Constituents’ Inferences of Local Governments’ Goals and the Relationship Between Political Party and Belief in COVID-19 Misinformation: Cross-sectional Survey of Twitter Followers of State Public Health Departments

Abstract

Background Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, social media have influenced the circulation of health information. Public health agencies often use Twitter to disseminate and amplify the propagation of such information. Still, exposure to local government–endorsed COVID-19 public health information does not make one immune to believing misinformation. Moreover, not all health information on Twitter is accurate, and some users may believe misinformation and disinformation just as much as those who endorse more accurate information. This situation is complicated, given that elected officials may pursue a political agenda of re-election by downplaying the need for COVID-19 restrictions. The politically polarized nature of information and misinformation on social media in the United States has fueled a COVID-19 infodemic. Because pre-existing political beliefs can both facilitate and hinder persuasion, Twitter users’ belief in COVID-19 misinformation is likely a function of their goal inferences about their local government agencies’ motives for addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective We shed light on the cognitive processes of goal understanding that underlie the relationship between partisanship and belief in health misinformation. We investigate how the valence of Twitter users’ goal inferences of local governments’ COVID-19 efforts predicts their belief in COVID-19 misinformation as a function of their political party affiliation. Methods We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of US Twitter users who followed their state’s official Department of Public Health Twitter account (n=258) between August 10 and December 23, 2020. Inferences about local governments’ goals, demographics, and belief in COVID-19 misinformation were measured. State political affiliation was controlled. Results Participants from all 50 states were included in the sample. An interaction emerged between political party affiliation and goal inference valence for belief in COVID-19 misinformation (∆R2=0.04; F8,249=4.78; P<.001); positive goal inference valence predicted increased belief in COVID-19 misinformation among Republicans (β=.47; t249=2.59; P=.01) but not among Democrats (β=.07; t249=0.84; P=.40). Conclusions Our results reveal that favorable inferences about local governments’ COVID-19 efforts can accelerate belief in misinformation among Republican-identifying constituents. In other words, accurate COVID-19 transmission knowledge is a function of constituents' sentiment toward politicians rather than science, which has significant implications on public health efforts for minimizing the spread of the disease, as convincing misinformed constituents to practice safety measures might be a political issue just as much as it is a health one. Our work suggests that goal understanding processes matter for misinformation about COVID-19 among Republicans. Those responsible for future COVID-19 public health messaging aimed at increasing belief in valid information about COVID-19 should recognize the need to test persuasive appeals that address partisans’ pre-existing political views in order to prevent individuals’ goal inferences from interfering with public health messaging.

Not All Conservatives Are Vaccine Hesitant: Examining the Influence of Misinformation Exposure, Political Ideology, and Flu Vaccine Acceptance on COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

“…The politicization of vaccines has severe implications for populations worldwide. While numerous studies have examined the relationship between misinformation, political ideology, and COVID-19 vaccine attitudes [ 8 , 18 , 19 , 22 , 23 , 27 , 28 , 29 ], very few have looked at other important factors, such as general vaccine attitudes [ 39 , 40 , 41 ]. Importantly, the existing literature has not considered the factors mentioned above in conjunction.…”

“…Due to the politicization of COVID-19, political ideology has also impacted how people interact with misinformation about the virus and other issues. Indeed, studies have found that Republicans and conservatism are generally associated with increased susceptibility to and engagement with COVID-19 misinformation [ 28 , 29 ]. Further, consuming conservative media has been linked with increased susceptibility to COVID-19 misinformation [ 19 ].…”

“…However, people may still be hesitant to vaccinate against the flu and COVID-19 due to misinformation about the vaccines. Since the start of COVID-19, the scholarly focus has been on political ideology and misinformation’s impact on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy [ 8 , 19 , 23 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33 ]. In this study, we also focus on flu vaccine acceptance to assess if COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is specific to the pandemic or is related to general vaccine hesitancy.…”

Emotions and Incivility in Vaccine Mandate Discourse: Natural Language Processing Insights

“…LIWC is a natural language processing tool that measures psychological processes in texts by counting the percentage of words in a given tweet that fall into prespecified categories. It has been validated and used in investigations of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic (eg, LGBTQ+ youth mental health) [ 12 , 61 ]. In contrast to other sentiment analysis lexicons that generate the valence of emotion (eg, Afinn and Bing, which assign texts a score from negative to positive) without extrapolating discrete emotions and sentiment analysis lexicons that produce binary outcomes (eg, NRC), we wanted a continuous measure of the extent to which texts had a particular sentiment [ 62 ].…”

“…As a result, social media have become a prominent source of political information and misinformation, including information surrounding COVID-19 vaccines [7][8][9][10][11]. The politically polarized nature of COVID-19 information on social media has given rise to an infodemic, wherein health attitudes often hinge more on political ideology than science [12][13][14][15]. As a result, political affiliation influences negative sentiment toward the vaccine [16].…”