Based on the uncertainty management theory considering different information-based coping strategies that are relevant during health crises, the purpose of the present study is to understand how individuals seek and avoid information during the COVID-19 pandemic. We focus on online information seeking and avoidance because of the high share of people searching for information about the pandemic online and the questionable quality of information about the virus available online. Data for this qualitative exploratory study were collected in semi-structured interviews with 21 participants. Our findings revealed four information-seeking patterns that can be located on a continuum between more active, targeted, and less purposeful acquisitions of information, and three avoidance patterns that are distinguished by different motives to avoid certain information. The findings on specific factors involved in individuals’ choices between seeking and avoiding information will help to design better information environments and to identify barriers to the adequate use of information during such crises.
{"title":"Patterns of Online Information Seeking and Avoidance about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19","authors":"E. Link, Magdalena Rosset, Anna Freytag","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2022.103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2022.103","url":null,"abstract":"Based on the uncertainty management theory considering different information-based coping strategies that are relevant during health crises, the purpose of the present study is to understand how individuals seek and avoid information during the COVID-19 pandemic. We focus on online information seeking and avoidance because of the high share of people searching for information about the pandemic online and the questionable quality of information about the virus available online. Data for this qualitative exploratory study were collected in semi-structured interviews with 21 participants. Our findings revealed four information-seeking patterns that can be located on a continuum between more active, targeted, and less purposeful acquisitions of information, and three avoidance patterns that are distinguished by different motives to avoid certain information. The findings on specific factors involved in individuals’ choices between seeking and avoiding information will help to design better information environments and to identify barriers to the adequate use of information during such crises.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126339033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Conspiracy theories often involve topics of uncertainty and ambivalence. One of those topics during the Covid-19 pandemic was the vaccination based on the new method using messenger RNA. In a preregistered study with N = 382 participants, we tested an intervention addressing the uncertainty concerning this new vaccination at a time when conspiracy theories about the vaccination method were not yet widely spread. Participants either only read short facts about the new vaccination (no explanation condition), or read these facts in addition to an explanation about the function of messenger RNA vaccines (relevant explanation condition), or they read the facts after the explanation of an alternative issue (irrelevant explanation condition). Results showed that individuals reading the relevant explanations addressing uncertainties surrounding the new vaccination method were less likely to agree with a Covid-19 vaccination conspiracy theory and were more willing to get a Covid-19 vaccination compared to the other conditions. An exploratory analysis showed that agreement with the Covid-19 vaccination conspiracy theory mediated the effect of explanation type on vaccination intentions. Potential implications and limitations are discussed.
{"title":"Addressing Covid-19 Vaccination Conspiracy Theories and Vaccination Intentions","authors":"Lotte Pummerer, Kevin Winter, K. Sassenberg","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2022.201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2022.201","url":null,"abstract":"Conspiracy theories often involve topics of uncertainty and ambivalence. One of those topics during the Covid-19 pandemic was the vaccination based on the new method using messenger RNA. In a preregistered study with N = 382 participants, we tested an intervention addressing the uncertainty concerning this new vaccination at a time when conspiracy theories about the vaccination method were not yet widely spread. Participants either only read short facts about the new vaccination (no explanation condition), or read these facts in addition to an explanation about the function of messenger RNA vaccines (relevant explanation condition), or they read the facts after the explanation of an alternative issue (irrelevant explanation condition). Results showed that individuals reading the relevant explanations addressing uncertainties surrounding the new vaccination method were less likely to agree with a Covid-19 vaccination conspiracy theory and were more willing to get a Covid-19 vaccination compared to the other conditions. An exploratory analysis showed that agreement with the Covid-19 vaccination conspiracy theory mediated the effect of explanation type on vaccination intentions. Potential implications and limitations are discussed.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132641147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Shared Decision Making (SDM), currently considered a preferred model for making decisions in healthcare, requires that patients have the knowledge and skills to actively participate in the consultation and decision-making process. Patients with limited health literacy (LHL) often fail to do so. To gain insight into the experiences, needs and support for LHL-patients concerning SDM in clinical practice, five focus groups were held with 26 patients with LHL. A focus group discussion guide was developed based on 4-steps SDM models. Data was coded using thematic content analyses. LHL patients participating in this study had little experience with SDM in practice, but do prefer it. Important barriers for this are healthcare provider-related (involving patients too little in decision-making, using medical jargon), patient-related (feeling insecure to play a role in decision-making, inability to understand their diagnosis or information about treatment options), patient-provider interaction-related (relationship of trust) or system-related (too little consultation time). For SDM to take place more often, a shared responsibility between patients and healthcare providers is required. We recommend expanding the SDM models, by adding a step zero (patients understand their diagnosis) and a fifth step (reviewing the decision), to improve the process for LHL patients.
{"title":"Shared Decision Making in Clinical Practice","authors":"J. Noordman, M. Oosterveld-Vlug, J. Rademakers","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2022.102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2022.102","url":null,"abstract":"Shared Decision Making (SDM), currently considered a preferred model for making decisions in healthcare, requires that patients have the knowledge and skills to actively participate in the consultation and decision-making process. Patients with limited health literacy (LHL) often fail to do so. To gain insight into the experiences, needs and support for LHL-patients concerning SDM in clinical practice, five focus groups were held with 26 patients with LHL. A focus group discussion guide was developed based on 4-steps SDM models. Data was coded using thematic content analyses. LHL patients participating in this study had little experience with SDM in practice, but do prefer it. Important barriers for this are healthcare provider-related (involving patients too little in decision-making, using medical jargon), patient-related (feeling insecure to play a role in decision-making, inability to understand their diagnosis or information about treatment options), patient-provider interaction-related (relationship of trust) or system-related (too little consultation time). For SDM to take place more often, a shared responsibility between patients and healthcare providers is required. We recommend expanding the SDM models, by adding a step zero (patients understand their diagnosis) and a fifth step (reviewing the decision), to improve the process for LHL patients.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127455170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
T. Gültzow, E. Smit, Raesita Hudales, C. Dirksen, C. Hoving
Evidence-based cessation assistance increases cessation rates. Activating preferences during decision making could improve effectiveness further. Decision aids (DAs) facilitate deciding by taking preferences into account. To develop effective DAs, potential end users' (i.e., individuals motivated to quit) needs and experts' viewpoints should be considered. Therefore, the aim of this needs assessment was: (1) To explore end users' needs and (2) to obtain consensus among smoking cessation counsellors and scientific experts to develop a self-administered DA to support end users in choosing cessation assistance. Data was gathered via two approaches: (1) twenty semi-structured interviews with potential end users and (2) two three-round Delphi studies with 61 counsellors and 44 scientific experts. Interview data and the first Delphi rounds were analysed qualitatively, the other Delphi rounds were analysed quantitatively. Potential end users acquired information in different ways, e.g., via own experiences. Important characteristics to decide between tools varied, however effectiveness and costs were commonly reported. Experts reached consensus on 38 and 40 statements, e.g., tools should be appropriate for users' addiction level. Although some trends emerged, due to the variation among stakeholders, a 'one size fits all'-approach is undesirable. This heterogeneity should be considered, e.g., by enabling users to customise the DA.
{"title":"Informed Decision Making on the Uptake of Evidence-Based Smoking Cessation Assistance by Individuals Motivated to Quit Smoking","authors":"T. Gültzow, E. Smit, Raesita Hudales, C. Dirksen, C. Hoving","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2022.101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2022.101","url":null,"abstract":"Evidence-based cessation assistance increases cessation rates. Activating preferences during decision making could improve effectiveness further. Decision aids (DAs) facilitate deciding by taking preferences into account. To develop effective DAs, potential end users' (i.e., individuals motivated to quit) needs and experts' viewpoints should be considered. Therefore, the aim of this needs assessment was: (1) To explore end users' needs and (2) to obtain consensus among smoking cessation counsellors and scientific experts to develop a self-administered DA to support end users in choosing cessation assistance. Data was gathered via two approaches: (1) twenty semi-structured interviews with potential end users and (2) two three-round Delphi studies with 61 counsellors and 44 scientific experts. Interview data and the first Delphi rounds were analysed qualitatively, the other Delphi rounds were analysed quantitatively. Potential end users acquired information in different ways, e.g., via own experiences. Important characteristics to decide between tools varied, however effectiveness and costs were commonly reported. Experts reached consensus on 38 and 40 statements, e.g., tools should be appropriate for users' addiction level. Although some trends emerged, due to the variation among stakeholders, a 'one size fits all'-approach is undesirable. This heterogeneity should be considered, e.g., by enabling users to customise the DA.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134189680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Medical pluralism does not only mean the presence of multiple therapies but also the variety of health discourses and norms. By analysing the rhetoric of active participants in the Estonian health field, we portray the diverse discourses in defining and positioning complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in relation to biomedicine (BM). On a scale of attitudes, five different positions of CAM and BM emerge. Both ends of the spectrum dominantly represent a system-level view characterized by distinct categories, opposition, and labelling. In between, integrative positions focus more on an individual’s personal needs by combining and “taking the best out of” all available knowledge systems. The presence of these competing discourses poses several challenges for health communication. Meanings offered by CAM-related health approaches are increasingly visible and influential as unlicensed health workers and laypeople contribute more to public communication due to the openness of social media. On the other hand, critics of CAM and proponents of scientific thinking have mobilized to set boundaries to defend the authoritative position of scientific medicine. Our analysis suggests that using system-level categories supports polarization, which could lead people to seek alternative explanations based on their individual experiences, and thus feeding distrust towards medicine and doctors.
{"title":"Beyond Medical Pluralism","authors":"Marko Uibu, Katre Koppel","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2021.305","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2021.305","url":null,"abstract":"Medical pluralism does not only mean the presence of multiple therapies but also the variety of health discourses and norms. By analysing the rhetoric of active participants in the Estonian health field, we portray the diverse discourses in defining and positioning complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in relation to biomedicine (BM). On a scale of attitudes, five different positions of CAM and BM emerge. Both ends of the spectrum dominantly represent a system-level view characterized by distinct categories, opposition, and labelling. In between, integrative positions focus more on an individual’s personal needs by combining and “taking the best out of” all available knowledge systems. The presence of these competing discourses poses several challenges for health communication. Meanings offered by CAM-related health approaches are increasingly visible and influential as unlicensed health workers and laypeople contribute more to public communication due to the openness of social media. On the other hand, critics of CAM and proponents of scientific thinking have mobilized to set boundaries to defend the authoritative position of scientific medicine. Our analysis suggests that using system-level categories supports polarization, which could lead people to seek alternative explanations based on their individual experiences, and thus feeding distrust towards medicine and doctors.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114269667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
C. Karamanidou, A. Xochelli, P. Ghia, K. Stamatopoulos
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) is a chronic hematologic malignancy with great heterogeneity and unpredictable clinical course. The European Research Initiative on CLL (ERIC), in the context of its CLL Patient Empowerment Program, conducted a study exploring hematologists’ experience of communication. Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted with hematologists caring for CLL patients in Greece. Inductive thematic qualitative analysis was employed revealing 3 major themes: (i) disclosure of information encompassing ‘negotiating the level of disclosure’, ‘the power of cultural perceptions’, ‘fear of being held culpable’, ‘fear of patients’ and own emotions’; (ii) medical-decision making which described ‘balancing autonomy and beneficence’, ‘considering patients’ preferences’ and ‘adhering to practice guidelines’; (iii) emotional support which included ‘assessment of emotional distress’, ‘identifying and regulating patients’ emotions’ and ‘maintaining a supportive relationship’. In conclusion, physicians are aware of the importance of communication and its potential impact on CLL patients. They use a wide range of communication strategies which serve the diversity of communication goals they must achieve. However, the majority have not received formal education on patient interactions. Present findings highlight the need for specific communication protocols, guidance and training that will empower physicians to overcome challenges, inherent to the nature of CLL.
{"title":"How do Hematologists Communicate with Patients Suffering from Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia?","authors":"C. Karamanidou, A. Xochelli, P. Ghia, K. Stamatopoulos","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2021.306","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2021.306","url":null,"abstract":"Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) is a chronic hematologic malignancy with great heterogeneity and unpredictable clinical course. The European Research Initiative on CLL (ERIC), in the context of its CLL Patient Empowerment Program, conducted a study exploring hematologists’ experience of communication. Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted with hematologists caring for CLL patients in Greece. Inductive thematic qualitative analysis was employed revealing 3 major themes: (i) disclosure of information encompassing ‘negotiating the level of disclosure’, ‘the power of cultural perceptions’, ‘fear of being held culpable’, ‘fear of patients’ and own emotions’; (ii) medical-decision making which described ‘balancing autonomy and beneficence’, ‘considering patients’ preferences’ and ‘adhering to practice guidelines’; (iii) emotional support which included ‘assessment of emotional distress’, ‘identifying and regulating patients’ emotions’ and ‘maintaining a supportive relationship’. In conclusion, physicians are aware of the importance of communication and its potential impact on CLL patients. They use a wide range of communication strategies which serve the diversity of communication goals they must achieve. However, the majority have not received formal education on patient interactions. Present findings highlight the need for specific communication protocols, guidance and training that will empower physicians to overcome challenges, inherent to the nature of CLL.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133427997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
mHealth apps are growing in popularity among smartphone users. Such apps often contain social features that enable users to compare their behavior with others but to function, mHealth apps require users to share health information which is considered a threat to individuals’ privacy. Building on social comparison theory and research on privacy decision-making, we investigate the effects of users’ social comparison orientation and privacy attitudes as well as the potential mediating effect of health information disclosure on users’ intention to use a dietary app. Relying on a PLS-based structural-equation model in a sample of N = 528 participants, our study supports claims of a positive effect of social comparison orientation on intention to use a mHealth app. Further, the negative effect of privacy attitude and the positive mediation of information disclosure were supported as well. The study also demonstrated that findings were stable when the context of information disclosure is changed.
{"title":"Trading Data for Health","authors":"Sven Joeckel, Jakob Henke, Leyla Dogruel","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2021.304","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2021.304","url":null,"abstract":"mHealth apps are growing in popularity among smartphone users. Such apps often contain social features that enable users to compare their behavior with others but to function, mHealth apps require users to share health information which is considered a threat to individuals’ privacy. Building on social comparison theory and research on privacy decision-making, we investigate the effects of users’ social comparison orientation and privacy attitudes as well as the potential mediating effect of health information disclosure on users’ intention to use a dietary app. Relying on a PLS-based structural-equation model in a sample of N = 528 participants, our study supports claims of a positive effect of social comparison orientation on intention to use a mHealth app. Further, the negative effect of privacy attitude and the positive mediation of information disclosure were supported as well. The study also demonstrated that findings were stable when the context of information disclosure is changed.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114629096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Health and health-related behaviours are embedded in social contexts in various ways which comprise both risks and opportunities for health communication. We propose a research agenda on social aspects of health communication and introduce the articles of the present special issue. Owing to the complexity of individuals’ social contexts, the research agenda addresses questions lying at the individual, interpersonal, and societal levels. The issue’s articles cover different and highly relevant questions of this research agenda, ranging from stigmatisation to impression management to collective action and from experimental designs to qualitative interviews and netnography. In sum, the articles demonstrate not only the diversity but also the relevance of academic research on social aspects of health communication. We expect that this topic will continue gaining importance, given the ongoing digitalisation of the media environment and the increasing interconnectedness of producers and users, doctors and patients, and experts and laypersons.
{"title":"Social Aspects of Health Communication – Towards a Research Agenda","authors":"Sarah Geber, Tobias Frey, Thomas N. Friemel","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2021.200","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2021.200","url":null,"abstract":"Health and health-related behaviours are embedded in social contexts in various ways which comprise both risks and opportunities for health communication. We propose a research agenda on social aspects of health communication and introduce the articles of the present special issue. Owing to the complexity of individuals’ social contexts, the research agenda addresses questions lying at the individual, interpersonal, and societal levels. The issue’s articles cover different and highly relevant questions of this research agenda, ranging from stigmatisation to impression management to collective action and from experimental designs to qualitative interviews and netnography. In sum, the articles demonstrate not only the diversity but also the relevance of academic research on social aspects of health communication. We expect that this topic will continue gaining importance, given the ongoing digitalisation of the media environment and the increasing interconnectedness of producers and users, doctors and patients, and experts and laypersons.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132875733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The stigmatisation of people with mental illness has severe negative consequences for affected individuals. As research in the context of exemplification theory (Zillmann & Brosius, 2000) shows, single-case descriptions of affected individuals (i.e., exemplars) have the potential to either strengthen or reduce stigmatising attitudes towards people with mental illness, in general. We examine the role of depicting social support for exemplars with mental illness (i.e., depression), exemplars’ age and sex as well as characteristics of the potential stigmatisers (e.g., sex, relationship status) in generalised stigma-related attitudes towards people with mental illness. A 2 × 2 × 2 online survey experiment with 854 participants was conducted. Univariate ANOVAs yielded main effects and complex interaction patterns of participants’ sex and relationship status, as well as combinations of exemplar characteristics. Overall, our results confirm the influence that single-case descriptions can have upon generalised stigma-related attitudes towards people with mental illness. They underline the potential of depicting social support for exemplars with mental illness as well as the consideration of potential stigmatisers’ sex and relationship status for (de-)stigmatisation and give starting points for future research in the field of health and anti-stigma-communication.
{"title":"The Influence of Social Support and Characteristics of the Stigmatisers on Stigmatising Attitudes Towards People With Mental Illness","authors":"Michélle Möhring, Natascha Katharina Krick, Anika Ditze","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2021.204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2021.204","url":null,"abstract":"The stigmatisation of people with mental illness has severe negative consequences for affected individuals. As research in the context of exemplification theory (Zillmann & Brosius, 2000) shows, single-case descriptions of affected individuals (i.e., exemplars) have the potential to either strengthen or reduce stigmatising attitudes towards people with mental illness, in general. We examine the role of depicting social support for exemplars with mental illness (i.e., depression), exemplars’ age and sex as well as characteristics of the potential stigmatisers (e.g., sex, relationship status) in generalised stigma-related attitudes towards people with mental illness. A 2 × 2 × 2 online survey experiment with 854 participants was conducted. Univariate ANOVAs yielded main effects and complex interaction patterns of participants’ sex and relationship status, as well as combinations of exemplar characteristics. Overall, our results confirm the influence that single-case descriptions can have upon generalised stigma-related attitudes towards people with mental illness. They underline the potential of depicting social support for exemplars with mental illness as well as the consideration of potential stigmatisers’ sex and relationship status for (de-)stigmatisation and give starting points for future research in the field of health and anti-stigma-communication.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115405582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A better understanding of the public attitude towards science could be crucial to tackle the spread of mis- and disinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. We here contribute to this understanding by conceptualizing and analyzing the attitude toward science as a psychological network. For this analysis, we utilized data from a German probability sample (N = 1,009), the “Science Barometer”, collected during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, our network analysis revealed that especially the perceived value of science for curbing the pandemic is central to the attitude towards science. Beliefs about this value are related to trust in science and trust in scientific information and to positive and negative evaluations of scientific controversy and complexity. Further, valuing common sense over science was related to seeking less scientific information on official websites, suggesting that this belief, in particular, may drive mis- and disinformation and could be a promising target for interventions. Finally, we found no evidence that seeking scientific information on social media had detrimental consequences for the attitude towards science. Implications for health communication and science communication, limitations, and future directions are discussed.
{"title":"Attitudes towards science during the COVID-19 pandemic: A psychological network approach","authors":"Tobias Wingen, Óscar Lecuona, S. Dohle","doi":"10.31219/osf.io/zrwy9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/zrwy9","url":null,"abstract":"A better understanding of the public attitude towards science could be crucial to tackle the spread of mis- and disinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. We here contribute to this understanding by conceptualizing and analyzing the attitude toward science as a psychological network. For this analysis, we utilized data from a German probability sample (N = 1,009), the “Science Barometer”, collected during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, our network analysis revealed that especially the perceived value of science for curbing the pandemic is central to the attitude towards science. Beliefs about this value are related to trust in science and trust in scientific information and to positive and negative evaluations of scientific controversy and complexity. Further, valuing common sense over science was related to seeking less scientific information on official websites, suggesting that this belief, in particular, may drive mis- and disinformation and could be a promising target for interventions. Finally, we found no evidence that seeking scientific information on social media had detrimental consequences for the attitude towards science. Implications for health communication and science communication, limitations, and future directions are discussed.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122402739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：