Literature DB >> 33048825

Associations Between COVID-19 Misinformation Exposure and Belief With COVID-19 Knowledge and Preventive Behaviors: Cross-Sectional Online Study.

Jung Jae Lee1, Kyung-Ah Kang2, Man Ping Wang1, Sheng Zhi Zhao1, Janet Yuen Ha Wong1, Siobhan O'Connor3, Sook Ching Yang4, Sunhwa Shin2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Online misinformation proliferation during the COVID-19 pandemic has become a major public health concern.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 misinformation exposure and beliefs, associated factors including psychological distress with misinformation exposure, and the associations between COVID-19 knowledge and number of preventive behaviors.
METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 1049 South Korean adults in April 2020. Respondents were asked about receiving COVID-19 misinformation using 12 items identified by the World Health Organization. Logistic regression was used to compute adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for the association of receiving misinformation with sociodemographic characteristics, source of information, COVID-19 misinformation belief, and psychological distress, as well as the associations of COVID-19 misinformation belief with COVID-19 knowledge and the number of COVID-19 preventive behaviors among those who received the misinformation. All data were weighted according to the Korea census data in 2018.
RESULTS: Overall, 67.78% (n=711) of respondents reported exposure to at least one COVID-19 misinformation item. Misinformation exposure was associated with younger age, higher education levels, and lower income. Sources of information associated with misinformation exposure were social networking services (aOR 1.67, 95% CI 1.20-2.32) and instant messaging (aOR 1.79, 1.27-2.51). Misinformation exposure was also associated with psychological distress including anxiety (aOR 1.80, 1.24-2.61), depressive (aOR 1.47, 1.09-2.00), and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms (aOR 1.97, 1.42-2.73), as well as misinformation belief (aOR 7.33, 5.17-10.38). Misinformation belief was associated with poorer COVID-19 knowledge (high: aOR 0.62, 0.45-0.84) and fewer preventive behaviors (≥7 behaviors: aOR 0.54, 0.39-0.74).
CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 misinformation exposure was associated with misinformation belief, while misinformation belief was associated with fewer preventive behaviors. Given the potential of misinformation to undermine global efforts in COVID-19 disease control, up-to-date public health strategies are required to counter the proliferation of misinformation. ©Jung Jae Lee, Kyung-Ah Kang, Man Ping Wang, Sheng Zhi Zhao, Janet Yuen Ha Wong, Siobhan O'Connor, Sook Ching Yang, Sunhwa Shin. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 13.11.2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; PTSD; anxiety; behavior; depression; infodemic; infodemiology; knowledge; misinformation; prevention; preventive behaviors

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33048825      PMCID: PMC7669362          DOI: 10.2196/22205

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Internet Res        ISSN: 1438-8871            Impact factor:   5.428


Introduction

Background

COVID-19 has brought significant challenges to public health with its high infectivity and severity, particularly in vulnerable groups (eg, older adults, those with chronic diseases) [1-4], leading to a rapid rise in cases worldwide. On top of managing the response to the COVID-19 global health crisis, the World Health Organization (WHO) and governments also face the challenge of an “infodemic,” which causes people to experience difficulties in finding credible and trustworthy sources amid an excess of information [5]. Although the concept of an infodemic is not a new one, the digital age we are currently living in has magnified its effects and added complexities to the challenge it poses. With the widespread use of social media such as internet websites, social networking services (SNSs), and instant messaging services, people all over the world are more connected than ever, allowing information to be shared easily and quickly [6]. However, a recent study has found that in the midst of the global pandemic, COVID-19 misinformation is just as likely to spread and engage users on social media platforms as accurate information, which can pose an equal threat to the COVID-19 public health response by affecting public awareness and knowledge of the disease [7]. Misinformation can be defined as information that is false or inaccurate and not supported by scientific evidence [8]. Misinformation in the context of COVID-19 can include inaccurate information regarding the virus and its transmission, conspiracy theories, and fabricated reports regarding methods of prevention and treatment [9]. Some of its consequences include the panic-buying and hoarding of goods, taking ineffective and potentially harmful remedies, ignoring advice from health authorities, and engaging in behavior that increases the risk of virus transmission [10]. Despite the many efforts by the WHO and public health organizations to battle the infodemic, such as conducting campaigns against COVID-19 misinformation, cooperating with social media platforms, and regularly providing evidence-based information to the public (eg, COVID-19 advice for the public: myth busters [11]), the proliferation of misinformation worldwide has remained rampant [9,12,13]. Although social media can be used effectively to provide essential health-related information to the global community, misinformation does not require professional verification or review, and thus has the potential to proliferate quicker and be disseminated farther on social media due to existing algorithms that highlight popular or desired content. This highlights the tall challenge health authorities face in delivering accurate information to the public in precedence to the proliferation of misinformation [4,5] and the need for new strategies to build preparedness [9] against future infodemics. South Korea (hereafter Korea) has one of the most developed technological infrastructures in the world, and the use of the internet is well-integrated into Koreans’ everyday lives. As such, information and communication technology (ICT) has also been employed in Korea’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including the monitoring and tracking of COVID-19 cases, conveying of health information to professionals and the public, and for allocating and distributing resources, such as COVID-19 test kits and protective equipment [14,15]. With the deep integration of ICT such as social media into Koreans’ daily lives and activities [6], it is expected that Koreans will be highly exposed to COVID-19 information and misinformation, through either active searches for information or passive receiving of information through messages, emails, or news feeds. Notwithstanding our awareness of misinformation and the risk it poses to public health, there remains little evidence on the prevalence of COVID-19 misinformation exposure and its effects on health beliefs and behaviors, including psychological well-being [16].

Objectives

We aimed to investigate the following: (1) the prevalence of COVID-19 misinformation exposure and misinformation belief, (2) associated factors including psychological distress with misinformation exposure; and (3) the associations between misinformation exposure and COVID-19 knowledge as well as preventive behaviors in Korean adults.

Methods

Study Design and Sampling

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted using the largest online survey platform in Korea [17]. This platform was chosen as it has 5 million survey panel members nationwide (as of 2020) and has been used to conduct more than 160,000 surveys for academic (such as those by Kim et al [18] and Ra et al [19]), government, and industry research. The inclusion criteria were the following: (1) aged ≥20 years (according to Korea’s civil law, those aged ≥20 years are regarded as adults), (2) a resident in the Seoul Metropolitan area (including the Seoul, Gyeonggi-do, and Incheon areas, in which 50.0% of the Korean population resides as of 2020), (3) has encountered COVID-19 information from any source, and (4) a Korean speaker. The company sent survey invitations containing general information about the survey such as its aim and participation incentive (KRW 1000 [US $1 is about KRW 1200]) via emails and a smartphone app to registered survey panel members who met the inclusion criteria on April 23, 2020. The survey closed on the same date (ie, recruitment was conducted for one day due to the cost involved). Details of the survey and consent statement were provided on the first page of the online survey. Respondents provided consent by clicking “Agree to participate in this survey” on the same page, before moving on to answer the survey questions. The survey took approximately 15 minutes to complete. The survey questionnaire is attached as Multimedia Appendix 1. Ethical approval was obtained from an institutional review board at Sahmyook University in Seoul (Ref: 2-1040781-A-N-012020021HR). Meanwhile, as of April 23, 2020, Korea had 10,708 confirmed cases of COVID-19 since the first case was reported on January 24, 2020. The daily new cases of COVID-19 peaked on March 3, 2020 (803 cases), after which there was a downward trend until April 23, 2020 (14 new cases).

Measurements

Sociodemographic characteristics including sex, age, education level, household arrangement, and monthly personal income were collected. COVID-19 misinformation items used in this study were extracted from COVID-19 misinformation reports by the WHO [11,20], the main coordinator of the global COVID-19 pandemic response. In total, 12 misinformation items about COVID-19 transmission, infectivity, prevention, and treatment were included (see Question 2 in Multimedia Appendix 1). Respondents were allocated to one of two groups: misinformation exposure (defined as having seen one or more items of misinformation, through active searching or passive receiving means) or misinformation nonexposure. Respondents were then asked if they believed any of the 12 misinformation items to be correct (hereafter misinformation belief) or incorrect. Measures for psychological distress included anxiety and depressive symptoms, using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4; four items), which consists of two subscales: the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 (GAD-2; two items) and Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2; two items) [21]. The score of each subscale ranges from 0 to 6, and a score of ≥3 indicates a high risk of anxiety (GAD-2) and depression (PHQ-2), respectively [21]. PHQ-4 was validated in Korean (Cronbach α=.79; acceptable convergent validity) [22]. An additional Primary Care Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5; five items) that was validated in Korean (Cronbach α=.87; acceptable concurrent validity) [23,24] was also adopted to screen respondents for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) risk. The scores range from 0 to 5 and the cutoff score for high risk of PTSD is 3. COVID-19 knowledge was assessed using five COVID-19 knowledge questions (definition, transmission modes, main symptoms, prevention, and treatment) that were extracted from a questionnaire developed by the WHO [25] (see Questions 4-8 in Multimedia Appendix 1). Higher scores indicate a higher COVID-19 knowledge level. The number of COVID-19 preventive behaviors that the respondents performed during the past three months was assessed with 10 answer options that were extracted from the COVID-19 preventive methods recommended by the WHO [25] and Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [26], such as washing hands regularly, covering one’s mouth and nose when coughing, and social distancing (see Question 9 in Multimedia Appendix 1). Higher scores indicated a higher engagement in COVID-19 preventive behaviors.

Statistical Analysis

All data were weighted by age and sex distributions in the Seoul Metropolitan area, according to the Korea census data in 2018 [27]. Descriptive statistics were reported in numbers, proportions, means, and standard deviations (SD), as appropriate. The differences between the two groups (COVID-19 misinformation exposure group versus nonexposure group), including the respondents’ sociodemographic characteristics, source of information, COVID-19 misinformation belief, psychological well-being (ie, anxiety, depressive, and PTSD symptoms), and COVID-19 knowledge and preventive behaviors were analyzed by chi-square test or t test, as appropriate. The responses on the knowledge and preventive behavior questions were categorized into binary groups according to the mean scores for the chi-square analysis. Logistic regression was used to compute odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted ORs (aORs) to identify the association of misinformation exposure (a binary variable) with the sociodemographic characteristics, source of information, and COVID-19 misinformation belief. The associations of COVID-19 misinformation belief with COVID-19 knowledge and COVID-19 preventive behaviors among the respondents who encountered misinformation were also investigated. As subgroup analyses, we included the interaction term to test if demographic characteristics modify the associations of COVID-19 knowledge, preventive behaviors, misinformation belief, and psychosocial distress following misinformation exposure. Sex, age, highest education level, household arrangement, and monthly personal income were adjusted for the adjusted regression models. STATA 15 (StataCorp LLC) was used to conduct all analyses.

Results

Of 1054 people who initially responded to the survey, five were excluded from the study as they reported that they had not encountered any COVID-19 information and therefore could not complete the survey. Among the 1049 respondents, 50.04% (n=505) were male, the mean age was 40.60 years (SD 12.87), 74.94% (n=786) had tertiary education or higher, 88.50% (n=929) lived with others, and 55.95% (n=587) had a monthly personal income
Table 1

Characteristics of COVID-19 misinformation exposure by respondents’ demographics, and sociobehavioral and psychological symptoms (N=1049).

VariablesParticipants, n (%)aWeighted valuesb, n (%)aMisinformationP valuec,d
N=1049N=1049Not exposed (n=338)Exposed (n=711)
Sex
Male446 (42.52)525 (50.04)179 (53.08)346 (48.60).15c
Female603 (57.48)524 (49.96)158 (46.92)366 (51.40).15c
Age (years), mean (SD) 39.51 (10.47)43.60 (12.87)45.86 (13.01)42.53 (12.67).02d
20-29198 (18.88)196 (18.69)48 (14.09)149 (20.87).06c
30-39351 (33.46)219 (20.85)65 (19.25)154 (21.61).06c
40-49311 (29.65)243 (23.17)78 (23.14)165 (23.18).06c
50-59148 (14.12)236 (22.54)74 (22.11)162 (22.74).06c
60-6941 (3.91)154 (14.75)72 (21.41)82 (11.59).06c
Education
High school or below233 (22.21)263 (25.06)92 (27.13)171 (24.08).83c
Tertiary or above816 (77.79)786 (74.94)246 (72.87)540 (75.92).83c
Household arrangement
Living alone142 (13.54)121 (11.50)32 (9.55)88 (12.43).10c
Living with others907 (86.46)929 (88.50)306 (90.45)623 (87.57).10c
Monthly personal income, KRW (US $)
<3,000,000 (<2500)e622 (59.29)587 (55.95)165 (48.78)422 (59.35).03c
3,000,000-4,990,000 (2500-4158)264 (25.17)261 (24.92)99 (29.24)163 (22.86).03c
≥5,000,000 (>4158)163 (15.54)201 (19.14)74 (21.98)127 (17.79).03c
COVID-19 information sourcef
Television, radio, or newspaper (offline)999 (95.23)998 (95.07)316 (93.53)682 (95.80).40c
Television, radio, or newspaper (online)1036 (98.76)1030 (98.21)328 (97.06)703 (98.76).54c
Other internet websites864 (82.36)842 (80.26)262 (77.55)580 (81.55).44c
Social network services753 (71.78)754 (71.82)220 (65.10)534 (75.01).03c
Instant messaging873 (83.22)868 (82.71)262 (77.49)606 (85.19).011c
COVID-19 misinformation belief
No604 (57.58)618 (58.86)291 (86.21)326 (45.87)<.001c
Yes445 (42.42)432 (41.14)47 (13.79)385 (54.13)<.001c
Anxiety symptom, mean (SD)g 1.49 (1.60)1.51 (1.65)3.18 (1.58)3.66 (1.66)<.001d
No853 (81.32)854 (81.38)290 (85.94)564 (79.22).002c
Yes196 (18.68)195 (18.62)48 (14.06)148 (20.78).002c
Depressive symptom, mean (SD)h 2.02 (1.73)2.04 (1.78)3.76 (1.78)4.17 (1.77).001d
No738 (70.35)739 (70.45)253 (74.85)486 (68.36).01c
Yes311 (29.65)310 (29.55)85 (25.15)225 (31.64).01c
Posttraumatic stress disorder symptom, mean (SD)i 1.43 (1.09)1.43 (1.14)1.12 (1.04)1.57 (1.15)<.001d
No902 (85.99)903 (86.05)306 (90.52)597 (83.92).002c
Yes147 (14.01)146 (13.95)32 (9.48)114 (16.08).002c
COVID-19 knowledge, mean (SD) 24.69 (2.56)24.65 (2.69)24.79 (2.24)24.58 (2.88).38d
Low (0-24)444 (42.33)446 (42.55)142 (41.97)305 (42.82).99c
High (25-35)605 (57.67)603 (57.45)196 (58.03)407 (57.18).99c
COVID-19 preventive behaviors, mean (SD) 6.94 (2.42)7.01 (2.47)7.01 (2.46)7.02 (2.48).72d
0-6 behaviors396 (37.75)388 (36.99)129 (38.15)259 (36.44).70c
≥7 behaviors653 (62.25)661 (63.01)209 (61.85)452 (63.57).70c

aCalculated percentages were rounded off to one decimal place; accordingly, combined percentages can exceed 100%.

bData were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area.

cP for chi-square (computed using unweighted data).

dP for t test (computed using unweighted data).

eAverage monthly income among employees was KRW 2,970,000 in 2018.

fMultiple responses allowed.

gGeneralized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire-2 (GAD-2) score ≥3.

hPatient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) score ≥3.

iPrimary Care Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) score ≥3.

Characteristics of COVID-19 misinformation exposure by respondents’ demographics, and sociobehavioral and psychological symptoms (N=1049). aCalculated percentages were rounded off to one decimal place; accordingly, combined percentages can exceed 100%. bData were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area. cP for chi-square (computed using unweighted data). dP for t test (computed using unweighted data). eAverage monthly income among employees was KRW 2,970,000 in 2018. fMultiple responses allowed. gGeneralized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire-2 (GAD-2) score ≥3. hPatient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) score ≥3. iPrimary Care Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) score ≥3. The majority of the respondents encountered COVID-19 information from diverse media including television, newspapers, internet websites, SNSs, and instant messaging. Overall, 57.45% (n=603) had high levels (score of 25-35) of COVID-19 knowledge and 63.01% (n=661) reported conducting ≥7 COVID-19 preventive behaviors. In total, 18.68% (n=196), 31.55% (n=331), and 13.95% (n=146) reported anxiety, depressive, and PTSD symptoms, respectively (Table 1). Overall, 41.14% (n=432) reported believing in one or more of the 12 COVID-19 misinformation items, while exposure to at least one COVID-19 misinformation item in the preceding three months was reported by 67.78% (n=711) of the respondents. In addition, 49.76% (n=354) and 48.14% (n=342) encountered misinformation about reusing masks (Table 2), which was the most common item of misinformation reported.
Table 2

Respondents’ exposure to COVID-19 misinformation (N=1049).

VariablesParticipants, n (%)aWeighted valuesb, n (%)a
Number of COVID-19 misinformation items
0321 (30.60)338 (32.19)
1279 (26.60)260 (24.74)
2205 (19.54)206 (19.63)
≥3 items244 (23.26)246 (23.44)
COVID-19 misinformation itemsc 728 (69.40)711 (67.78)
Masks can be sterilized and reused after steaming with hot water346 (47.53)354 (49.76)
Masks can be reused after spraying alcohol on its surface345 (47.39)342 (48.14)
Drinking tea can prevent infection231 (31.73)219 (30.78)
Gargling can disinfect the respiratory tract to prevent infection150 (20.60)168 (23.55)
Coronavirus is artificially developed172 (23.63)156 (21.88)
Basking in the sun can prevent infection110 (15.11)109 (15.30)
Gargling with salt can prevent infection104 (14.29)109 (15.29)
Taking antibiotics can prevent or treat infection94 (12.91)102 (14.34)
Flip the sides of a used mask to reuse it90 (12.36)90 (12.60)
Drinking alcohol/smoking can prevent infection59 (8.10)70 (9.88)
Only older adults can be infected25 (3.43)32 (4.46)
A vaccine is available now15 (2.06)14 (1.99)

aCalculated percentages were rounded off to one decimal place; accordingly, combined percentages can exceed 100%.

bData were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area in Korea.

cThe COVID-19 misinformation items were extracted from World Health Organization documents [11,20].

Respondents’ exposure to COVID-19 misinformation (N=1049). aCalculated percentages were rounded off to one decimal place; accordingly, combined percentages can exceed 100%. bData were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area in Korea. cThe COVID-19 misinformation items were extracted from World Health Organization documents [11,20]. COVID-19 misinformation exposure was negatively associated with being older (60-69 years age group: aOR 0.40, 95% CI 0.25-0.64 versus 20-29 years age group) and having a higher monthly personal income (KRW 3,000,000-4,990,000 [US $2500-$4158]: aOR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.93 versus COVID-19 misinformation exposure was positively associated with a tertiary education or above (aOR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02-1.96 versus high school or below). Of the information sources, misinformation exposure was associated with SNSs (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.31-2.35 versus other information sources) and instant messaging (aOR 1.79, 95% CI 1.27-2.51 versus other information sources), while offline and online television, radio, and newspapers and other websites were not statistically significant. Misinformation exposure was also significantly associated with misinformation belief (aOR 7.33, 95% CI 5.17-10.38 versus no misinformation belief) and with psychological distress, including anxiety (aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.24-2.61 versus no anxiety symptoms), depressive (aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.09-2.00 versus no depressive symptoms), and PTSD symptoms (aOR 1.97, 95% CI 1.42-2.73 versus no PTSD symptoms). However, misinformation exposure was not associated with COVID-19 knowledge and preventive behaviors (Table 3).
Table 3

Associated factors with COVID-19 misinformation exposure (N=1049)a.

VariablesMisinformation exposure (yes/no)
Crude odds ratio (95% CI)Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)b
Sex
MaleReferenceReference
Female1.20 (0.92-1.55)1.15 (0.87-1.52)
Age (years)
20-29ReferenceReference
30-390.76 (0.49-1.17)0.74 (0.46-1.17)
40-490.68 (0.44-1.03)0.70 (0.45-1.10)
50-590.69 (0.45-1.06)0.76 (0.48-1.20)
60-690.37 (0.23-0.58)c0.40 (0.25-0.64)c
Education
High school or belowReferenceReference
Tertiary or above1.17 (0.87-1.58)1.42 (1.02-1.96)d
Household arrangement
Living aloneReferenceReference
Living with others (including family)0.74 (0.49-1.14)0.83 (0.53-1.29)
Monthly personal income, KRW (US $)e
<3,000,000 (<2500)ReferenceReference
3,000,000-4,990,000 (2500-4158)0.64 (0.47-0.87)f0.66 (0.47-0.93)d
≥5,000,000 (≥4158)0.67 (0.47-0.93)d0.74 (0.51-1.07)
COVID-19 information sourceg
Television, radio, or newspaper (offline)1.58 (0.89-2.78)1.79 (0.99-3.22)
Television, radio, or newspaper (online)2.41 (0.97-6.03)2.52 (0.98-6.52)
Other internet websites1.28 (0.93-1.76)1.24 (0.89-1.72)
Social network services1.61 (1.22-2.13)f1.75 (1.31-2.35)c
Instant messaging1.67 (1.20-2.32)f1.79 (1.27-2.51)f
COVID-19 misinformation belief
NoReferenceReference
Yes7.38 (5.24-10.39)c7.33 (5.17-10.38)c
COVID-19 knowledge
Low (0-24)ReferenceReference
High (25-35)0.97 (0.74-1.26)0.97 (0.74-1.27)
COVID-19 preventive behaviors
0-6 behaviorsReferenceReference
≥7 behaviors1.08 (0.82-1.41)1.13 (0.86-1.49)
Anxiety symptomh
NoReferenceReference
Yes1.60 (1.12-2.29)f1.80 (1.24-2.61)f
Depressive symptomi
NoReferenceReference
Yes1.38 (1.03-1.84)d1.47 (1.09-2.00)d
Posttraumatic stress disorder symptomj
NoReferenceReference
Yes1.84 (1.34-2.53)c1.97 (1.42-2.73)c

aAll data were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area in Korea.

bAdjusted for sex, age, highest education level, household arrangement, and monthly personal income.

cP<.001.

dP<.05.

eAverage monthly income among employees was KRW 2,970,000 in 2018.

fP<.01.

gMultiple responses were allowed (the reference groups were those who responded “No”).

hGeneralized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire-2 (GAD-2) score ≥3.

iPatient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) score ≥3.

jPrimary Care Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) score ≥3.

Associated factors with COVID-19 misinformation exposure (N=1049)a. aAll data were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area in Korea. bAdjusted for sex, age, highest education level, household arrangement, and monthly personal income. cP<.001. dP<.05. eAverage monthly income among employees was KRW 2,970,000 in 2018. fP<.01. gMultiple responses were allowed (the reference groups were those who responded “No”). hGeneralized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire-2 (GAD-2) score ≥3. iPatient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) score ≥3. jPrimary Care Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) score ≥3. Subgroup analyses showed that the associations of misinformation exposure with misinformation belief, COVID-19 knowledge, preventive behaviors, and psychological distress differed according to the respondents’ demographics (sex, age, education, and monthly personal income; Multimedia Appendix 2). Among the respondents who reported misinformation exposure, misinformation belief was associated with lower COVID-19 knowledge levels (high: aOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.84 versus low) and fewer COVID-19 preventive behaviors (≥7 behaviors: aOR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.74 versus 0-6 behaviors; Table 4).
Table 4

Associations of COVID-19 knowledge and number of COVID-19 preventive behaviors with COVID-19 misinformation belief among respondents who were exposed to misinformation (N=711)a.

VariablesParticipants, n (%)Misinformation belief (yes/no)
Crude odds ratio (95% CI)Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)b
Knowledge
Low (0-24)259 (36.44)ReferenceReference
High (25-35)452 (63.56)0.59 (0.44-0.80)c0.62 (0.45-0.84)c
Preventive behaviors
0-6 behaviors305 (42.82)ReferenceReference
≥7 behaviors407 (57.18)0.51 (0.37-0.70)d0.54 (0.39-0.74)d

aAll data were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area in Korea.

bAdjusted for sex, age, highest education level, household arrangement, and monthly personal income.

cP<.01.

dP<.001.

Associations of COVID-19 knowledge and number of COVID-19 preventive behaviors with COVID-19 misinformation belief among respondents who were exposed to misinformation (N=711)a. aAll data were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in the Seoul metropolitan area in Korea. bAdjusted for sex, age, highest education level, household arrangement, and monthly personal income. cP<.01. dP<.001.

Discussion

Principal Findings

In this cross-sectional survey of Korean adults, more than two-thirds of the respondents reported COVID-19 misinformation exposure between the end of January 2020 and the end of April 2020, as COVID-19 evolved into a global pandemic. A previous study [28] identified a similar prevalence, where 70% of respondents reported misinformation exposure during the 2018 Ebola virus epidemic, affirming a substantial exposure risk to inaccurate or false health-related information during serious infectious disease outbreaks. We identified that misinformation exposure was significantly associated with younger age, higher education levels, and lower incomes. Existing studies reported that younger people, including university students, preferred to obtain health information via online means and perceived themselves as having a high level of digital health literacy [29-31]. Such characteristics would expose young people to more COVID-19 misinformation and information. However, contrary to their perceptions, they lacked the skills to evaluate health resources and apply gathered information to health-related decisions [29-31]. This indicates that despite their proficiencies in using technology and the internet, effective interventions are required to improve young people’s digital health literacy, which is the ability to search for, understand, and critically evaluate health information through electronic sources, then apply gained knowledge to health issues [32]. Meanwhile, to our best knowledge, the associations between misinformation exposure and demographic characteristics have been underinvestigated in the existing literature. We performed subgroup analyses that offer additional details of interactions between the respondents’ demographic characteristics and COVID-19 variables. Further studies that provide in-depth understanding on how and why these demographic characteristics are associated with misinformation exposure will be useful. Consistent with previous reports on the role of social media in health information dissemination and misinformation propagation [7,9,33,34], respondents in this study reported greater COVID-19 misinformation exposure through SNSs and instant messaging. This can also be attributed to the significance of social media like SNSs and instant messaging in Koreans’ daily lives, as those services also include product marketing, shopping, and payment services, contributing to Korea having the third highest social media usage penetration in the world [35]. Many recent studies have identified that the COVID-19 pandemic and fear of being infected have had negative effects on public mental health, reporting increased depression and anxiety [36-38]. The respondents in this study were similarly identified to be at high risk of psychological distress; compared to the nonexposure group, the misinformation exposure group notably had around 1.8 and 1.47 times higher anxiety and depressive symptoms, respectively. This demonstrates the alarming negative effect that misinformation can have on public mental health. Higher levels of social media use during the COVID-19 pandemic have been shown to result in higher levels of anxiety (OR 1.72) and a combination of depression and anxiety (OR 1.91) [39]. It is purported that prolonged and frequent use of social media throughout the ongoing pandemic increases exposure to misinformation along with accurate information. The mixture of accurate and false information can deliver conflicting messages and amplify uncertainties regarding COVID-19 and its perceived health risks [40], resulting in psychological distress [41,42]. A vicious cycle can be triggered, as evidence has shown that psychological distress itself can drive people to look for more information, which in turn causes further distress [43]. Despite the ongoing COVID-19 situation, this study also identified that the respondents had symptoms of PTSD in relation to the pandemic, raising concern that the psychological impact can persist and lead to poor physical health outcomes [44]. In this study, no association between misinformation exposure and COVID-19 knowledge as well as preventive behaviors was found. However, we identified that COVID-19 misinformation belief was negatively associated with COVID-19 knowledge and preventive behaviors, while it was positively associated with misinformation exposure. Similar to our findings, Allington et al [45] found that frequent use of SNSs, which propagate more misinformation than any other media [7], for COVID-19 information was associated with having conspiracy beliefs. Conspiracy beliefs, in turn, showed a negative relationship with COVID-19 preventive behaviors [45-47]. Vinck et al [28] also reported that the belief in Ebola virus misinformation resulted in a lower likelihood of adopting preventive behaviors. The Health Belief Model (HBM) is a theoretical framework widely used in public health to understand heath behaviors for disease prevention (see Champion and Skinner [48]). It theorizes that people’s beliefs about their susceptibility to COVID-19 infection and its severity (collectively known as perceived threat), as well as perceptions about the benefits of and barriers to engaging in preventive behaviors will be predictive of their likelihood of engaging in those behaviors, while cues trigger engagement. Additionally, one’s understanding about COVID-19 can alter individual beliefs and thus indirectly influence behavior [48]. Based on the HBM, our findings suggest that those who believed in misinformation that they were exposed to had lesser accurate knowledge of COVID-19, which could include inaccurate knowledge about preventive behaviors. A less accurate understanding of COVID-19 in turn altered the perceptions they had about COVID-19, such as reduced perceived COVID-19 threat, reduced perceived benefits from preventive behaviors, heightened perceived benefits from inappropriate preventive behaviors, or heightened perceived barriers to preventive behaviors. These altered perceptions and beliefs regarding COVID-19 thus resulted in reduced engagement in recommended preventive behavior, as our findings show, or potentially increased engagement in inappropriate preventive behaviors. The HBM thus offers insights into interventions that can improve engagement in recommended preventive behaviors by delivering information targeted at the core HBM beliefs of perceived susceptibility, severity, benefits, and barriers [49]. Although our findings show no association between misinformation exposure and COVID-19 knowledge, increasing exposure to accurate or corrective COVID-19 information can be useful to denormalize misinformation beliefs, thus changing perceptions of COVID-19 to increase the likelihood of engaging in recommended preventive behaviors [4].

Implications

As misinformation exposure is associated with misinformation belief, it is essential to manage and stem the propagation of misinformation through popular mediums like social media and counteract misinformation exposure with evidence-based information exposure. A study identified that official authorities had produced only a few COVID-19 information videos through a popular video streaming website (YouTube, a website with around 2 billion monthly users), while videos containing misinformation were disproportionately increasing [50]. Governments, health agencies, and researchers should take advantage of such social media outlets by producing and sharing evidence-based and corrective information through YouTube videos and simple but impactful infographics. Additionally, governments and health agencies can work closely with social media platforms to ensure that health-related information has increased visibility without involving unilateral censorship, develop misinformation alerts, and provide verification of information source quality, particularly in the event of global health crises [51]. These can accordingly mitigate the development of misinformation belief. Increasing digital health literacy among the public, particularly young people, will also be essential, as misinformation exposure did not reflect improved COVID-19 knowledge or preventive behaviors but was associated with misinformation belief. Educational or training programs on digital health literacy should be developed and delivered to the public and can be introduced in schools to cultivate these skills from a young age. In-depth, follow-up, and longitudinal studies that explore misinformation selection and beliefs, as well as how misinformation beliefs transform health behaviors will be beneficial as foundations to digital health literacy program development and anti-misinformation strategies.

Limitations

This study has several limitations. First, the causal relationships between COVID-19 misinformation exposure and belief, COVID-19 knowledge, and psychological distress were uncertain due to the cross-sectional study design [52]. Second, we used survey questions to measure respondents’ COVID-19 misinformation exposure, COVID-19 knowledge, and preventive behaviors, which are not validated. Third, we collected self-reported data from the respondents that would cause recall and social desirability biases. Fourth, although all data were weighted according to the South Korea census data, there were relatively fewer people aged ≥60 years who participated in this study. We recruited adult respondents only and did not recruit teenagers (ie, those aged <20 years), who popularly use social media for information acquisition. The inclusion of younger people in future studies would provide additional evidence about their misinformation exposure and belief. Fifth, we conducted an online survey by recruiting panel members using a survey company and thus there is a possibility of sampling bias. For instance, those sampled were based in urban, not rural, areas and drawn from a high-income Asian country with prior experience of managing outbreaks of infectious diseases (eg, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome).

Conclusion

We investigated the prevalence of misinformation exposure and factors that were associated with misinformation exposure and belief, including psychological distress, COVID-19 knowledge, and preventive behaviors in an adult population in the Seoul Metropolitan area, Korea. COVID-19 misinformation exposure was associated with misinformation belief, while misinformation belief was associated with poorer knowledge and engagement in fewer preventive behaviors. Given the potential of such misinformation to undermine global efforts in the COVID-19 response, public health strategies should be kept up-to-date and involve collaborations with multiple stakeholders, including social media platforms, to counter the proliferation of misinformation and win the fight against the infodemic.
  33 in total

1.  Seeking Formula for Misinformation Treatment in Public Health Crises: The Effects of Corrective Information Type and Source.

Authors:  Toni G L A van der Meer; Yan Jin
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2019-02-14

2.  Relationships Between eHealth Literacy and Health Behaviors in Korean Adults.

Authors:  Sun-Hee Kim; Youn-Jung Son
Journal:  Comput Inform Nurs       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.985

3.  Coronavirus misinformation needs researchers to respond.

Authors: 
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  The Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5): Development and Evaluation Within a Veteran Primary Care Sample.

Authors:  Annabel Prins; Michelle J Bovin; Derek J Smolenski; Brian P Marx; Rachel Kimerling; Michael A Jenkins-Guarnieri; Danny G Kaloupek; Paula P Schnurr; Anica Pless Kaiser; Yani E Leyva; Quyen Q Tiet
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Public responses to the novel 2019 coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in Japan: Mental health consequences and target populations.

Authors:  Jun Shigemura; Robert J Ursano; Joshua C Morganstein; Mie Kurosawa; David M Benedek
Journal:  Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2020-02-23       Impact factor: 5.188

6.  Mental health problems and social media exposure during COVID-19 outbreak.

Authors:  Junling Gao; Pinpin Zheng; Yingnan Jia; Hao Chen; Yimeng Mao; Suhong Chen; Yi Wang; Hua Fu; Junming Dai
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Digital technology and COVID-19.

Authors:  Daniel Shu Wei Ting; Lawrence Carin; Victor Dzau; Tien Y Wong
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 53.440

8.  Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance with government guidelines in England.

Authors:  Daniel Freeman; Felicity Waite; Laina Rosebrock; Ariane Petit; Chiara Causier; Anna East; Lucy Jenner; Ashley-Louise Teale; Lydia Carr; Sophie Mulhall; Emily Bold; Sinéad Lambe
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 7.723

9.  COVID-19-Related Web Search Behaviors and Infodemic Attitudes in Italy: Infodemiological Study.

Authors:  Alessandro Rovetta; Akshaya Srikanth Bhagavathula
Journal:  JMIR Public Health Surveill       Date:  2020-05-05

10.  "Pandemic fear" and COVID-19: mental health burden and strategies.

Authors:  Felipe Ornell; Jaqueline B Schuch; Anne O Sordi; Felix Henrique Paim Kessler
Journal:  Braz J Psychiatry       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 2.697

View more
  47 in total

1.  Public attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination: The role of vaccine attributes, incentives, and misinformation.

Authors:  Sarah Kreps; Nabarun Dasgupta; John S Brownstein; Yulin Hswen; Douglas L Kriner
Journal:  NPJ Vaccines       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 7.344

2.  Knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) toward COVID-19: a cross-sectional study in South Korea.

Authors:  Minjung Lee; Bee-Ah Kang; Myoungsoon You
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 3.295

3.  Hematology Patient Protection During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy: A Nationwide Nursing Survey.

Authors:  Stefano Botti; Nicola Serra; Fausto Castagnetti; Sabina Chiaretti; Nicola Mordini; Gianpaolo Gargiulo; Laura Orlando
Journal:  Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 2.576

4.  Digital contact-tracing during the Covid-19 pandemic: An analysis of newspaper coverage in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

Authors:  Julia Amann; Joanna Sleigh; Effy Vayena
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The Role of Transparency, Trust, and Social Influence on Uncertainty Reduction in Times of Pandemics: Empirical Study on the Adoption of COVID-19 Tracing Apps.

Authors:  Andreas Oldeweme; Julian Märtins; Daniel Westmattelmann; Gerhard Schewe
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 5.428

6.  Adherence to preventive behaviors among college students during COVID-19 pandemic in China: The role of health beliefs and COVID-19 stressors.

Authors:  Cheuk Chi Tam; Xiaoyan Li; Xiaoming Li; Yuyan Wang; Danhua Lin
Journal:  Curr Psychol       Date:  2021-06-09

7.  Health equity during COVID-19: A qualitative study on the consequences of the syndemic on refugees' and asylum seekers' health in reception centres in Bologna (Italy).

Authors:  Delia Da Mosto; Chiara Bodini; Leonardo Mammana; Giulia Gherardi; Mattia Quargnolo; Maria Pia Fantini
Journal:  J Migr Health       Date:  2021-06-25

8.  Perceptions towards COVID-19 and adoption of preventive measures among the public in Saudi Arabia: a cross sectional study.

Authors:  Ghadah Alkhaldi; Ghadeer S Aljuraiban; Sultana Alhurishi; Roberta De Souza; Kethakie Lamahewa; Rosa Lau; Fahdah Alshaikh
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-06-29       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Evaluation of a Social Media Campaign in Saskatchewan to Promote Healthy Eating During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Social Media Analysis and Qualitative Interview Study.

Authors:  Jordyn L Grantham; Carrie L Verishagen; Susan J Whiting; Carol J Henry; Jessica R L Lieffers
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Health Information Seeking Behaviors on Social Media During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among American Social Networking Site Users: Survey Study.

Authors:  Stephen Neely; Christina Eldredge; Ron Sanders
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.