Health Misinformation Across Multiple Digital Ecologies: Qualitative Study of Data From Interviews With International Students

Abstract

Background Transient migrants such as international students have received limited support from host country governments throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. An increase in misinformation, resulting in poor health outcomes for individuals, may impact an already vulnerable group. Objective Existing research examines the spread of misinformation. Similarly, there is extensive literature on the health information behavior of international students. However, there is a gap in the literature focusing on international students’ interaction with health misinformation. This exploratory research aims to address this gap by examining international students’ interaction with health misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A total of 11 participants took part in semistructured interviews and a health misinformation-identification exercise via Zoom. The data collected were subjected to qualitative thematic analysis. Multiple rounds of coding, checked by other coders, revealed 2 themes and 6 subthemes. Results The 2 main themes that emerged were (1) approaches to dealing with health misinformation and (2) how international students navigate across multiple digital ecologies. Results show that international students who draw on multiple digital ecologies for information reliably identify misinformation, suggesting that the use of multiple digital ecologies may have a protective effect against health misinformation. Conclusions Findings show that international students encounter health misinformation across multiple digital ecologies, and they also compare information across multiple ecologies. This comparison may support them in identifying health misinformation. Thus, the findings of this study combat narratives of international students’ susceptibility to misinformation.

Communication inequalities and incomplete data hinder understanding of how social media affect vaccine uptake

“… 37 Also, research from qualitative studies has found that people who relied on multiple channels in their media ecology for their health information were more likely to identify misinformation; this suggests that reliance on different media ecologies may insulate one from being misled. 38 These two examples are indicative that common assumptions derived from aggregated “big” data from social media may well be missing the mark if the context of individuals was not given due attention.…”

Rumours. Who believes them?

“…The study deliberately targeted a group of people who use the internet continually and who present a wide range of demographic features to be tested. By definition, however, the study excluded all other social groups and even within this group was limited to domestic students, who might be less vulnerable to false rumours originating in their home country than international students reading the same rumours (Bahl et al, 2021;Bahl et al, 2022). The study also did not test the possibility that Chinese students might resemble their foreign student counterparts in being less sceptical about online information than the general public (Metzger et al, 2003) or that they may be less vulnerable to rumours than aged persons in China (He et al, 2019).…”