Remembering and forgetting information about the COVID-19 vaccine on Twitter.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2022.2144892
Ezgi Bilgin, Qi Wang
{"title":"Remembering and forgetting information about the COVID-19 vaccine on Twitter.","authors":"Ezgi Bilgin,&nbsp;Qi Wang","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2022.2144892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Social media exposes people to selective information of what they have previously known. We conducted two laboratory studies to examine in a simulated online context the phenomenon of retrieval-induced forgetting, where information reposted on social media is likely to be later remembered and relevant but not reposted information may be forgotten. Specifically, we examined how exposure to selective information about the COVID-19 vaccine via tweets affected subsequent memory and whether people's attitudes towards vaccination played a role in their memory for the information. Young adults (<i>N</i> = 119; Study 1) and community members (<i>N</i> = 92; Study 2) were presented with information about the COVID-19 vaccine that included both pro- and anti-vaccine arguments, organised in four categories (i.e., science, children, religion, morality). They then read tweets that repeated half of the arguments from two of the categories. In a subsequent memory test, participants remembered best the statements repeated in the tweets and remembered worst the statements from the same category but not repeated in the tweets, thus exhibiting retrieval-induced forgetting. This pattern of results was similar across pro- and anti-vaccine arguments, regardless of the participants' level of support for vaccination. We discussed the findings in light of remembering and forgetting in the context of the pandemic and social media.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":"31 2","pages":"247-258"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2022.2144892","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social media exposes people to selective information of what they have previously known. We conducted two laboratory studies to examine in a simulated online context the phenomenon of retrieval-induced forgetting, where information reposted on social media is likely to be later remembered and relevant but not reposted information may be forgotten. Specifically, we examined how exposure to selective information about the COVID-19 vaccine via tweets affected subsequent memory and whether people's attitudes towards vaccination played a role in their memory for the information. Young adults (N = 119; Study 1) and community members (N = 92; Study 2) were presented with information about the COVID-19 vaccine that included both pro- and anti-vaccine arguments, organised in four categories (i.e., science, children, religion, morality). They then read tweets that repeated half of the arguments from two of the categories. In a subsequent memory test, participants remembered best the statements repeated in the tweets and remembered worst the statements from the same category but not repeated in the tweets, thus exhibiting retrieval-induced forgetting. This pattern of results was similar across pro- and anti-vaccine arguments, regardless of the participants' level of support for vaccination. We discussed the findings in light of remembering and forgetting in the context of the pandemic and social media.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在推特上记住和忘记有关COVID-19疫苗的信息。
社交媒体将人们暴露在他们之前所知道的选择性信息中。我们进行了两项实验室研究,在模拟的网络环境中检验检索诱发遗忘现象,即在社交媒体上转发的信息可能会被稍后记住,相关但未转发的信息可能会被遗忘。具体来说,我们研究了通过推特接触有关COVID-19疫苗的选择性信息如何影响随后的记忆,以及人们对疫苗接种的态度是否在他们对信息的记忆中发挥了作用。年轻人(N = 119;研究1)和社区成员(N = 92;研究2)提供了关于COVID-19疫苗的信息,包括支持和反对疫苗的观点,分为四类(即科学、儿童、宗教、道德)。然后,他们阅读了重复其中两个类别中一半论点的推文。在随后的记忆测试中,参与者对推文中重复的语句记得最好,对同一类别但没有重复的语句记得最差,因此表现出检索诱发遗忘。无论参与者对疫苗接种的支持程度如何,这种结果模式在支持和反对疫苗的观点中都是相似的。我们根据大流行和社交媒体背景下的记忆和遗忘讨论了这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
期刊最新文献
Development and validation of the Closure and Resolution Scale (CRS). People experience similar intrusions about past and future autobiographical negative experiences. Comparison of working memory performance in athletes and non-athletes: a meta-analysis of behavioural studies. On the role of familiarity and developmental exposure in music-evoked autobiographical memories. Intrinsic functional connectivity in medial temporal lobe networks is associated with susceptibility to misinformation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1