ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing ArtsISSN (Online): 2582-7472
Comprehending the characteristics and effects of the health misinformation - A study among social media users Dr. E. Indira 1 1 Assistant
Professor, Department of Visual Communication, School of Arts and Social
Sciences, Avinashilingam Institute for Home Science
and Higher Education for Women, Coimbatore, India 2 Associate
Professor & Head, Department of Visual Communication & Electronic Media
PSG College of Arts and Science, Coimbatore, India
1. INTRODUCTION “Health misinformation is a serious threat to public
health. It can cause confusion, sow mistrust, harm people’s health, and
undermine public health efforts” “Dr. Vivek H.
Murthy Surgeon General of the United States” Health is an
important concern in everyone’s life and people are anxious when they seek
information on health aspects. Digitalisation and high penetration of low-cost
internet services, proliferation of numerous web portals and websites has
opened a new world of information for all. It is estimated that more than 4
billion have joined these services and this population is growing every day Barua et al. (2020). In the world of
internet, there are innumerable channels of accessing information, more
specifically health related information. But it is hard to identify the
authenticity and trust worthiness of the information and the sources of
information in such channels. When the health information circulated consists
of misleading information, done intentionally or not and verified or not, it
can be termed as “misinformation”. Such misinformation becomes rampant during
times of emergency and pandemics, and this directly hinders the efforts of the
public authorities and thereby the overall healthcare system of the country, region,
or state. In the most recent times, COVID 19 was one such situation
when there was a big wave of misinformation spread among the people of the
world and it was addressed as “infodemic” by World Health Organisation (WHO).
According to WHO, “an infodemic is too much information including false or
misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease
outbreak. It causes confusion and risk-taking behaviours that can harm health.
It also leads to mistrust in health authorities and undermines the public
health response. An infodemic can intensify or lengthen outbreaks when people
are unsure about what they need to do to protect their health and as well as the
health of people around them. With growing digitization – an expansion of
social media and internet use – information can spread more rapidly. This can
help to rapidly fill information voids but can as well amplify harmful
messages”. High penetration of mobile phones and the increasing network
connectivity, people have more avenues for search of information with great
speed and scale. This trend is more prevalent
in the spread of misinformation on social networking sites. The widespread use
of social media and internet during the pandemic leads to information overload
with low scope of confirmation and more importantly high level of anxiety about
the epidemic. People look out for various ways to alleviate their anxiety and
resort to diverse information channels about the potential risks of the
epidemic. This becomes more conducive for the rapid dispersion of
misinformation, specifically through social media. The “infodemic” during the pandemic made people oppose
vaccination and public health measures and also resort
to unproven remedies. Not just that, they also act violently against the health
workers and other frontline workers who are involved in disseminating public
health measures. Some of the identified reasons for the instant and fast
spread of misinformation through social media platforms are
1) The inbuilt
algorithm of the social networking sites will suggest posts and information to
the people based on their previous history of engagement as well as popularity
of the content. It creates an “echo chamber” for the people, where they tend to
see the information which they would like to see or hear. This makes them exposed
to any misinformation and again reinforced to the same kind of misinformation. 2) The engagement
rewards including likes, shares, comments which are embedded as a product
feature in the social media platforms makes people share and expose to more and
more misinformation which comes as a vicious cycle. These platforms focus more
on connecting and informing people rather than on verifying the accuracy and
authenticity of the shared information. 3) The information
shared in the social media platforms tend to be more appealing to the common
public as they are charged with sensational and emotional content. Moreover,
they are framed to intensify the psychological responses more than make people
resort to their logical, cognitive thinking. And this leads them to either
urgently act based on the received content or share the misinformation with
others resulting in a “viral” spread. 4) The proliferation
of number of online spaces people look for information
especially health related information has made it more challenging to identify
and correct misinformation. Sometimes the media channels too tend to promote or
amplify the misinformation carried in the online platforms. 5) In some cases,
there is a general mistrust on the existing health care system and the
information shared by them. This results in scarcity of credible and reliable
information. And when people are exposed
to lot of contradictory information on the online platforms they may be misled
and misinformed. 6) When intense
societal and political differences exist, there is a general distrust and
hostility among the public and this leads to lots of contradictions and also “viral” of misinformation. 2. Need for the
Study The need for research studies on health misinformation arises
from the fact that during the first phase of COVID 19 pandemic nearly 30
percentages of the information shared in the social media platforms on the
pandemic and the virus could be categorised as misinformation. And moreover,
many research studies mentioned that the social media posts also carried
several myths related to COVID 19, and these studies did not provide any clear
proof on the outcomes of the misinformation. Some studies mentioned that such
misinformation shared among the common public led to fear and panic and
heightened the anxiety of the people. Such negative emotions evoked through
misinformation were also one of the causes for the “viral” diffusion of
misinformation. It was seen that social media was the main reason for mushrooming of misinformation through the period of Covid 19 pandemic which also shed doubts about the legitimacy of the vaccines and the spread of virus as such. Some of the misinformation that circulated online promoted medicines that were considered not safe for the treatment of Covid 19. Responding to such information has caused detrimental effects on the lives of people. Based on the WHO newsroom article, it is seen that misinformation has caused nearly 6,000 people across the globe to be hospitalised and around 800 people may have died during the initial stages of the Covid 19 pandemic. World Health Organization (2021). Even after the world has witnessed the gruesomeness of the
health misinformation, scientific research towards analysing the scope of
misinformation, the modalities of its spread, their impact and identifying
measures to combat misinformation are not sufficient to be conclusive. Also,
there is little focus is given to the reasons on why and how people circulate
misinformation. There is a need for additional research which can identify the
characteristics of the misinformation and its spread based on the socio-
cultural diversities existing in the spaces of misinformation. 3. Objectives of the
study For the purpose of determining the
characteristics of health misinformation practices among the social media users
and also understanding how they respond to the health misinformation they come
across, the objectives of the study were formulated as 1) To identify the
features of health (mis)information practices among the social media users 2) To understand the
attitude of social media users towards health (mis)information they come across 4. Review of
Literature To understand the prevalence and the impact of health
misinformation and the variables associated with it, a comprehensive review of
literature was done. This analysis gave new inputs on the conduct of the
present study. In a quali – quantitative case study
of Brazil on Misinformation on social networks by Biancovilli
et al, they mention that the main features of misinformation that comes in
social media should be understood to develop smart, latest, and proof supported
content that helps to increase health literacy and combat the diffusion of
false information. Several studies conclude that exposure to health
misinformation has resulted in detrimental effects like unwanted fear and
apprehension about the diseases or health conditions Chua & Banerjee (2017), led to
misunderstandings about the diseases Chen
et al. (2021) and also brings barriers in
the rapport between the doctors and the patients Lavorgna
et al. (2018). To identify solutions to the
ill effects of health misinformation on social media, Bode and Vraga explored various methods like inclusion of relevant
corrective algorithms in the social media, corrective content given by relevant
experts and also societal involvement in the
corrective messages Bode & Vraga
(2015). Few studies
also insisted on promoting health literacy among the people like knowledge
about health issues, and awareness about the ways of handling the issues that
arise due to exposure to health misinformation on social media Syed-Abdul et al. (2013), Trembath et al. (2016). Few studies focussed on the management approaches the ill
effects of misinformation like providing visible accurate information,
improving the social media presence, and also reaching out to the doubts of
individuals Brady et al. (2017), Gesser-Edelsburg et al. (2018). A thematic analysis of Misinformation in India during the
COVID-19 Pandemic was carried on by Md. Sayeed Al-Zaman (2021). This study
found that misinformation on health issues will influence the nation’s
healthcare system and facilities directly, generating false remedies,
therapies, data, and forecasts and also identified few
information gaps which calls for further research efforts to understand the
contents, bases, influences, and other essential features of COVID-19
misinformation in India. In a study by Ghenai (2017), it was found
that nearly 44% of the people were searching for a cure for an illness on the
internet before consulting any physician. Not only that they also sometimes
changed their decision about the treatment for their illness. Another study which attempts to study the scale of false
health information in social media identified the ways and levels at which the
misinformation was spread and made few suggestions to the policy making
authorities. The study also found that social media platforms are very prompt
in stepping up to condemn the acts of spreading false information and
identifying measures to counter such mis information. Exposure to online COVID 19 related health misinformation was
found to reduce the intentions of people towards vaccination Loomba et al. (2021). People showed
high inclination to share their first-hand experience of treatment among their
social groups than on online platforms, which they expected to raise their
social standing Fichman et al. (2011). From the users’
perspective, they found the information on health issues from their friends and
relatives more trustworthy than the information they find in through internet
search Zhao & Zhang (2017). On the flip side, when such misinformation
was shared among the closed networks, the risks involved were found to be on a
higher scale Brady et al. (2017), Chou et al. (2018) 5. Methodology The present study “Comprehending the characteristics and effects of the health misinformation – A study among the social media users” is a descriptive study to assess the situation of health misinformation online. The study used a quantitative survey method involving convenience sampling technique. A questionnaire tool was developed based on the variables used in the studies reviewed. The questions outlined the socio demographic profile, the social media usage pattern for health communication purposes, knowledge level about health misinformation and the ways to deal with it and finally the attitude towards the health (mis)information they access. The attitude towards health (mis)information was collected through a 5-point Likert scale attitude statements based on the themes derived from various studies. The survey questionnaire was circulated among social media users alone through Google forms. Around 114 responses were received during a period of one month from February 2023 to March 2023. Descriptive Statistics, Non Parametric Kruskal Walis Test and Regression analysis were used to analyse the responses using SPSS statistical tool. 6. Results and
Discussions The socio demographic profile of the respondents gives an
interesting depiction of the health information scenario of the respondents who
were social media users. The age of the respondents was in the range between 17
to 45 years and nearly 55% of them were between 19 years to 21 years. Among the
various sources of information for accessing health information, the majority of the respondents resorted to family members
(61%) and health professionals (67%). On the other hand, websites (45.3%) and
social media (45.3%) also were too widely accessed for health information. Among
the various social media platforms used every day by the respondents What’s app
was the highest (102- ), followed by Instagram (67) and You Tube (60). Surprisingly
Facebook was rarely or never used by most of the respondents. Nearly 95% of the respondents said that they accessed social
media for health information regularly when they needed to know more
information about certain health condition more than during any disease
outbreak (30%) or when they were affected by any disease (35%). This shows that searching for health
information happens on a regular basis and thereby creates a fertile area for
the possibilities of accessing and misled by any misinformation. It was also
seen that most of the respondents (53.8%) accessed health information in the
form of image, video, audio, and graphics. It may be inferred that they were
more interested in accessing the information in more dynamic and more
participatory content. Majority of the respondents (78%) partially relied on the
health information they accessed through social media, which says that there
are all possibilities for them to be misled by the misinformation they may come
across. This says that more focus needs to be made on the ways of how to
protect them from such misinformation or create an awareness on the ways to
identify the information and misinformation and health literacy on reporting
such misinformation they come across. Nearly 55% of the respondents are in the habit of endorsing
the health information they come across in the social media which multiplies
the possibilities of false information being circulated. However, the respondents also knew how to
check the facts of the health information they considered as not trustworthy.
Contrarily, only 28% of the respondents mentioned that they will report the
misinformation, and 41% of them ignored it and only 30% of them share it
mentioning that it was false. Ignoring
the misinformation without reporting or mentioning it was false makes the situation graver. Table 1
The
respondents were asked about the situations when they will access social media
for your health information needs. The options given were during any disease
outbreak, when you are affected by any disease, when your family members are affected and you want to know certain information on any
health issues. Regression analysis of these two variables revealed no
significant correlation between the use of social media and the type of
situations during when they access social media for their health
information. However,
a statistical significance was found between usage of You tube and when family
members are affected by any disease. This significance however shows a negative
coefficient which proves that when the family members are affected by any
disease, they tend to retreat or do not use You tube. This may be due to the
notion that their fear or anxiety may be intensified due to the extra
information they access through the use of you tube. Table 2
The
respondents were asked to give their views on the reasons for sharing health
(mis)information which includes, we like to feel that we have new information
that others don’t know, we want to protect the people we care about, we may be
seeking explanations or wanting to share information that helps us make sense
of events and we want to feel connected to others. From the
above Table 3 it can be inferred that that there
is a significant correlation between use of what’s app for seeking explanations
or wanting to share information that helps them make sense of events, may be during
pandemic or any health calamity. During any health emergencies, whether it is a
personal one or happening to the society as a whole, every
individual is concerned of what may happen next. This
anxiety of the unknown facts of the health emergency, doubts on the health
practices to be followed, and so on makes people to reach out to the people or
experts for clarification. However, the analysis also showed that there was no
significant relation between any other reasons for accessing social media for
their health information and usage of other social media. Table 3
The
attitude of the respondents towards using social media for health information
was analysed using the attitude statements responses
in which they expressed their views on how they will respond to the health
(mis)information they access or come across. Based on the highly used social
media platforms by the respondents, the analysis was carried out on the three
social platform users which includes Whats app, You
Tube and Instagram. It was found that there was no significant association
between the Instagram users and any of the attitude statements towards health
(mis)information. However, the users of
What’s app showed significant association towards the statement affirming that
they accessed the health information in social media as it is told by someone whom
they can relate to or who they think as an expert. It can be inferred that the
respondents accessed social media for their health information needs as they
can look out for people whom they can trust or relate to. This shows that
credibility of the source plays a major role in the credibility of the
information as such. In addition it could be seen that there is a strong association
between the users of You tube ant the statements which said that it was easy to
access health information instantly and also that the respondents could find
real people whom they know and also who talk about their own personal
experiences. The results of the study by Zhao & Zhang (2017) reaffirm the idea that people tend
to make health decisions based on the experiences of their friends. The reason for sharing such personal
experiences is explained in a study by Fichman et al. (2011) which states that people tend to
share their firsthand treatment experience on social media thinking that they
contribute for a social conscience and feel that enhances their social standing
among their friends. According to the
respondents, ease of use is one of the drivers which made them choose social
media for accessing health information.
Ease of use here can be identified with other aspects including
technical efficacy to use social media, and availability of devices for access.
With the experiences during COVID 19, everyone developed the habit of accessing
social media for their health information needs and that habit still seems to
persist. On the
other hand, the users of You Tube also felt that they accessed social media to
know details about various health conditions as it comes from the people who
have experienced it and that shared experience makes the people more
personalized with the information too. True to its name, the
social media establishes social ties among people whom they know and
among people they have not met also. This makes it more convenient for them to
relate to the posts made by the people world around. However, it should be
noted that the health condition of one individual cannot be generalized for
everyone and also the environmental conditions where
they reside also differ. When people take other people’s experience for their
own health condition it would be detrimental to their health and life too. The
attitude statements assessing the credibility of the information shared or the
credibility of the source does not show significant relationship or association
which is an unsettling aspect. Mushrooming of misinformation will be difficult
to curb if the users do not show importance to the credibility aspects of the
information shared or accessed. The results of the study show that there is a growing trend
to access social media for information on health issues and they tend to rely
on it partially. However, if they find it less trustworthy, they are clear to
verify it with the health professionals. This seems to be a promising trend. However,
the analysis of the attitude statements gives a little a worrisome picture as
most of the respondents are found to be guided more by emotions than the logic
of the information on health topics found in the social media. And this may
lead them to be misguided or access misinformation without realising the
repercussions of such access. 7. Conclusion According to Rosnow et al. (1988), there are four
factors that will lead to the big spread of misinformation. They are
uncertainty, outcome relevant involvement, personal anxiety, and trust
worthiness. All these factors are interconnected, and one factor leads or
affects the other and results in the thriving of misinformation. People search
and share misinformation when the situation is uncertain, and no one knows
where and how to approach for credible information. As such if the information
they search for will affect their life or important to the general
public, the tendency to believe the misinformation will be high. During
times of crisis, the anxiety of the people is heightened and hence when they
come across any misinformation, they are prone to believe it easily and also share it amongst their circles. This increases the
speed of spread of misinformation and difficult to control it. Trust worthiness
in case of public health domain is dependent on the level of health literacy
among the people and also the socio-cultural factors
prevailing in that society. Health literacy of the individuals will decide on
how the individual will access, process, understand and act upon the health
information. Li et al. (2019) Every individual should actively involve in reducing the
spread and impact of health-related misinformation. The social media users can
take up the responsibility to avoid spreading information which they consider
as not credible. When they come across any information which they consider not
credible, they can directly report it to the social media platforms itself or
the misinformation reporting tabs found in the portal of World Health
Organisation. On their side the social media platforms can identify the
misinformation and they can either tag it as misinformation or remove it. The
health department of the state or health providers can increase their presence
in social media, thereby circulating more credible information. Harvey (2021) Understanding the need to combat health related
misinformation; the World Health Organization (WHO) has initiated awareness
campaigns that enable people to check information with trusted sources. In
addition, WHO has installed myth busters’ pages which aim at informing people
about the various myths that exists on the diseases and various health issues. Murthy (2021) As discussed earlier, WHO has proclaimed the information
overload or misinformation during the pandemics as “infodemic” and management
of infodemic becomes the need of the hour. It involves “the systematic use of
risk- and evidence-based analysis and approaches to manage the infodemic and
reduce its impact on health behaviours during health emergencies”. Effective
infodemic management involves listening to the genuine concerns of the
community, making people understand the risks and provide essential health
advice, building resilience to misinformation and enabling communities to take
up positive actions. There is a need for more research outlay which can create an
evidence base spelling out the consequences of the mis and disinformation and
how it can affect the health outcomes of individuals and society at large. In
addition, the research efforts can also focus on the effectiveness of the
interventions that are designed for countering the effects of
misinformation. This will enable us to
reciprocate more efficiently to the challenges caused by the infodemics and also increase the practice of accessing accurate health
information. Gabarron et al. (2021) Discussing lockdown to who is right and who is wrong with COVID 19 information was seen with an over hyped reactions from the social media users. But it can be noted that many social media users have gained followers for their handle, whether is it fortunate or unfortunate is a question to be cleared by social scientists and psychologist. Thus, scope for further research is multifold in the area of mis- and dis-information for the researchers, as no one can disagree that many lives have been taken away by the COVID 19 pandemic whether it is silly, illogical or planned conspiracy, but life become standstill throughout the world. It is time to share some sense and fact by not threatening the laymen by our messages through social media. We need to join hands in establishing the right sense of health information through our studies and analysis by intensifying methods and data to substantiate the broad area of health communication.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS None. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS None. REFERENCES Al-Zaman, S. (2021). A Thematic Analysis of Misinformation in India During the COVID-19 Pandemic. The International Information & Library Review, 54(2), 128-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2021.1908063. Barua, Z., Barua, S., Aktar, S., Kabir, N., & Li, M. (2020). Effects of Misinformation on COVID-19 Individual Responses and Recommendations for Resilience of Disastrous Consequences of Misinformation. Progress in Disaster Science, 8, 100119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100119. Bode, L., & Vraga, E. K. (2015). "In Related News, that was Wrong : The Correction of Misinformation through Related Stories Functionality in Social Media" : Erratum. Journal of Communication, 65(6), 1062. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12197. Brady, W. J., Wills, J. A., Jost, J. T., Tucker, J. A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2017). Emotion Shapes the Diffusion of Moralized Content in Social Networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(28), 7313–7318. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1618923114. Chen, K., Luo, Y., Hu, A., Zhao, J., Zhang, L. (2021). Characteristics of Misinformation Spreading on Social Media During the COVID-19 Outbreak in China : A Descriptive Analysis. Risk Manag Healthc Policy, 14, 1869-1879. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S312327. Chua, A. Y. K., & Banerjee, S. (2017). To Share or not to Share : The Role of Epistemic Belief in Online Health Rumors. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 108, 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.08.010. Fichman, R. G., Kohli, R., & Krishnan, R. (2011). Editorial Overview : The Role of Information Systems in Healthcare : Current Research and Future Trends. Information Systems Research, 22(3), 419–428. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23015587. Gabarron, E., Oyeyemi, S. O., & Wynn, R. (2021). COVID-19-Related Misinformation on Social Media : à Systematic Review. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 99 (6), 455 - 463A. http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.20.276782. Gesser-Edelsburg, A., Diamant, A., Hijazi, R., & Mesch, G.S. (2018). Correcting Misinformation by Health Organizations During Measles Outbreaks : A Controlled Experiment. PLoS ONE, 13(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209505. Ghenai, A. (2017). Health Misinformation in Search and Social Media. In Proceedings of the 40th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1371. https://doi.org/10.1145/3077136.3084153. Harvey, A. (2021, November 23). Combatting Health Misinformation And Disinformation : Building An Evidence Base. healthaffairs.org. Lavorgna, L., De Stefano, M., Sparaco, M., Moccia, M., Abbadessa, G., Montella, P., Buonanno, D., Esposito, S., Clerico, M., Cenci, C., Trojsi, F., Lanzillo, R., Rosa, L., Morra, V. B., Ippolito, D., Maniscalco, G., Bisecco, A., Tedeschi, G., & Bonavita, S. (2018). Fake News, Influencers and Health-Related Professional Participation on the Web : A Pilot Study on a Social-Network of People with Multiple Sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders, 25, 175–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2018.07.046. Li, Y.J., Cheung, C.M.K., Shen, X.L., & Lee, M.K.O., (2019). "Health Misinformation on Social Media : A Literature Review" (2019). PACIS 2019 Proceedings. 194. https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2019/194. Loomba, S., de Figueiredo, A., Piatek, S. J., de Graaf, K., & Larson, H. J. (2021). Measuring the Impact of Covid-19 Vaccine Misinformation on Vaccination Intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(3), 337–348. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1. Murthy, V. H. (2021). Health-Misinformation. Rosnow, R. L., Esposito, J. L., & Gibney, L. (1988). Factors Influencing Rumor Spreading : Replication and Extension. Language & Communication, 8(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(88)90004-3. Syed-Abdul, S., Fernandez-Luque, L., Jian, W. S., Li, Y. C., Crain, S., Hsu, M. H., Wang, Y. C., Khandregzen, D., Chuluunbaatar, E., Nguyen, P. A., & Liou, D. M. (2013). Misleading Health-Related Information Promoted Through Video-Based Social Media : Anorexia on Youtube. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(2), e30. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2237. World Health Organization (2021). Infodemic. World Health Organization (2021, April 27). Fighting Misinformation in the Time of COVID-19, One Click at à Time. Zhao, Y., & Zhang, J. (2017). Consumer Health Information Seeking in Social Media : A Literature Review. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 34(4), 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12192.
© ShodhKosh 2023. All Rights Reserved. |