Debunking Mental Health Misperceptions in Short-Form Social Media Videos: An Experimental Test of Scientific Credibility Cues.

In recent years, short-form social media videos have emerged as an important source of health-related advice. In this study, we investigate whether experts or ordinary users in such videos are more effective in debunking the common misperception that talking about suicide should be avoided. We also explore a new trend on TikTok and other platforms, in which users attempt to back up their arguments by displaying scientific articles in the background of their videos. To test the effect of source type (expert vs. ordinary user) and scientific references (present or absent), we conducted a 2 × 2 between-subject plus control group experiment (n = 956). In each condition, participants were shown a TikTok video that was approximately 30 seconds long. Our findings show that in all four treatment groups, participants reduced their misperceptions on the topic. The expert was rated as being more authoritative on the topic compared to the ordinary user. However, the expert was also rated as being less credible compared to the ordinary user. The inclusion of a scientific reference did not make a difference. Thus, both experts and ordinary users may be similarly persuasive in a short-form video environment.

The Effects of a News Literacy Video and Real-Time Corrections to Video Misinformation Related to Sunscreen and Skin Cancer.

Given concerns about the persuasive power of video misinformation on social media for health topics, we test two techniques - exposure to a news literacy video and user corrections - to limit the effects on misperceptions. An online sample of American adults from August of 2019 was randomly assigned to view two simulated Facebook videos. The first video manipulated the presence of news literacy concepts. The second video either promoted sunscreen use or made inaccurate claims regarding its dangers; scrolling comments either debunked or did not address the sunscreen misinformation in the video. Our results demonstrate that video misinformation heightened beliefs in sunscreen myths and reduced acceptance of sunscreen facts and intentions to wear sunscreen compared to a promotional video. Real-time user corrections were partially successful in reducing the effects of the misinformation video on beliefs but not intentions. Additionally, exposure to a news literacy video did not inoculate people to the misinformation. We discuss the implications of these findings for best practices regarding correcting video misinformation on health topics.

Addressing COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media Preemptively and Responsively.

Efforts to address misinformation on social media have special urgency with the emergence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In one effort, the World Health Organization (WHO) designed and publicized shareable infographics to debunk coronavirus myths. We used an experiment to test the efficacy of these infographics, depending on placement and source. We found that exposure to a corrective graphic on social media reduced misperceptions about the science of 1 false COVID-19 prevention strategy but did not affect misperceptions about prevention of COVID-19. Lowered misperceptions about the science persisted >1 week later. These effects were consistent when the graphic was shared by the World Health Organization or by an anonymous Facebook user and when the graphics were shared preemptively or in response to misinformation. Health organizations can and should create and promote shareable graphics to improve public knowledge.

See Something, Say Something: Correction of Global Health Misinformation on Social Media.

Social media are often criticized for being a conduit for misinformation on global health issues, but may also serve as a corrective to false information. To investigate this possibility, an experiment was conducted exposing users to a simulated Facebook News Feed featuring misinformation and different correction mechanisms (one in which news stories featuring correct information were produced by an algorithm and another where the corrective news stories were posted by other Facebook users) about the Zika virus, a current global health threat. Results show that algorithmic and social corrections are equally effective in limiting misperceptions, and correction occurs for both high and low conspiracy belief individuals. Recommendations for social media campaigns to correct global health misinformation, including encouraging users to refute false or misleading health information, and providing them appropriate sources to accompany their refutation, are discussed.

Feeling the pressure: Attitudes about volunteering and their effect on civic and political behaviors.

This article examines the evolving nature of volunteering among American youth, ages 12 to 17, focusing on emergent pressures to volunteer, as required by high schools or to improve one's employment or education prospects after graduation. Using survey data (N = 736, mean age = 14.78, 75.1% white, 49.1% female), it finds these pressures are prevalent, related to a desire to volunteer, and both of these motivations are positively associated with volunteering. It further concludes that volunteering supplements, rather than replaces or subsumes both online and offline political behaviors among youth. This has important implications for how we understand the role of volunteering in the youngest American age cohorts, and practical implications for educators and civic proponents in terms of determining what actually increases volunteering activity.

User correction.

This paper reviews the existing literature on user correction to consider its value for combating misinformation on social media. We discuss the effectiveness of user correction in reducing misperceptions, and synthesize best practices, highlighting the dual audiences for public correction on social media. We outline how often user correction occurs across contexts, countries, and social media platforms. We pay special attention to the methodological constraints in existing research, emphasizing the need for using diverse and interdisciplinary methods, including longitudinal surveys and experiments, computational methods, realistic simulated environments, and qualitative methods. We call for a more comprehensive understanding of user correction in terms of its long-term and downstream effects on social media platforms.

Understanding high- and low-quality URL Sharing on COVID-19 Twitter streams.

This article investigates the prevalence of high and low quality URLs shared on Twitter when users discuss COVID-19. We distinguish between high quality health sources, traditional news sources, and low quality misinformation sources. We find that misinformation, in terms of tweets containing URLs from low quality misinformation websites, is shared at a higher rate than tweets containing URLs on high quality health information websites. However, both are a relatively small proportion of the overall conversation. In contrast, news sources are shared at a much higher rate. These findings lead us to analyze the network created by the URLs referenced on the webpages shared by Twitter users. When looking at the combined network formed by all three of the source types, we find that the high quality health information network, the low quality misinformation network, and the news information network are all well connected with a clear community structure. While high and low quality sites do have connections to each other, the connections to and from news sources are more common, highlighting the central brokerage role news sources play in this information ecosystem. Our findings suggest that while low quality URLs are not extensively shared in the COVID-19 Twitter conversation, a well connected community of low quality COVID-19 related information has emerged on the web, and both health and news sources are connecting to this community.

A first look at COVID-19 information and misinformation sharing on Twitter.

Since December 2019, COVID-19 has been spreading rapidly across the world. Not surprisingly, conversation about COVID-19 is also increasing. This article is a first look at the amount of conversation taking place on social media, specifically Twitter, with respect to COVID-19, the themes of discussion, where the discussion is emerging from, myths shared about the virus, and how much of it is connected to other high and low quality information on the Internet through shared URL links. Our preliminary findings suggest that a meaningful spatio-temporal relationship exists between information flow and new cases of COVID-19, and while discussions about myths and links to poor quality information exist, their presence is less dominant than other crisis specific themes. This research is a first step toward understanding social media conversation about COVID-19.

Effect of 'lifestyle stigma' on public support for NHS-provisioned pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and preventative interventions for HPV and type 2 diabetes: a nationwide UK survey.

OBJECTIVES: This study examines how the perceived role of poor lifestyle and irresponsible behaviour in contracting HIV, human papilloma virus (HPV) and diabetes affects public support for government-provisioned prevention efforts in Britain. It assesses whether public attitudes on healthcare spending are broadly sensitive to 'lifestyle stigmas'. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 738 respondents in Britain and embedded three separate survey experiments to measure support for government-provisioned interventions for HIV, HPV and type 2 diabetes. In each experiment, we manipulated language used to describe the extent to which the diseases are caused by lifestyle choices. Most respondents participated in all three experiments, but assignment was randomised within each condition. Analysis compared support among respondents exposed to 'lifestyle' treatment (information emphasising the disease's lifestyle causes) versus control treatment. We estimated three separate t-tests in which support for government provision of interventions is the dependent variable. RESULTS: Support for government-provisioned prevention was high for all three diseases. There was no statistical difference between treatment and control conditions for HIV (treatment mean=3.73, control mean=3.86, p=0.38). But in both HPV (treatment mean=3.96, control mean=4.43, p<0.01) and type 2 diabetes (treatment mean=3.53, control mean=4.03, p<0.01) experiments, support for government-provisioned interventions was significantly lower under lifestyle treatment conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Public opinion on healthcare expenditures in Britain is unexpected and uneven. Consistent participant support for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) shows public attitudes are not always sensitive to lifestyle stigmas-but for other diseases, perceived relationships between individual behaviour and poor health can still shape public opinion about health expenditures. Policymakers and practitioners should remain attentive to how health problems are framed and discussed to ensure broad public support, and take advantage of policy windows like with PrEP as they may close.

The rules of engagement: comparing two social protest movements on YouTube.

Social media Web sites such as YouTube offer activists unique opportunities to reach out to new audiences through a variety of diverse appeals. Yet the rules of engagement on social media should depend on the structures, goals, and characteristics of the movements engaging in this outreach. To explore how differences in social movements translate into online activism, we employ a paired case study approach, comparing YouTube artifacts for two political mobilizations: the Occupy Movement and California's Proposition 8 ballot initiative concerning same sex marriage. Across movements, we examine the popularity of videos and their characteristics, and whether the type of video consistently predicts video engagement. We find that "social media activism" is not a unitary phenomenon; the two mobilizations produced unique YouTube ecologies. Occupy Wall Street videos tended on average to produce less engagement and focused on filmed live events and amateur content. Meanwhile, Proposition 8 videos usually produced more engagement and bridged more diverse formats: from professionalized and scripted content to live event footage and unscripted monologues to the camera. Therefore, our study suggests that social activism in online spaces such as YouTube is not easily defined, but is adapted to suit movement needs-which makes social media a popular and flexible venue for activism but also highlights the challenges for scholars studying such venues.