Explaining Health Misinformation Belief through News, Social, and Alternative Health Media Use: The Moderating Roles of Need for Cognition and Faith in Intuition

Wu, Yuanyuan; Kuru, Ozan; Campbell, Scott W.; Baruh, Lemi

doi:10.1080/10410236.2021.2010891

Cited by 21 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The rational mode features analytic, intentional and effortful information processing, whereas the experiential features an intuitive, automatic and effortless approach (Epstein et al, 1996). This classification aligns with other dual-process theories, such as the elaboration likelihood model (Nan et al, 2022;Wu et al, 2022b). Although different information processing styles can substantially shape the persuasion effect, limited scholarly attention has been paid to exploring how information processing disparities affect susceptibility to health misinformation (Wu et al, 2022b), let alone among the middle-aged or above group.…”

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesis Developmentsupporting

confidence: 63%

“…Furthermore, since misinformation susceptibility and sharing may be fueled or buffered by certain individual traits (e.g. information processing predispositions) (Nan et al, 2022;Wu et al, 2022b;Xiao and Su, 2022), we also discussed how individual differences in information processing (i.e. need for cognition (NFC) and faith in intuition (FI)) would condition the S-O-R-based psychological process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding health misinformation sharing among the middle-aged or above in China: roles of social media health information seeking, misperceptions and information processing predispositions

Tang¹,

Luo²,

Su³

2023

OIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe ballooning health misinformation on social media raises grave concerns. Drawing upon the S-O-R (Stimulus-Organism-Response) model and the information processing literature, this study aims to explore (1) how social media health information seeking (S) affects health misinformation sharing intention (R) through the channel of health misperceptions (O) and (2) whether the mediation process would be contingent upon different information processing predispositions.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from a survey comprising 388 respondents from the Chinese middle-aged or above group, one of China's most susceptible populations to health misinformation. Standard multiple linear regression models and the PROCESS Macro were adopted to examine the direct effect and the moderated mediation model.FindingsResults bolstered the S-O-R-based mechanism, in which health misperceptions mediated social media health information seeking's effect on health misinformation sharing intention. As an indicator of analytical information processing, need for cognition (NFC) failed to moderate the mediation process. Contrarily, faith in intuition (FI), an indicator reflecting intuitive information processing, served as a significant moderator. The positive association between social media health information seeking and misperceptions was stronger among respondents with low FI.Originality/valueThis study sheds light on health misinformation sharing research by bridging health information seeking, information internalization and information sharing. Moreover, the authors extended the S-O-R model by integrating information processing predispositions, which differs this study from previous literature and advances the extant understanding of how information processing styles work in the face of online health misinformation. The particular age group and the Chinese context further inform context-specific implications regarding online health misinformation regulation.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0157.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesis Developmentsupporting

confidence: 63%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding health misinformation sharing among the middle-aged or above in China: roles of social media health information seeking, misperceptions and information processing predispositions

Tang¹,

Luo²,

Su³

2023

OIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In terms of aesthetic evaluation, rational individuals (high in need for cognition) tend to engage in conscious aesthetic estimations. However, intuitive individuals (low in need for cognition) are more prone to make emotional estimations ( Wu et al, 2022 ). Top-down attention, affected by factors such as an individual’s motivation and involvement, is usually consciousness-oriented and requires cognitive costs ( Banerjee et al, 2015 ), while bottom-up attention is affected by stimulus characteristics that are usually automated and unconscious ( Tu et al, 2013 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People often form different aesthetic preferences for natural and built environments, which affects their behavioral intention; however, it remains unknown whether this difference in aesthetic preference is due to differences in thinking styles. However, whether tourists’ aesthetic preferences differ when using different visual attention processes has not been studied further. This study used eye-tracking and self-reporting to investigate these questions. The results show that natural environment images are more favored visually because they can evoke in tourists larger pupil diameters and longer scan paths, but we found no significant difference in fixation duration and fixation counts. We also found that the scanning path of tourists who predominantly rely on intuitive thinking is modulated by the bottom-up attention process, while the scanning path of tourists who prefer rational thinking is modulated by the top-down attention process. In the bottom-up process, tourists who prefer rational thinking exhibit more positive aesthetic preferences and emotional arousal. In summary, the present study verified that aesthetic preference is more likely to be influenced by both thinking style and visual attention processing. The results of the present work provide preliminary evidence that the aesthetic preference of the environment is not only related to visual attention but also affected by the individual visual attention process and thinking style.

show abstract

“…There is also a changing environment for audiences to be exposed to health misinformation in addition to social media, for example, from interpersonal communication or other forms of media including the traditional news media. [32][33][34] Campaigns that focus on increasing public awareness of misinformation and educating users on trustworthy information sources may be a more effective and sustainable way to tackle misinformation. 31 This study has certain limitations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of brief exposure to misinformation about e-cigarette harms on Twitter on knowledge and perceptions of e-cigarettes

Liu

Wright

Elizarova³

et al. 2022

DIGITAL HEALTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study examined whether exposure to misinformation found on Twitter about e-cigarette harms leads to inaccurate knowledge and misperceptions of harms of e-cigarette use among cigarette smokers. Methods We conducted an online randomized controlled experiment in November 2019 among an online sample of 2400 adult US and UK cigarette smokers who did not currently use e-cigarettes. Participants viewed four tweets in one of four conditions: 1) e-cigarettes are as or more harmful than smoking, 2) e-cigarettes are completely harmless, 3) e-cigarette harms are uncertain and 4) control (physical activity). Outcomes were knowledge about e-cigarettes and harm perceptions of e-cigarette use for five diseases. We conducted multiple logistic and linear regressions to analyze the effect of experimental conditions on outcomes, controlling for baseline knowledge and perceived harms. Findings Participants in the ‘as or more harmful’ condition (vs. control group) had higher odds of accurate knowledge about e-cigarettes containing toxic chemicals ( p < 0.001), not containing only water vapor (p < 0.001) and containing formaldehyde ( p < 0.001). However, these participants had lower odds of accurate knowledge that e-cigarettes did not contain tar ( p < 0.001) and contained fewer toxins than cigarettes ( p < 0.001). Exposure to ‘as or more harmful’ tweets also increased harm perceptions for five diseases (all p < 0.001), with the greatest effect observed for lung cancer (β = 0.313, p < 0.001). This effect was greater among UK participants for all diseases. Interpretation Brief exposure to misinformation on Twitter reduced accurate knowledge of the presence of tar and the level of toxins compared with smoking and increased harm perceptions of e-cigarette use.

show abstract

Explaining Health Misinformation Belief through News, Social, and Alternative Health Media Use: The Moderating Roles of Need for Cognition and Faith in Intuition

Cited by 21 publications

References 82 publications

Understanding health misinformation sharing among the middle-aged or above in China: roles of social media health information seeking, misperceptions and information processing predispositions

Understanding health misinformation sharing among the middle-aged or above in China: roles of social media health information seeking, misperceptions and information processing predispositions

The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study

Effects of brief exposure to misinformation about e-cigarette harms on Twitter on knowledge and perceptions of e-cigarettes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About