Continued influence of misinformation in times of COVID‐19

Abstract

Health‐related misinformation, especially in times of a global health crisis, can have severe negative consequences on public health. In the current studies, we investigated the persuasive impact of COVID‐19‐related misinformation, and whether the valence of the misinformation and recipients' degree of overconfidence affect this impact. In two pre‐registered experimental studies, participants ( N = 403; N = 437) were exposed to either a positive or a negative news article describing a fictional hospital's high COVID‐19 recovery/mortality rates. Half of the participants subsequently received a correction. Attitudes towards the hospital were measured before and after exposure. Results of both studies showed that, as expected, corrections reduced the persuasive impact of misinformation. But whereas some persuasive impact remained for corrected negative misinformation (a continued influence effect), it reversed for corrected positive information, causing people to have more negative attitudes towards the hospital than before exposure to any information (a backfire effect). These results corroborate prior suggestions that continued influence effects are asymmetric: negative misinformation is harder to neutralise than positive misinformation. Participants' overconfidence degrees did not have a moderating role in misinformation effects. Even though corrections decrease the persuasive impact of health‐related misinformation, continued influence remains for negative misinformation.

Web-Based Health Information–Seeking Methods and Time Since Provider Engagement: Cross-sectional Study

“…Additionally, although the use of WHI-seeking methods has demonstrable benefits [ 13 , 14 , 39 , 40 ], concerns arise around exposure to online health misinformation [ 41 ]. Misinformation and disinformation around health have received increased public attention in recent years due to the negative impact they have had on individual and public health, notably during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 42 ]. Although the popularity of online information and social media platforms has contributed to the prevalence of online misinformation [ 43 ], it is unknown whether those who use the internet as a primary source of health information are disproportionately exposed to health misinformation.…”

Community involvement in addressing the antibiotic crisis

“…Many institutions pivoted to online learning modalities during this time. Public outreach and education were negatively impacted, and the pandemic exacerbated public mistrust in science education, confounded by politics and misinformation ( 1 – 5 , 7 – 9 ). The fall of 2022 represented the next opportunity to bring back Tiny Earth in Titletown symposium.…”

“…Central themes of ASM Microbe 2023 were the future of science communication with the broader community and restoring trust in science. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, many negative outcomes were linked to misinformation and disinformation ( 1 – 9 ). Trust in science, especially in public health, is at a low point ( 10 – 12 ).…”

Exploring the Existential Implications of COVID-19 in Health Communication

“…Specifically, partially false information is more persuasive and credible than fully false information and more difficult to correct, according to Hameleers et al (2021) . And, negative misinformation is much harder to correct than positive misinformation ( Van Huijstee et al, 2022 ). Fact-checking can play a key role in correcting this information, but it either was not readily available or people had not seen it ( Singh et al, 2022 ).…”