Search results

To provide human judgment input for computer algorithm development, this study examines the relative importance of source, content, and style cues in predicting the truthfulness ratings of two common types of online health information: news stories and institutional news releases.

This study employed a multi-method approach using (1) a manual content analysis of 400 randomly selected online health news stories and news releases from HealthNewsReview.org and (2) an online experiment comparing truthfulness ratings between news stories and news releases.

Using content analysis, the authors found significant differences in the importance of source, content, and style cues in predicting truthfulness ratings of news stories and news releases: source and style cues predicted truthfulness ratings better than content cues. In the experiment, source credibility was the most important predictor of truthfulness ratings, controlling for individual differences. Experts have higher ratings for news media stories than news releases and lay people have no differences in rating the two news formats.

It is important for health educators to curb consumer trust in misinformation and increase health information literacy. Rather than solely reporting scientific evidence, educators should focus on addressing cues people use to judge the truthfulness of health information.

This is the first study that directly compares human judgments of health news stories and news releases. Using both the breadth of content analysis and experimental causality testing, the authors evaluate the relative importance of source, content, and style cues in predicting truthfulness ratings.

This paper aims to explore the links among health authorities’ public relations efforts, news media coverage, and public perceptions of risk during the H1N1 pandemic outbreak.

This study used a triangulation of research methods by comparing public relations materials, media coverage, and public opinion. The data were collected from a federal government web site, national newspapers, and national polls.

The data revealed a positive relationship between information subsidy attention and media attention to the H1N1 disease as well as the severity attribute. The salience of the severity attribute in information subsidies was linked with increased H1N1 salience in media coverage, extending the testing of the compelling-arguments hypothesis to an agenda-building context. However, there was no association between salience of the severity attribute and public risk perceptions.

The study provides evidence for public relations effectiveness. However, the limited influence of the severity frame on the public's risk perception suggests a gap between news coverage and the public's view. Framing that effectively empowers the public to engage in desired behavior should be further studied for the success of a public health campaign. The study is limited to examining the severity attribute. A future study should pay more attention to different issue attributes or other frames. The media sample was limited to newspapers and thus lacks generalizability.

The study contributes to public relations scholarship by demonstrating how information subsidies influence media agendas and public opinion in a health communication context. The public health authorities’ role in influencing media agenda should be stressed.

Purpose – The authors examine framing and narrativization in news coverage of health threats to assess variations in news discourse for known, emerging and novel health risks. Methodology/Approach – Using the analytical categories of known, emerging, and novel risks the authors discuss media analyses of anti-vaccination, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and Covid-19. Findings – Known risks are framed within a biomedical discourse in which scientific evidence underpins public health guidelines, and following these directives prevent risk exposure while non-compliance is characterized as immoral and risky. News coverage of emerging risks highlights public health guidelines but fails to convey their importance as the risks seem too distant or abstract. Media coverage of novel risks is characterized by the ubiquity of uncertainty, which emerges as a “master frame” under which all incidents and events are subsumed. Stories about novel risks highlight the fluid and changing nature of scientific knowledge, which has the unintended effect of fueling uncertainty as studies and experts contradict each other. Originality/Value – This chapter introduces a new analytical framework for examining how media stories represent public health risks, along with previously unpublished analysis of media coverage about AMR and Covid-19. This chapter provides insight about the nature of risk discourses involving media, public health officials, activists, and citizens.

Health-related issues are widely covered in news agencies by medical and health journalists. The quantity, format and quality of their coverage influence the general public as well as policymakers and professions. Current studies and observations suggest that news agencies are more dominated by medical topics (disease, symptoms, epidemiology, treatment and medicines) than general public health issues (risk prevention, health protection, education and promotion). This study explores the causes of the current situation in Iran and generates solutions for supporting health-promoting media that may also prove beneficial for other countries.

A qualitative study was conducted to explore the coverage of health-related topics in selected news agencies. Stakeholders, including health journalists, health professionals and public relations staff at the Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education were interviewed. Data were collected until data saturation was reached. The transcripts of all the 17 interviews conducted were analyzed using conventional content analysis.

Four groups of causes were identified, including individual factors, organizational factors, socioeconomic factors and the different nature of medicine and public health. The participants proposed several solutions that were classified into three categories, including the empowerment of stakeholders through capacity development, organizational change and mutual communication and culture change.

Creating health-promoting media is a complex but urgent task, and providing a comprehensive and deep understanding of the dynamic interdependencies of the multiple factors at play in it and developing and implementing the most effective interventions for it requires a systematic approach.

Health-related online fake news (HOFN) has become a major social problem. HOFN can lead to the spread of ineffective and even harmful remedies. The study aims to understand Internet users' responses to HOFN during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic using the protective action decision model (PADM).

The authors collected pandemic severity data (regional number of confirmed cases) from government websites of the USA and China (Studies 1 and 2), search behavior from Google and Baidu search engines (Studies 1 and 2) and data regarding trust in two online fake news stories from two national surveys (Studies 2 and 3). All data were analyzed using a multi-level linear model.

The research detected negative time-lagged relationships between pandemic severity and regional HOFN search behavior by three actual fake news stories from the USA and China (Study 1). Importantly, trust in HOFN served as a mediator in the time-lagged relationship between pandemic severity and search behavior (Study 2). Additionally, the relationship between pandemic severity and trust in HOFN varied according to individuals' perceived control (Study 3).

The authors' results underscore the important role of PADM in understanding Internet users' trust in and search for HOFN. When people trust HOFN, they may seek more information to implement further protective actions. Importantly, it appears that trust in HOFN varies with environmental cues (regional pandemic severity) and with individuals' perceived control, providing insight into developing coping strategies during a pandemic.

Diffusion of fake news and pseudo-facts is becoming increasingly fast-paced and widespread, making it more difficult for the general public to separate reliable information from misleading content. The purpose of this article is to provide a more advanced understanding of the underlying processes that contribute to the spread of health- and beauty-related rumors and of the mechanisms that can mitigate the risks associated with the diffusion of fake news.

By adopting denialism as a conceptual lens, this article introduces a framework that aims to explain the mechanisms through which fake news and pseudo-facts propagate within the health and beauty industry. Three exemplary case studies situated within the context of the health and beauty industry reveal the persuasiveness of these principles and shed light on the diffusion of false and misleading information.

The following seven denialistic marketing tactics that contribute to diffusion of fake news can be identified: (1) promoting a socially accepted image; (2) associating brands with a healthy lifestyle; (3) use of experts; (4) working with celebrity influencers; (5) selectively using and omitting facts; (6) sponsoring research and pseudo-science; and (7)exploiting regulatory loopholes. Through a better understanding of how fake news spreads, brand managers can simultaneously improve the optics that surround their firms, promote sales organically and reinforce consumers’ trust toward the brand.

Within the wider context of the health and beauty industry, this article sets to explore the mechanisms through which fake news and pseudo-facts propagate and influence brands and consumers. The article offers several contributions not only to the emergent literature on fake news but also to the wider marketing and consumer behavior literature.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of congruent and incongruent anonymous comments posted to an online health news article on personal risk perception. This association is examined through testing the moderating roles of perceived similarity and approval ratings, and the mediating roles of source credibility and content credibility.

Hypotheses regarding the impact of comments on personal risk perception were tested experimentally using a news article, comments and approval ratings about the ear picking behavior. Data were collected from 391 young Vietnamese respondents.

The influence of online comments (congruent vs incongruent) on personal risk perception was mediated by source credibility and content credibility. Further, data showed a direct effect of online comments on personal risk perception. Interestingly, the direct and indirect effects of online comments on personal risk perception were observed among participants who perceived that anonymous commenters were similar to them. Approval ratings had neither a main nor interaction effect with comments on the dependent variables.

The results indicate that marketers should consider online comments as a powerful form of social influence, which may alter consumers’ personal risk perception.

The present study adds to social marketing literature by showing how consumers’ online comments influence personal risk perception in the context of changing media ecosystem.

When scientific information is unclear about the health benefits of foods, people choose to react in different ways. Using a posttest-only control group design, the authors tested how balanced and nonfactual information available on YouTube influences public perception of organic foods.

The authors randomly assigned participants (N = 640) from a southern US land grant university to watch one video: balanced news, nonfactual news, or control. All participants indicated changes in perception about organic foods immediately after the video. The authors analyzed the data using one-way and two-way ANOVA.

The nonfactual news video had the most influence on public perception of organic foods. Results confirmed that the effect of nonfactual information was more for individuals with preexisting beliefs consistent with the message communicated and individuals exposed to average to high levels of health and diet news.

The authors recommend regulatory changes in marketing strategies related to organic foods in the US that encourage balanced information about organic foods rather than promoting credence attributes of organic foods using persuasive information.

The authors findings suggest that, when scientific information about the health benefits of foods is unclear, communication activities should aim to increase healthy skepticism considering the audience's preexisting beliefs and frequency of health and diet news exposure.