Literature DB >> 32375715

Misinformation and the US Ebola communication crisis: analyzing the veracity and content of social media messages related to a fear-inducing infectious disease outbreak.

Tara Kirk Sell1,2, Divya Hosangadi3,4, Marc Trotochaud3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Ebola communication crisis of 2014 generated widespread fear and attention among Western news media, social media users, and members of the United States (US) public. Health communicators need more information on misinformation and the social media environment during a fear-inducing disease outbreak to improve communication practices. The purpose of this study was to describe the content of Ebola-related tweets with a specific focus on misinformation, political content, health related content, risk framing, and rumors.
METHODS: We examined tweets from a random 1% sample of all tweets published September 30th - October 30th, 2014, filtered for English-language tweets mentioning "Ebola" in the content or hashtag, that had at least 1 retweet (N = 72,775 tweets). A randomly selected subset of 3639 (5%) tweets were evaluated for inclusion. We analyzed the 3113 tweets that meet inclusion criteria using public health trained human coders to assess tweet characteristics (joke, opinion, discord), veracity (true, false, partially false), political context, risk frame, health context, Ebola specific messages, and rumors. We assessed the proportion of tweets with specific content using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests.
RESULTS: Of non-joke tweets, 10% of Ebola-related tweets contained false or partially false information. Twenty-five percent were related to politics, 28% contained content that provoked reader response or promoted discord, 42% contained risk elevating messages and 72% were related to health. The most frequent rumor mentioned focused on government conspiracy. When comparing tweets with true information to tweets with misinformation, a greater percentage of tweets with misinformation were political in nature (36% vs 15%) and contained discord-inducing statements (45% vs 10%). Discord-inducing statements and political messages were both significantly more common in tweets containing misinformation compared with those without(p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the importance of anticipating politicization of disease outbreaks, and the need for policy makers and social media companies to build partnerships and develop response frameworks in advance of an event. While each public health event is different, our findings provide insight into the possible social media environment during a future epidemic and could help optimize potential public health communication strategies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Communication; Ebola; Infectious disease; Misinformation; Social media; Twitter

Year:  2020        PMID: 32375715     DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-08697-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Public Health        ISSN: 1471-2458            Impact factor:   3.295


  17 in total

Review 1.  Is a Mask That Covers the Mouth and Nose Free from Undesirable Side Effects in Everyday Use and Free of Potential Hazards?

Authors:  Kai Kisielinski; Paul Giboni; Andreas Prescher; Bernd Klosterhalfen; David Graessel; Stefan Funken; Oliver Kempski; Oliver Hirsch
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 3.390

2.  How Italy Tweeted about COVID-19: Detecting Reactions to the Pandemic from Social Media.

Authors:  Valentina Lorenzoni; Gianni Andreozzi; Andrea Bazzani; Virginia Casigliani; Salvatore Pirri; Lara Tavoschi; Giuseppe Turchetti
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 4.614

3.  Pretrained Transformer Language Models Versus Pretrained Word Embeddings for the Detection of Accurate Health Information on Arabic Social Media: Comparative Study.

Authors:  Yahya Albalawi; Nikola S Nikolov; Jim Buckley
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2022-06-29

4.  Web Search Engine Misinformation Notifier Extension (SEMiNExt): A Machine Learning Based Approach during COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Abdullah Bin Shams; Ehsanul Hoque Apu; Ashiqur Rahman; Md Mohsin Sarker Raihan; Nazeeba Siddika; Rahat Bin Preo; Molla Rashied Hussein; Shabnam Mostari; Russell Kabir
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-03

5.  Different impacts of COVID-19-related information sources on public worry: An online survey through social media.

Authors:  Hsing-Ying Ho; Yi-Lung Chen; Cheng-Fang Yen
Journal:  Internet Interv       Date:  2020-10-12

6.  Social media as a tool for scientific updating at the time of COVID pandemic: Results from a national survey in Italy.

Authors:  Rita Murri; Francesco Vladimiro Segala; Pierluigi Del Vecchio; Antonella Cingolani; Eleonora Taddei; Giulia Micheli; Massimo Fantoni
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  An Examination of Factors Contributing to the Acceptance of Online Health Misinformation.

Authors:  Wenjing Pan; Diyi Liu; Jie Fang
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-03-01

8.  Some ethical concerns related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Authors:  Ali Montazeri
Journal:  Med J Islam Repub Iran       Date:  2020-05-27

9.  Commentary: Physiological and Psychological Impact of Face Mask Usage during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Jennifer L Scheid; Shannon P Lupien; Gregory S Ford; Sarah L West
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-09-12       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Individually optimal choices can be collectively disastrous in COVID-19 disease control.

Authors:  Madison Stoddard; Debra Van Egeren; Kaitlyn E Johnson; Smriti Rao; Josh Furgeson; Douglas E White; Ryan P Nolan; Natasha Hochberg; Arijit Chakravarty
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.