TWO Awareness of Misinformation in Health-Related Advertising: A Narrative Review of the Literature

Boudewyns, Vanessa; Southwell, Brian; Betts, Kevin R.; Gupta, Catherine; Paquin, Ryan S.; O’Donoghue, Amie C.; Vazquez, Natasha

doi:10.7560/314555-004

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, providing overly simplistic guidance on hydration (or other heat-health messaging) may have unanticipated health implications. Although a balance is needed between informational content conciseness/clarity, these findings highlight that being overly concise may have negative health implications 27…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Although a balance is needed between informational content conciseness/clarity, these findings highlight that being overly concise may have negative health implications. 27 Instances of contradictory messaging and advice lacking critical context were also identified (Tables S3 and S4). For example, some articles advised the public to stay inside during the EHE.…”

Section: Evidence-based and Accessible Heat-health Guidancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hot Topic: A Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Heat-Related Messages During the 2021 Heat Dome in Canada

Tetzlaff,

Goulet,

Gorman

et al. 2023

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: During the summer of 2021, western Canada experienced a deadly heat event. From the first heat alert to postevent reporting, thousands of media articles were published that reference the heat event. However, a gap remains in understanding how this communication chain—from the release of a public heat alert to information shared through media outlets to the public—currently operates to disseminate heat-related messaging across Canada. Objective: To understand the role of digital media in delivering heat-health messaging during an extreme heat event in Canada. Design: A qualitative content analysis was conducted using Canadian news articles published on the 2021 Heat Dome between June 2021 and February 2022 (n = 2909). The coding frame was designed to align with the basic framework for information gathering used in journalism (who, what, where, when, and how) and included both concept-driven and data-driven codes. Results: Overall, 2909 unique media articles discussing the 2021 Heat Dome were identified, with the majority (74%) published by online news agencies (how). The highest article count was on June 29, 2021 (n = 159), representing 5% of the total data set (n = 2909) spanning 260 days (when); 57% of the identified locations were in British Columbia (where). Although we found that the top voices providing media-based heat-health messages are government officials (who), only 23% of articles included heat-health messaging that aligns with the government health alert bulletins released during extreme heat. In addition, heat-health messaging frequently included contradictory content, inconsistent language, or incorrect advice (what). Conclusion: The findings demonstrate clear opportunities to improve health communication related to extreme heat, perhaps most importantly, including updates to mass media messaging educating the public on heat-protective behaviors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Evidence-based and Accessible Heat-health Guidancementioning

confidence: 99%

Hot Topic: A Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Heat-Related Messages During the 2021 Heat Dome in Canada

Tetzlaff,

Goulet,

Gorman

et al. 2023

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many studies that measure instances of misinformation assume that prevalence is an indicator of effect. Other studies examine the effect of misinformation on behavior or perceptions, focusing, for example, on indicators of deception or purchase decisions (for a review, see Boudewyns et al 2018). In many of these studies, researchers have randomly assigned people to be exposed to claims known to be false or to claims that imply inaccurate information and then assessed the effects on claim acceptance, product perceptions, or intentions (e.g., Boudewyns et al 2021).…”

Section: Measuring Scientific Misinformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining and Measuring Scientific Misinformation

Southwell¹,

Brennen²,

Paquin³

et al. 2022

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Scie

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We define scientific misinformation as publicly available information that is misleading or deceptive relative to the best available scientific evidence and that runs contrary to statements by actors or institutions who adhere to scientific principles. Scientific misinformation violates the supposition that claims should be based on scientific evidence and relevant expertise. As such, misinformation is observable and measurable, but research on scientific misinformation to date has often missed opportunities to clearly articulate units of analysis, to consult with experts, and to look beyond convenient sources of misinformation such as social media content. We outline the ways in which scientific misinformation can be thought of as a disorder of public science, identify its specific types and the ways in which it can be measured, and argue that researchers and public actors should do more to connect measurements of misinformation with measurements of effect.

show abstract

“…In combating the influence of misinformation, some scholars suggest that lack of knowledge makes people fall for health misinformation (Scherer et al, 2021;Scheufele and Krause, 2019). They have also advocated that knowledge include both knowledge about the subject and knowledge about persuasion tactics (Boudewyns et al, 2018). In contrast, other scholars have argued that misinformation might not be a "knowledge" problem (Krause et al, 2020).…”

Section: Effects Of Health Misinformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But it is not the only type of knowledge that matters. Studies have suggested that knowledge about media and persuasion may also play a role in people’s awareness about deception (Boudewyns et al , 2018; (Lee and Ramazan, 2021). Thus, we hope to contribute to understanding various types of knowledge and their effects on curbing the impact of health misinformation.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Key Termsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of health misinformation on misbeliefs: understanding the moderating roles of different types of knowledge

Wang

Jacobson

2022

JICES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Health misinformation poses severe risks to people’s health decisions and outcomes. A great deal of research in this area has focused on debunking misinformation and found limited effects of correctives after misinformation exposure. The research on prebunking strategies has been inadequate. Most has focused on forewarning and enhancing literacy skills and knowledge to recognize misinformation. Part of the reason for the inadequacy could be due to the challenges in conceptualizing and measuring knowledge. This study intends to fill this gap and examines various types of knowledge, including subjective knowledge, cancer literacy, persuasion knowledge and media literacy. This study aims to understand how knowledge may moderate the effect of misinformation exposure on misbeliefs. Design/methodology/approach An online experiment with a basic experimental design (misinformation exposure: health misinformation vs factual health message) was conducted. The authors measured and tested the moderating role of different types of knowledge (subjective knowledge, cancer literacy, persuasion knowledge and media literacy) separately to improve the understanding of their role in combatting online health misinformation. Findings This study found that a higher level of cancer literacy and persuasion knowledge helped people identify misinformation and prevented them from being persuaded by it. A higher level of subjective knowledge, however, reduced the recognition of misinformation, thereby increasing the likelihood of being persuaded by it. Media literacy did not moderate the mediation path. Originality/value This study differentiates the role different types of knowledge may have played in moderating the influence of health misinformation. It contributes to a strategic development of interventions that better prepare people against the influence of health misinformation.

show abstract

TWO Awareness of Misinformation in Health-Related Advertising: A Narrative Review of the Literature

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Hot Topic: A Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Heat-Related Messages During the 2021 Heat Dome in Canada

Hot Topic: A Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Heat-Related Messages During the 2021 Heat Dome in Canada

Defining and Measuring Scientific Misinformation

Effects of health misinformation on misbeliefs: understanding the moderating roles of different types of knowledge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About