| Literature DB >> 35645856 |
Qingrui Li1, Yu Zheng1, Junqing Zhang1, Rui Geng1.
Abstract
Purpose: COVID-19 pandemic is a significant threat toward the public health. However, the discussion of the mechanism of media literacy's effect in fighting against pandemic is limited. Thus, this study aims to explore the mechanism with a sociocognitive perspective.Entities:
Keywords: media literacy; mediation effect; moderation effect; proxy efficacy; self-efficacy
Year: 2022 PMID: 35645856 PMCID: PMC9133661 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.847522
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1The theoretical model.
Descriptive statistics of major variables.
| High | Low |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Media literacy | 6 | 1 | 4.648 | 0.8506 |
| Self-efficacy | 6 | 1 | 4.7851 | 0.8709 |
| Proxy efficacy | 6 | 1 | 4.7667 | 1.0132 |
| Official media use | 36 | 1 | 22.9381 | 8.5039 |
Media literacy of respondents.
| Question |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| I would consider how this article was produced when reading content related to the COVID-19 pandemic (same below). | 4.22 | 1.304 |
| I would think about the source of this article. | 4.72 | 1.206 |
| I would consider the intent of the article publisher. | 4.52 | 1.219 |
| For the same event, I would compare information from different sources. | 4.70 | 1.167 |
| I would pay attention to the completeness and clarity of the original information. | 4.81 | 1.084 |
| When new developments occur, I decide whether to trust the new information by comparing it to previous information. | 4.76 | 1.078 |
| I would search for more relevant information to determine if the content of an article is credible. | 4.45 | 1.234 |
| I think it is important to think over and over about the message of the article. | 4.56 | 1.116 |
| I will consider whether the information in the article is accurate. | 4.91 | 0.985 |
| I will check the timeliness of the article. | 4.83 | 1.069 |
The mediation effect of proxy efficacy between media literacy and self-efficacy.
| Media literacy | Proxy efficacy | Self-efficacy | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Boot SE |
| Boot SE | |
| Constant variables | 2.4664*** | 0.4186 | 2.6261*** | 0.2212 |
| Media literacy | 0.5002*** | 0.0738 | 0.3164*** | 0.0426 |
| Proxy efficacy | 0.4607*** | 0.0410 | ||
| Sex | 0.0067 | 0.1024 | −0.0809 | 0.0632 |
| Grade | −0.0416* | 0.0233 | −0.0078 | 0.0157 |
| Residence | 0.1401 | 0.1733 | 0.0152 | 0.0904 |
| 0.1884 | 0.5201 | |||
|
| 24.0851*** | 89.7469*** | ||
*p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.
Direct effects, indirect effects and overall effect.
| Effect | Boot SE | Boot LLCI | Boot ULCI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall effect | 0.5468 | 0.0432 | 0.4351 | 0.6585 |
| Direct effect | 0.3164 | 0.0390 | 0.2154 | 0.4173 |
| Mediation effect: low official media use | 0.2339 | 0.0408 | 0.1185 | 0.3376 |
| Mediation effect: medium official media use | 0.1760 | 0.0348 | 0.0954 | 0.2752 |
| Mediation effect: high official media use | 0.1181 | 0.0395 | 0.0325 | 0.2344 |
The moderation effect of official media use between media literacy and proxy efficacy.
| IV | Proxy efficacy | |
|---|---|---|
|
| Boot SE | |
| Constant variables | 4.8069*** | 0.1976 |
| Media literacy | 0.3820*** | 0.0670 |
| Official media use | 0.0279*** | 0.0059 |
| Int: media literacy* official media use | −0.0148** | 0.0049 |
| Sex | 0.0214 | 0.0972 |
| Grade | −0.0451* | 0.0227 |
| Residence | 0.1647 | 0.1580 |
| 0.2565 | ||
|
| 23.7492*** | |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Figure 2The moderation effect.
Figure 3Model with coefficients.