the development of essential global standards that provide a basis for communication within and outside of the scientific community.

Staying connected: Alzheimer's hashtags and opportunities for engagement and overcoming stigma.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a terminal, neurodegenerative disease, and consequently is difficult to communicate about as it is stigmatized, and discussions are rife with misconceptions. By situating AD conversations in the sociocultural space of the opportunity model of presence during the end-of-life process, a framework developed illustrating the potential trajectory from living with illness through death and into bereavement, we examined networked discussions surrounding Alzheimer's related hashtags on Twitter (N = 132,803) between January 1st, 2010, and September 29th, 2021. Using the mixed-method approach of the Analysis of Topic Model Network (ANTMN) framework, results revealed 30 topics clustered into five distinct themes: promotion, education, action, "You aren't alone", and dementia. Results indicated that discussions surrounding World Alzheimer's Day focused on changing stigma and promoting engagement in difficult conversations. The frequency of themes over time remained relatively stable. By understanding how Twitter's online discourse may be used to overcome stigmatized topics, we can continue to tailor messages to reduce stigma and provide support for those who experience similar health issues.

Factors Assessing Science's Self-Presentation model and their effect on conservatives' and liberals' support for funding science.

A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of responses to 13 questions from a 2022 national probability sample of 1,154 US adults supported the existence of five factors that we argue assess perceptions of Factors Assessing Science's Self-Presentation (FASS). These factors also predict support for increasing federal funding of science and, separately, supporting federal funding of basic research. Each of the factors reflects perceptions of a key facet of scientists' self-presentation, science/scientists' adherence to professed norms, or science's benefits: specifically, that scientists are Credible, Prudent, and Unbiased and that science is Self-Correcting and Beneficial. The FASS model explained 40.6% of the variance in support for increasing federal funding for science and 33.7% in support for basic research. For both dependent variables, conservatives were less likely to be supportive when they perceived that science/scientists fail to overcome biases. The interactions between political ideology and both Prudence and Beneficial, however, were significant only when predicting Basic Research support. In that case, there were no differences between conservatives and liberals when perceptions of benefit were low, but when high, liberals' perception of benefit had a stronger association with support for funding than conservatives'. Among those perceiving that scientists lack prudence, liberals were more likely to support funding basic research than conservatives, but the difference disappeared when perceptions of prudence were very high. The factors could serve as across-time indicators of the public's assessment of the state of science.

Shouts from the Void: A Mixed-Method Analysis Surrounding the Online Chronic Illness Community, NEISVoid.

Chronic illness affects millions worldwide, rendering the life of those affected complex to manage. Extant research points to the need for effective and supportive care for the successful treatment, yet health care encounters for this population are often filled with negative experiences, ranging from discontinuity of care to disenfranchisement from providers. One such group dedicated to sharing struggles is the NEISVoid (No End In Sight) community on Twitter. Through the use of the hashtag, #NEISVoid, they come together to share what experiences living with chronic illness look like, in vulnerable and potentially unfiltered ways. The present study analyzes the discourse surrounding the hashtag #NEISVoid in tweets published from January 1 2020, until September 1 2022 (N = 450,914 tweets) using the mixed-method analysis of topic model network (ANTMN) approach. We identify and discuss four broad discursive themes: community experiences, symptom management, efficacy solutions, and biomedical health. We analyze this discourse through the chronic care model (CCM) and in light of research on hashtag activism. We discuss practical and theoretical implications for health communicators.

Conspiracies, misinformation and resistance to public health measures during COVID-19 in white nationalist online communication.

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 machine learning approaches to analyze all conversations posted in the "Coronavirus (Covid-19)" sub-forum on Stormfront between January 2020 and December 2021 (N = 9642 posts). Additionally, we manually analyze sentiment and argumentation in 300 randomly sampled posts. We identified four discursive themes: Science, Conspiracies, Sociopolitical, and Containment. Negative- sentiment was substantially higher than what was found in prior work done before COVID-19 regarding vaccines and other containment measures. The negativity was driven mostly by arguments adapted from the anti-vaccine movement and not by WN ideology.

Vaccine Hesitancy Under the Magnifying Glass: A Systematic Review of the Uses and Misuses of an Increasingly Popular Construct.

Resistance to vaccines has hindered attempts to contain and prevent outbreaks of infectious diseases for centuries. More recently, however, the term "vaccine hesitancy" has been used to describe not necessarily outright resistance but also a delay in acceptance or uncertainty regarding vaccines. Given concerns about hesitancy and its impact on vaccine uptake rates, researchers increasingly shifted the focus from resistance to vaccines toward vaccine hesitancy. Acknowledging the urgency to accurately assess the phenomenon, it is critical to understand the state of the literature, focusing on issues of conceptualization and operationalization. To carry out this systematic review, we collected and analyzed all published empirical articles from 2000 to 2021 that explicitly included quantitative self-report measures of vaccine hesitancy (k = 86). Using a mixed-method approach, the review demonstrates and quantifies crucial inconsistencies in the measurement of the construct, lack of clarity in regard to the determination of who should or should not be defined as hesitant, and overreliance on unrepresentative samples. Crucially, our analysis points to a potential systematic bias toward exaggerating the level of hesitancy in the population. Modeling a vaccine hesitancy co-citation network, the analysis also points to the existence of insular academic silos that make it harder to achieve a unified measurement tool. Theoretical and practical implications for academics, practitioners, and policymakers are discussed.

Oppression by omission: An analysis of the #WhereIsTheInterpreter hashtag campaign around COVID-19 on Twitter.

Critical to managing a crisis such as COVID-19 is the propagation of information to all vulnerable populations. Despite guidelines regarding communicating with people with differing accessibility needs during crises, some often find their needs unmet. Following a lack of assisted communications for d/Deaf people during the COVID-19 pandemic, a Twitter hashtag campaign, #WhereIsTheInterpreter, was launched in the UK, protesting the lack of accessibility during official press briefings around the epidemic. The campaign received support from across the globe. This study analyzes the discourse around the campaign in tweets published from March 1st, 2020 and September 30th, 2021 (N = 27,021) and analyzed the corpus using the Analysis of Topic Model Network (ANTMN) approach. We identified four major themes of discourse: discrimination, accessibility challenges, communication gaps and barriers, and Deaf rights. We analyze the discourse through the perspective of Critical Disability Theory (CDT) and hashtag activism, and discuss practical and theoretical implications.

Exploring Web-Based Twitter Conversations Surrounding National Healthcare Decisions Day and Advance Care Planning From a Sociocultural Perspective: Computational Mixed Methods Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Within the cultures and societies of the United States, topics related to death and dying continue to be taboo, and as a result, opportunities for presence and engagement during the end of life, which could lead to a good death, are avoided. Several efforts have been made to help people engage in advance care planning (ACP) conversations, including completing advance care directives so that they may express their goals of care if they become too sick to communicate their wishes. A major effort in the United States toward encouraging such challenging discussions is the annual celebration of the National Healthcare Decisions Day. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore ACP from a sociocultural perspective by using Twitter as a communication tool. METHODS: All publicly available tweets published between August 1, 2020, and July 30, 2021 (N=9713) were collected and analyzed using the computational mixed methods Analysis of Topic Model Network approach. RESULTS: The results revealed that conversations driven primarily by laypersons (7107/7410, 95.91% of tweets originated from unverified accounts) surrounded the following three major themes: importance and promotion, surrounding language, and systemic issues. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the results, we argue that there is a need for awareness of the barriers that people may face when engaging in ACP conversations, including systemic barriers, literacy levels, misinformation, policies (including Medicare reimbursements), and trust among health care professionals, in the United States. This is incredibly important for clinicians and scholars worldwide to be aware of as we strive to re-envision ACP, so that people are more comfortable engaging in ACP conversations. In terms of the content of tweets, we argue that there is a chasm between the biomedical and biopsychosocial elements of ACP, including patient narratives. If used properly, Twitter conversations and National Health Care Decision Day hashtags could be harnessed to serve as a connecting point among organizations, physicians, patients, and family members to lay the groundwork for the trajectory toward a good death.

Vaccine discourse in white nationalist online communication: A mixed-methods computational approach.

INTRODUCTION: Research has indicated a growing resistance to vaccines among U.S. conservatives and Republicans. Following past successes of the far-right in mainstreaming health misinformation, this study tracks almost two decades of vaccine discourse on the extremist, white nationalist (WN) online message-board Stormfront. We examine the argumentative repertoire around vaccines on the forum, and whether it assimilated to or challenged common arguments for and against vaccines, or extended it in ways unique to the racist WN agenda. METHODS: We use a mixed-methods approach, combining unsupervised machine learning of 8892 posts including the term "vaccin*", published on Stormfront between 2001 and 2017. We supplemented the computational analysis with a manual coding of randomly sampled 500 posts, evaluating the prevalence of pro- and anti-vaccine sentiment, previously identified pro- and anti-vaccine arguments, and WN-specific arguments. RESULTS: Discourse was dynamic, increasing around specific events, such as outbreaks and following legal debates about vaccine mandates. We identified four themes: conspiracies, science, race and white innovation. The prominence of themes over time was relatively stable. Our manual coding identified levels of anti-vaccine sentiment that were much higher than found in the past on mainstream social media. Most anti-vaccine posts relied on common anti-vaccine tropes and not on WN conspiracy theories. Pro-vaccination posts, however, were supported by unique race-based arguments. CONCLUSION: We find a high volume of anti-vaccine sentiment among WN on Stormfront, but also identify unique pro-vaccine arguments that echo the group's racist ideology. PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATION: As with past health-related conspiracy theories, high levels of anti-vaccine sentiment in online far-right sociotechnical information systems could threaten public health, especially if it 'spills-over' to mainstream media. Many pro-vaccine arguments on the forum relied on racist, WN reasoning, thus preventing the authors from recommending the use of these unethical arguments in future public health communications.

The Role of Information Avoidance in Managing Uncertainty from Conflicting Recommendations about Electronic Cigarettes.

Insufficient scientific evidence about electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has led to conflicting recommendations (CRs) by credible scientific organizations, creating a public health debate that could prove especially difficult to reconcile as current and former smokers make decisions about whether to use e-cigarettes. To investigate how CRs about e-cigarettes may affect intentions to engage in healthy behaviors, 717 former and current smokers were randomly exposed to one of five conditions (varying in the level of conflict in recommendations) in this between-subject experiment. Our results indicated a significant interaction between the message level of conflict and individuals' information avoidance, employed to maintain hope and deniability. These results suggest the effects of CRs stemming from scientific uncertainty vary with subgroups of people, pointing to several pressing theoretical and practical implications.

The effects of media narratives about failures and discoveries in science on beliefs about and support for science.

This study examines the effects of exposure to media narratives about science on perceptions pertaining to the reliability of science, including trust, beliefs, and support for science. In an experiment (n = 4497), participants were randomly assigned to read stories representing ecologically valid media narratives: the honorable quest, counterfeit quest, crisis or broken, and problem explored. Exposure to stories highlighting problems reduced trust in scientists and induced negative beliefs about scientists, with more extensive effects among those exposed to the "crisis/broken" accounts and fewer for those exposed to "counterfeit" and "problem explored" stories. In the "crisis/broken" and "problem explored" conditions, we identified a three-way interaction in which those with higher trust who considered the problem-focused stories to be representative of science were more likely to believe science is self-correcting and those with lower trust who perceived the stories to be representative were less likely to report that belief. Support for funding science was not affected by the stories. This study demonstrates the detrimental consequences of media failure to accurately communicate the scientific process, and provides evidence for ways for scientists and journalists to improve science communication, while acknowledging the need for changes in structural incentives to obtain such a goal.

The Framing of COVID-19 in Italian Media and Its Relationship with Community Mobility: A Mixed-Method Approach.

Media framing of epidemics was found to influence public perceptions and behaviors in experiments, yet no research has been conducted on real-world behaviors during public health crises. We examined the relationship between Italian news media coverage of COVID-19 and compliance with stay-at-home orders, which could impact the spread of epidemics. We used a computational method for framing analysis (ANTMN) and combined it with Google's Community Mobility data. A time-series analysis using vector autoregressive models showed that the Italian media used media frames that were largely congruent with ones used by journalists in other countries: A scientific frame focusing on symptoms and health effects, a containment frame focusing on attempts to ameliorate risks, and a social frame, focusing on political and social impact. The prominence of different media frames over time was associated with changes in Italians' mobility patterns. Specifically, we found that the social frame was associated with increased mobility, whereas the containment frame was associated with decreased mobility. The results demonstrate that the ways the news media discuss epidemics can influence changes in community mobility, above and beyond the effect of the number of deaths per day.

The effects of scientific messages and narratives about vaccination.

A fundamental challenge complicates news decisions about covering vaccine side effects: although serious vaccine side effects are rare, less severe ones do occur occasionally. The study was designed to test whether a side effect message could induce vaccine hesitancy and whether that could be countered by pro-vaccine messages about vaccine safety. A large (N = 2,345), nationally representative experiment was conducted by randomly exposing participants to one of six videos about the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine edited from news programs produced during the 2019 measles outbreak in the United States. The design was a 2x3 factorial crossing the presence or absence of a hesitancy-inducing narrative message with a pro-vaccine science-supporting message (i.e., no message, science-supporting expert message, or pro-vaccine narrative message), leading to a total of six conditions. A general linear model was used to assess the effects of these videos on respondents' (1) vaccine risk perceptions, (2) policy views on vaccination, (3) willingness to encourage others to vaccinate their children, and (4) intention to send a pro-vaccine letter to their state representative. Findings indicated that the science-supporting expert message about vaccine safety led to higher pro-vaccine evaluations relative to other conditions [e.g., b = -0.17, p < .001, a reduction in vaccine risk perceptions of 0.17 as compared to the control]. There was also suggestive evidence that the hesitancy-inducing narrative may limit the effectiveness of a science-supporting expert message, although this finding was not consistent across different outcomes. When shown alone the hesitancy-inducing narrative did not shift views and intentions, but more research is needed to ascertain whether exposure to such messages can undercut the pro-vaccine influence of science-supporting (expert) ones. All in all, however, it is clear that science-supporting messages are effective and therefore worthwhile in combating vaccine misinformation.

Russian Twitter Accounts and the Partisan Polarization of Vaccine Discourse, 2015-2017.

Objectives. To understand how Twitter accounts operated by the Russian Internet Research Agency (IRA) discussed vaccines to increase the credibility of their manufactured personas.Methods. We analyzed 2.82 million tweets published by 2689 IRA accounts between 2015 and 2017. Combining unsupervised machine learning and network analysis to identify "thematic personas" (i.e., accounts that consistently share the same topics), we analyzed the ways in which each discussed vaccines.Results. We found differences in volume and valence of vaccine-related tweets among 9 thematic personas. Pro-Trump personas were more likely to express antivaccine sentiment. Anti-Trump personas expressed support for vaccination. Others offered a balanced valence, talked about vaccines neutrally, or did not tweet about vaccines.Conclusions. IRA-operated accounts discussed vaccines in manners consistent with fabricated US identities.Public Health Implications. IRA accounts discussed vaccines online in ways that evoked political identities. This could exacerbate recently emerging partisan gaps relating to vaccine misinformation, as differently valenced messages were targeted at different segments of the US public. These sophisticated targeting efforts, if repeated and increased in reach, could reduce vaccination rates and magnify health disparities.

The Effects of Zika Virus Risk Coverage on Familiarity, Knowledge and Behavior in the U.S. - A Time Series Analysis Combining Content Analysis and a Nationally Representative Survey.

This study assessed the effects of the February through September 2016 American news media's coverage of Zika Virus (ZIKV) risk on the U.S. public's familiarity, knowledge and behavior in the form of interpersonal discussions. A content analysis (N = 2,782 pieces) revealed that the Rio Olympic Games elicited a spike in coverage of Zika. We also found that newsworthy and easy- to- depict aspects of the disease, specifically its transmission by mosquitoes and its relation to microcephaly were covered more extensively than its sexual transmission and transmissibility from an infected person who is asymptomatic. Nevertheless, survey data over the same period of time (N = 37,180 respondents) revealed that the general amount of coverage, rather than the specifics about Zika transmission and its consequences, influenced the public's familiarity, knowledge, and behavior.

The Potential for Narrative Correctives to Combat Misinformation†.

Misinformation can influence personal and societal decisions in detrimental ways. Not only is misinformation challenging to correct, but even when individuals accept corrective information, misinformation can continue to influence attitudes: a phenomenon known as belief echoes, affective perseverance, or the continued influence effect. Two controlled experiments tested the efficacy of narrative-based correctives to reduce this affective residual in the context of misinformation about organic tobacco. Study 1 (N = 385) tested within-narrative corrective endings, embedded in four discrete emotions (happiness, anger, sadness, and fear). Study 2 (N = 586) tested the utility of a narrative with a negative, emotional corrective ending (fear and anger). Results provide some evidence that narrative correctives, with or without emotional endings, can be effective at reducing misinformed beliefs and intentions, but narratives consisting of emotional corrective endings are better at correcting attitudes than a simple corrective. Implications for misinformation scholarship and corrective message design are discussed.

The Effects of News Coverage of Epidemics on Public Support for and Compliance with the CDC- An Experimental Study.

Content analysis identified three dominant themes used by the news media to cover epidemics: the scientific, the pandemic, and the social. This study uses a randomized experimental design to test the effects of common news coverage patterns of epidemics on perceptions of efficacy, certainty, and trust in the CDC, and subsequently on intentions to comply with and support for the CDC during public health crises. The experiment also compares the effects of real-world coverage to that of hypothetical coverage that more closely follows the CDC's recommendations for crisis communication. The results of the experiment (n = 321) demonstrate that exposure to articles from different themes affects perceptions of certainty and self-efficacy, that in turn affect intentions to comply with the CDC. Although organizational-efficacy and trust in the CDC are both correlated with intentions to support, and trust is also correlated with intentions to comply, exposure to different conditions did not affect these perceptions and there was no indirect effect from exposure to intentions. The results reveal the potential effects of real-world coverage on perceptions and intentions, and demonstrate the advantage of the hypothetical coverage that follows the CDC's crisis communication guidelines. Implications for public health organizations and communicators are discussed.

Designing Effective Testimonial Pictorial Warning Labels for Tobacco Products.

Warning labels on tobacco products sometimes feature images and stories of real people whose health has been affected by smoking. We examined effects of some of the design elements that may contribute to the effectiveness of these testimonial pictorial warning labels (PWLs). Beginning with a testimonial PWL that contained an image of a person and a basic warning statement (e.g., "Smoking can kill you"), we examined the impact of adding: (a) text detailing the person's name, age and health status (identifiers); and (b) explanatory statements that elaborated on the basic warning using a testimonial or non-testimonial message. In an online experiment, 1255 adult smokers in the United States were randomly assigned to one of six experimental conditions (2 [identifier: none/identifier] × 3 [explanatory statement: none/non-testimonial/testimonial]), or a control condition (text only warning labels that currently appear on packs in the United States). In each condition, participants were exposed to multiple labels each focused on a different health effect. Effectiveness was assessed using emotional responses, engagement and behavioral intentions measured immediately post-exposure, and quit attempts measured at five-week follow up. Testimonial PWLs were more effective than the text only labels. However, there was little evidence that adding identifiers or the explanatory statements enhanced effectiveness; rather, there was some evidence that testimonial explanatory statements reduced effectiveness. These findings suggest that the most effective design for testimonial PWLs may be to combine a basic warning statement with an image of a real person, without any additional textual components.

Coverage of Epidemics in American Newspapers Through the Lens of the Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication Framework.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) framework has been used by the organization during recent outbreaks of infectious diseases. However, the dissemination of the organization's crisis messages depends largely on mass media coverage. This study analyzed 5,006 articles from leading American newspapers covering 3 epidemics: H1N1, Ebola, and Zika. Using a mixed method of automated and manual content analysis, it identified 3 distinct themes used to cover the diseases: pandemic, scientific, and social. Analysis of the themes based on CERC guidelines demonstrated substantial discrepancies between what CDC aims to communicate during epidemics and what the media actually disseminated to the public. Implications for public health organizations and communicators are discussed.