Misinformation about COVID-19: evidence for differential latent profiles and a strong association with trust in science.
Misinformation about COVID-19: evidence for differential latent profiles and a strong association with trust in science.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12889-020-10103-x
复制
发表时间：
2021-01-07
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Xiao Y
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Agley J;Xiao Y
关于 2019 冠状病毒病 (COVID-19) 起源的错误信息和阴谋论（例如 5G 蜂窝网络）的传播，以及疫苗接种、社交距离和口罩等预防措施的动机（例如，作为一种政治策略），反映了 2019 年冠状病毒病 (COVID-19) 在全球的传播。这些信念给现实世界带来了实质性的负面结果，但在很大程度上仍未得到研究。这是一项横断面在线调查 (n=660)。参与者被问及五个选定的 COVID-19 叙述的可信度、他们的政治倾向、他们的宗教信仰、他们对科学的信任（包含 21 个项目的量表）以及社会人口统计项目。对数据进行描述性评估，然后使用潜在概况分析来识别具有相似可信度概况的亚组。进行双变量 (ANOVA) 分析，然后使用多变量、多变量逻辑回归来识别与特定 COVID-19 叙述可信度概况中的成员资格相关的因素。对于完整样本，叙述的可信度各不相同，从 5G 叙述的低值 1.94 (SD=1.72) 到人畜共患（科学共识）叙述的高值 5.56 (SD=1.64)。出现了四种不同的信仰概况，其中绝大多数（70%）的样本属于概况 1，它相信科学上接受的叙述（人畜共患起源），但不相信误导或阴谋论叙述。其他人并没有不相信人畜共患病的解释，而是在不同程度上相信了额外的错误信息。控制社会人口统计、政治倾向和宗教信仰与 COVID-19 信仰概况成员资格的关系微弱且通常不显着。然而，对科学的信任是个人资料成员资格的一个强有力的、重要的预测因素，较低的信任度与个人资料 2 至 4 的归属有实质性联系。对错误信息或阴谋论叙述的信仰可能与对反映科学共识的叙述的信仰并不相互排斥；也就是说，个人资料的区分不是通过对人畜共患叙事的信仰，而是通过对其他叙事的伴随信仰或不信仰来区分。此外，重新传播科学上公认的叙述可能不会削弱对错误信息的信念。然而，可以通过采取具体措施提高对科学和科学家的信任来预防 COVID-19 错误信息，例如建立对科学过程的理解和支持开放科学倡议。在线版本包含可在 10.1186/s12889-020-10103-x 获取的补充材料。
The global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been mirrored by diffusion of misinformation and conspiracy theories about its origins (such as 5G cellular networks) and the motivations of preventive measures like vaccination, social distancing, and face masks (for example, as a political ploy). These beliefs have resulted in substantive, negative real-world outcomes but remain largely unstudied. This was a cross-sectional, online survey (n=660). Participants were asked about the believability of five selected COVID-19 narratives, their political orientation, their religious commitment, and their trust in science (a 21-item scale), along with sociodemographic items. Data were assessed descriptively, then latent profile analysis was used to identify subgroups with similar believability profiles. Bivariate (ANOVA) analyses were run, then multivariable, multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with membership in specific COVID-19 narrative believability profiles. For the full sample, believability of the narratives varied, from a low of 1.94 (SD=1.72) for the 5G narrative to a high of 5.56 (SD=1.64) for the zoonotic (scientific consensus) narrative. Four distinct belief profiles emerged, with the preponderance (70%) of the sample falling into Profile 1, which believed the scientifically accepted narrative (zoonotic origin) but not the misinformed or conspiratorial narratives. Other profiles did not disbelieve the zoonotic explanation, but rather believed additional misinformation to varying degrees. Controlling for sociodemographics, political orientation and religious commitment were marginally, and typically non-significantly, associated with COVID-19 belief profile membership. However, trust in science was a strong, significant predictor of profile membership, with lower trust being substantively associated with belonging to Profiles 2 through 4. Belief in misinformation or conspiratorial narratives may not be mutually exclusive from belief in the narrative reflecting scientific consensus; that is, profiles were distinguished not by belief in the zoonotic narrative, but rather by concomitant belief or disbelief in additional narratives. Additional, renewed dissemination of scientifically accepted narratives may not attenuate belief in misinformation. However, prophylaxis of COVID-19 misinformation might be achieved by taking concrete steps to improve trust in science and scientists, such as building understanding of the scientific process and supporting open science initiatives. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-020-10103-x.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.02.007
发表时间：
2020-05-01
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Aguinis, Herman;Banks, George C.;Cascio, Wayne F.
通讯作者：
Cascio, Wayne F.
影响因子：
13.6
作者：
Guess, Andrew;Nagler, Jonathan;Tucker, Joshua
通讯作者：
Tucker, Joshua
影响因子：
12.6
作者：
Buhrmester, Michael;Kwang, Tracy;Gosling, Samuel D.
通讯作者：
Gosling, Samuel D.
影响因子：
7.4
作者：
Ahmed, Wasim;Vidal-Alaball, Josep;Lopez Segui, Francesc
通讯作者：
Lopez Segui, Francesc
影响因子：
4.9
作者：
Cope, M. B.;Allison, D. B.
通讯作者：
Allison, D. B.