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.

A review of HPV and HBV vaccine hesitancy, intention, and uptake in the era of social media and COVID-19.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization named vaccine hesitancy as one of the top 10 threats to global health. The impact of hesitancy on the uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines was of particular concern, given the markedly lower uptake compared to other adolescent vaccines in some countries, notably the United States. With the recent approval of COVID-19 vaccines, coupled with the widespread use of social media, concerns regarding vaccine hesitancy have grown. However, the association between COVID-related vaccine hesitancy and cancer vaccines such as HPV is unclear. To examine the potential association, we performed two reviews using Ovid Medline and APA PsychInfo. Our aim was to answer two questions: (1) Is COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, intention, or uptake associated with HPV or hepatitis B (HBV) vaccine hesitancy, intention, or uptake? and (2) Is exposure to COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on social media associated with HPV or HBV vaccine hesitancy, intention, or uptake? Our review identified few published empirical studies that addressed these questions. Our results highlight the urgent need for studies that can shift through the vast quantities of social media data to better understand the link between COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and disinformation and its impact on uptake of cancer vaccines.

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.

U.S. public support for COVID-19 vaccine donation to low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

As COVID-19 vaccines become available to the public, there will be a massive worldwide distribution effort. Vaccine distribution has historically been unequal primarily due to the inability of nations with developing economies to purchase enough vaccine to fully vaccinate their populations. Inequitable access to COVID-19 vaccines will not just cause humanitarian suffering, it will likely also be associated with increased economic suffering worldwide. This study focuses on the U.S. population and its beliefs about future COVID-19 vaccine donation by the U.S. to low- and middle-income countries. This study carried out a survey among 788 U.S. adults. Variables include demographics, COVID-19 vaccine priority status, COVID-19 vaccine donation beliefs, and Social Dominance Orientation. Analyses showed that older respondents were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations and were more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it; those who identified as Democrats were more likely to endorse higher levels of future COVID-19 vaccine donation than Republicans; and those scoring higher on SDO were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations as well as more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it. Policymakers, as well as healthcare providers and public health communication professionals, should give consideration to those messages most likely to engender support for global prevention efforts with each audience segment.

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.

An Eye Tracking Approach to Understanding Misinformation and Correction Strategies on Social Media: The Mediating Role of Attention and Credibility to Reduce HPV Vaccine Misperceptions.

This study uses an unobtrusive eye tracking approach to examine understudied psychological mechanisms - message attention and credibility - when people are exposed to misinformation and correction on social media. We contrast humor versus non-humor correction strategies that point out rhetorical flaws in misinformation regarding the HPV vaccine, which was selected for its relevance and impact on public health. We randomly assigned participants to one of two experimental conditions: humor correction versus non-humor correction. Our analyses revealed that the humor correction increased attention to the image portion of the correction tweet, and this attention indirectly lowered HPV misperceptions by reducing the credibility of the misinformation tweet. The study also found that the non-humor correction outperformed the humor correction in reducing misperceptions via its higher credibility ratings. Practical implications for correcting misinformation on social media are discussed.

Willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine with and without emergency use authorization.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed psychosocial predictors of U.S. adults' willingness to get a future COVID-19 vaccine and whether these predictors differ under an emergency use authorization (EUA) release of the vaccine. METHODS: A survey of 788 U.S. adults was conducted to explore the relationships between demographics and psychosocial predictors of intent to get a future COVID-19 vaccine as well as willingness to get such a vaccine under EUA. RESULTS: Significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions were education, having insurance, scoring high on subjective norms, a positive attitude toward the vaccine, as well as high perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, high perceived benefits of the vaccine, scoring low on barriers to the vaccine, and scoring high on self-efficacy. Predictors of willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine under EUA were age, race/ethnicity, positive subjective norms, high perceived behavioral control, positive attitudes toward the vaccine, as well as high perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, high perceived benefits of the vaccine, low barriers to the vaccine, and scoring high on self-efficacy for getting the vaccine. Concerns about rushed vaccine development appear to reduce vaccine uptake intent, as well as willingness to get the vaccine under EUA. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine-related messages should both address concerns about the vaccine and its development and reinforce benefits of the vaccine (both factors significant in both models). Vaccine efforts may need to go beyond just communications campaigns correcting misinformation about a COVID-19 vaccine to also focus on re-establishing public trust in government agencies.

12 Tips for Engaging Medical Students in Health Communications.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. The proliferation of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic provides a clear example of the harms that can occur when medical professionals do not engage with the public regarding health topics. To address this need for accessible, accurate medical information, we taught medical students a COVID-19-specific curriculum tailored to sharing this information with the lay public via social media. Through active learning, students developed their understanding of disease-specific pathophysiology, prevention techniques, treatments, and public health interventions while practicing new skills in public communication as health professionals. After two cohorts completed the course, students' high-quality medical information about COVID-19 reached >100,000 viewers. To further broaden the impact, we shared the course curriculum through the Association of American Medical College (AAMC) iCollaborative. This curriculum provides a model for future engagement of medical students in health communication with lay audiences.

HPV Vaccine Searches on Pinterest: Before and After Pinterest's Actions to Moderate Content.

Objectives. To compare how human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination was portrayed on Pinterest before and after the platform acted to moderate vaccine-related search results to understand (1) what the information environment looked like previously and (2) whether Pinterest's policy decisions improved this environment in terms of sources and content.Methods. In this quantitative content analysis, we compared 2 samples of 500 HPV vaccine-focused Pinterest posts ("pins") collected before and after Pinterest's actions to provide more reliable vaccine-related information. Pins were based on search results and were analyzed using the Health Belief Model.Results. The majority of preaction search results leaned toward vaccine skepticism, specifically focused on perceived vaccine barriers. Few pins were published by public health-related Pinterest accounts. Postaction search results showed a significant shift to HPV vaccination benefits, and the number of pins by government or medical accounts increased. However, the proportion of pins in search results containing HPV content of any type was significantly lower.Conclusions. Pinterest's efforts to moderate vaccination discussions were largely successful. However, the ban also appeared to limit HPV vaccination search results overall, which may contribute to confusion or an information vacuum.

(S)pin the flu vaccine: Recipes for concern.

Influenza epidemics happen yearly, and the World Health Organization estimates that the virus is connected to between 290,000 and 650,000 annual deaths. The most effective way to prevent seasonal influenza is vaccination. The prevalence of vaccine misinformation on social media is increasing, but the visual platform Pinterest is understudied in this area. The current study is the first to explore the content and nature of influenza information that is shared on Pinterest. Using a quantitative content analysis, Pinterest messages were theoretically analyzed for Health Belief Model variables as well as for message source, engagement, and position on vaccination. Findings showed concerning trends but also promising opportunities for health organizations and professionals.

The Blue Check of Credibility: Does Account Verification Matter When Evaluating News on Twitter?

The increased reliance on social network sites for news and the proliferation of partisan news have refocused scholarly attention on how people judge credibility online. Twitter has faced scrutiny regarding their practices in assigning the "verified" status to Twitter accounts, but little work has investigated whether users apply this cue in making assessments for information quality. Using an experimental design, we test whether the Twitter verification mark contributes to perceptions of information and account credibility among news organizations. We additionally consider how account ambiguity and account congruence with political beliefs condition this relationship. Our results suggest little attention is paid to the verification mark when judging credibility, even when little other information is provided about the account or the content. Instead, account ambiguity and congruence dominate credibility assessments of news organizations. We propose that Twitter may need to revise their verification badges to increase their salience or provide more information to users. Currently, users appear to rely on other cues than the verification label when judging information quality.

Correction: Controversy matters: Impacts of topic and solution controversy on the perceived credibility of a scientist who advocates.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187511.].

Correction: Controversy matters: Impacts of topic and solution controversy on the perceived credibility of a scientist who advocates.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187511.].

Cancer and Social Media: A Comparison of Traffic about Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer, and Other Reproductive Cancers on Twitter and Instagram.

Social media are often heralded as offering cancer campaigns new opportunities to reach the public. However, these campaigns may not be equally successful, depending on the nature of the campaign itself, the type of cancer being addressed, and the social media platform being examined. This study is the first to compare social media activity on Twitter and Instagram across three time periods: #WorldCancerDay in February, the annual month-long campaigns of National Breast Cancer Awareness Month (NBCAM) in October and Movember in November, and during the full year outside of these campaigns. Our results suggest that women's reproductive cancers - especially breast cancer - tend to outperform men's reproductive cancer - especially prostate cancer - across campaigns and social media platforms. Twitter overall generates substantially more activity than Instagram for both cancer campaigns, suggesting Instagram may be an untapped resource. However, the messaging for both campaigns tends to focus on awareness and support rather than on concrete actions and behaviors. We suggest health communication efforts need to focus on effective messaging and building engaged communities for cancer communication across social media platforms.

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.

Controversy matters: Impacts of topic and solution controversy on the perceived credibility of a scientist who advocates.

In this article, we focus on the potential influence of a scientist's advocacy position on the public's perceived credibility of scientists as a whole. Further, we examine how the scientist's solution position (information only, non-controversial, and controversial) affects the public's perception of the scientist's motivation for sharing information about specific issues (flu, marijuana, climate change, severe weather). Finally, we assess how perceived motivations mediate the relationship between solution position and credibility. Using data from a quota sample of American adults obtained by Qualtrics (n = 2,453), we found that in some conditions advocating for a solution positively predicted credibility, while in one condition, it negatively predicted scientist credibility. We also found that the influence of solution position on perceived credibility was mediated by several motivation perceptions; most notably through perception that the scientist was motivated to: (a) serve the public and (b) persuade the public. Further results and implications are discussed.

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.

Dealing with dissonance: responding to an incongruent test result in a new media environment.

In a new media environment replete with opportunities to test and express political identity, this study examines how people respond when confronted with a political test result that contradicts their partisan affiliation. An incongruent test result should produce motivated processing, but only when individuals do not dismiss the incongruent result will they experience dissonance and alter their social identification. Using a series of experiments, the results of this study supported these hypotheses. Implications of these findings for political psychology and message response are discussed.