| Literature DB >> 35682334 |
Huan Liu1, Qiang Chen1, Richard Evans2.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that social media can impact society both positively (e.g., keeping citizens connected and informed) and negatively (e.g., the deliberate spreading of misinformation). This study aims to examine the underlying mechanisms of the relationship between official social media accounts and the infodemic, experienced during the first wave of COVID-19 in China. A theoretical model is proposed to examine how official social media accounts affected the infodemic during this period. In total, 1398 questionnaire responses were collected via WeChat and Tencent QQ, two leading Chinese social media platforms. Data analysis was conducted using Partial Lease Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), moderation effect analysis, and mediation effect analysis. Results indicate that the Information Quality (IQ) of Official social media accounts (β = -0.294, p < 0.001) has a significant negative effect on the infodemic. Mediation effect analysis revealed that both social support (β = -0.333, 95% Boot CI (-0.388, -0.280)) and information cascades (β = -0.189, 95% Boot CI (-0.227, -0.151)) mediate the relationship between IQ and the infodemic. Moderation effect analysis shows that private social media usage (F = 85.637, p < 0.001) positively moderates the relationship between IQ and the infodemic, while health literacy has a small negative moderation effect on the relationship between IQ and the infodemic. Our findings show that, in the context of Chinese media, official social media accounts act as a major source of information for influencing the infodemic through increasing social support and reducing information cascades for citizens.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19 infodemic; information cascades; official social media; public health emergency; social support
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35682334 PMCID: PMC9180041 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19116751
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Theoretical Model.
Background information.
| Variable | Category | Number | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 685 | 49.0% |
| Female | 713 | 51.0% | |
| Age | 18–30 years old | 323 | 23.1% |
| 31–40 years old | 504 | 36.1% | |
| 41–50 years old | 375 | 26.8% | |
| 51–60 years old | 128 | 9.2% | |
| More than 60 years old | 68 | 4.9% | |
| Education | Junior school or below | 120 | 8.5% |
| Senior high school | 176 | 12.6% | |
| Associate degree | 564 | 40.3% | |
| Bachelor degree | 433 | 31.0% | |
| Master’s degree or Ph.D. | 105 | 7.5% | |
| Annual Household Income (Chinese yuan) | Less than 30,000 | 37 | 2.6% |
| 30,000–100,000 | 825 | 59% | |
| 110,000–200,000 | 388 | 27.8% | |
| More than 200,000 | 148 | 10.6% |
Construct Reliability and Validity.
| Cronbach’s α | Rho_A | CR | AVE | VIF Range | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Infodemic | 0.773 | 0.786 | 0.847 | 0.527 | 1.28–01.665 |
| Information Cascades | 0.732 | 0.740 | 0.833 | 0.555 | 1.328–1.540 |
| Information Quality | 0.820 | 0.824 | 0.874 | 0.582 | 1.458–1.716 |
| Support | 0.880 | 0.881 | 0.907 | 0.582 | 1.650–2.068 |
Note: VIF range, VIF range of each item.
Figure 2PLS-SEM analysis results. Note: All the numbers in this figure are standardized.
Discriminant Validity.
| Quality | Cascades | Support | Infodemic | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Information Quality | 0.763 | |||
| Information Cascades | −0.590 ** | 0.745 | ||
| Support | 0.660 ** | −0.612 ** | 0.763 | |
| Infodemic | −0.558 ** | 0.573 ** | −0.555 ** | 0.726 |
Number of sample = 1398; the diagonal line is the square root value of AVE, while the other values are the correlation coefficients between variables; * <0.05; ** <0.01; *** <0.001.
Bootstrapping analysis.
| Path | O.S. | Sample | S.D. | t |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cascades → Infodemic | 0.242 | 0.243 | 0.029 | 8.366 | 0.000 |
| Quality → Infodemic | −0.294 | −0.293 | 0.036 | 8.111 | 0.000 |
| Quality → Cascades | −0.782 | −0.782 | 0.012 | 63.292 | 0.000 |
| Quality → Support | 0.861 | 0.861 | 0.008 | 107.155 | 0.000 |
| Support → Infodemic | −0.387 | −0.388 | 0.036 | 10.664 | 0.000 |
Note: O.S., Original Sample; S.D., Standard Deviation; t, T Statistics.
Figure 3Moderation analysis for the effect of private social media use on the infodemic.
Figure 4Moderation analysis for the effect of health literacy on the infodemic.
PLS predict results.
| PLS-SEM | LM Benchmark | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RMSE | MAE | Q2_Predict | RMSE | MAE | Q2_Predict | |
| overstretched | 1.018 | 0.793 | 0.401 | 1.013 | 0.787 | 0.408 |
| forgotten | 1.009 | 0.839 | 0.351 | 1.010 | 0.839 | 0.349 |
| refresh | 1.000 | 0.851 | 0.245 | 1.001 | 0.852 | 0.242 |
| anxiety | 0.935 | 0.745 | 0.466 | 0.934 | 0.743 | 0.466 |
| difficult | 1.011 | 0.790 | 0.282 | 1.014 | 0.795 | 0.277 |
| Relation cascades1 | 1.063 | 0.898 | 0.296 | 1.066 | 0.900 | 0.292 |
| Structural cascades2 | 1.019 | 0.831 | 0.317 | 1.020 | 0.830 | 0.315 |
| Structural cascades1 | 1.047 | 0.873 | 0.307 | 1.050 | 0.874 | 0.302 |
| Relation cascades2 | 0.943 | 0.747 | 0.432 | 0.946 | 0.749 | 0.428 |
| Study knowledge | 0.955 | 0.723 | 0.391 | 0.958 | 0.724 | 0.388 |
| Alleviate loneliness | 0.915 | 0.721 | 0.450 | 0.918 | 0.722 | 0.446 |
| Reduce worry | 0.952 | 0.742 | 0.461 | 0.953 | 0.740 | 0.460 |
| Prefer official | 0.929 | 0.715 | 0.418 | 0.930 | 0.717 | 0.416 |
| Share advice | 0.949 | 0.735 | 0.386 | 0.952 | 0.738 | 0.382 |
| Manage press | 0.915 | 0.723 | 0.474 | 0.915 | 0.723 | 0.474 |
| Read experience | 0.917 | 0.713 | 0.427 | 0.915 | 0.709 | 0.430 |