Infodemic

Last updated

An infodemic is a rapid and far-reaching spread of both accurate and inaccurate information about certain issues. [1] [2] [3] The word is a portmanteau of information and epidemic and is used as a metaphor to describe how misinformation and disinformation can spread like a virus from person to person and affect people like a disease. [4] This term, originally coined in 2003 by David Rothkopf, rose to prominence in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. [4]

Contents

History

In his 11 May 2003 article in the Washington Post—also published in Newsday, The Record, the Oakland Tribune, and the China Daily—foreign policy expert David Rothkopf, referred to the information epidemic—or "infodemic", in the context of the 2002–2004 SARS outbreak. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] The outbreak of SARS, which was caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 began in a remote region in Guangdong, China, in November 2002. By the time the outbreak ended in May 2003, it had reached 30 countries and there were over 8,000 confirmed cases and 774 deaths.

Rothkopf, who was at that time, a member of the advisory committee's board of directors at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health's Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security which provides policy recommendations to the United States government and the World Health Organization, [10] said that the infodemic was the second of two concurrent epidemics. [5] Rothkopf described how the "information epidemic" transformed SARS from a regional health crisis into a "debacle" that spread globally with both economic and social repercussions. [7] He said this infodemic "was not the rapid spread of simple news via the media, nor is it simply the rumor mill on steroids. Rather, as with SARS, it is a complex phenomenon caused by the interaction of mainstream media, specialist media and internet sites, and 'informal' media, which is to say wireless phones, text messaging, pagers, faxes, and e-mail, all transmitting some combination of fact, rumor, interpretation, and propaganda." [5] Rothkopf citing the State Department, said that 2002 was the "year of the most heightened state of terrorism panic in our history" even though terrorism globally had decreased to its "lowest level since 1969". [5] His company, the Washington DC–based strategic intelligence and analysis firm Intellibridge, which he had founded in 1999, tracked the January 2003 Chinese reports on the outbreak. On 9 February 2003, Intellibridge provided their analysis to the U.S. defense community, and then posted the information on ProMED, a Federation of American Scientists Web site. [5]

The general public did not learn of the outbreak until 23 February 2003, when an elderly woman died of SARS in her home in Toronto, Canada, from Hong Kong. Her son, who spread the disease in a Toronto hospital, also died. [11] With the first death in North America, the Western media began to cover the outbreak. Rothkopf said that if more had been done earlier to manage the disease as well as information about SARS, perhaps there might not have been a worldwide panic. The infodemic spread globally, far beyond the countries that had SARS victims and "set off a chain reaction of economic and social consequences". [5] It also made it harder for health organizations to control the SARS epidemic as panic spread online. [9]

In his 15 December 2002 article entitled "Infodemiology: The epidemiology of (mis)information" in The American Journal of Medicine, [12] health researcher Gunther Eysenbach coined the term infodemiologist [13] and later used the term to refer to attempts at digital disease detection. [14] [13]

Use of the term infodemic increased rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic. A study found that from 2010-2020 there were 61 articles mentioning the word infodemic, while between 2020 and 2021 there were 14,301 published stories using the term. [4] The United Nations and the World Health Organization began using the term infodemic during the COVID-19 pandemic as early as 2 February 2020. [1] [15] The related term disinfodemic (referring to COVID-19 disinformation campaigns) has been used by UNESCO. [16] By the time that the Journal of Medical Internet Research published their June 2020 issue featuring the WHO's framework for managing the infodemic related to the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO and public health agencies had acknowledged infodemiology as an "emerging scientific field" that was of critical importance during a pandemic. [13] By 2021, the WHO had published a number of resources clarifying the infodemic. [17]

A Royal Society and British Academy joint report published in October 2020 said of infodemics that: "COVID-19 vaccine deployment faces an infodemic with misinformation often filling the knowledge void, characterised by: (1) distrust of science and selective use of expert authority, (2) distrust in pharmaceutical companies and government, (3) straightforward explanations, (4) use of emotion; and, (5) echo chambers," and to combat the ill and "inoculate the public" endorsed the Singaporean POFMA legislation, which criminalises misinformation. [18] [19] The Aspen Institute even started their misinformation project before the pandemic. [20]

A blue-ribbon working group on infodemics, from the Forum on Information and Democracy, produced a report in November 2020, highlighting 250 recommendations to protect democracies, human rights, and health. [21]

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary tracked its renewed usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. [22]

Definitions

In his 11 May 2003 article in the Post, Rothkopf wrote that the information epidemic or "infodemic" was a "combination of "[a] few facts, mixed with fear, speculation, and rumor, amplified and relayed swiftly worldwide by modern information technologies." [7]

On 2 February 2020, the World Health Organization defined infodemic as a "an over-abundance of information—some accurate and some not—that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it." [1] A 21 February 2021 WHO publication, said that "[a]n infodemic is too much information including false or misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak." [17]

Eysenbach described infodemiology as the study of "the determinants and distribution of health information and misinformation". [12]

Research during COVID-19

As COVID-19 swept across the globe, information about how to stay safe and how to identify symptoms became vital. However, especially in the first phases of the pandemic, the amount of false, not validated and partially true information on the media was huge. Even seemingly reliable government sources did not always follow best practices in disseminating data about COVID-19, with many potentially misleading maps published on official websites. [2] [23] The inappropriate use of maps on these websites may have contributed to political polarization in response to COVID-19 epidemiological control measures. [24] There was also a proliferation of systematic reviews of COVID-19-related evidence, not all of which was robustly conducted. [25] Researchers have pointed out a few primary challenges of communicating with the public about COVID-19. First, social media platforms that prioritize engagement over accuracy and allow fringe opinions to thrive without correction create an information ecology that is difficult to understand. Second, as fast-moving science and politics intertwine during the pandemic, making decisions related to combatting misinformation becomes complicated by a volatile political environment and frequently changing scientific information. [26] A U.S.-based survey research revealed that during March and April 2020 higher news consumption about COVID-19, especially through social media, was associated with lower levels of knowledge and more fake news beliefs. [27] However, preliminary research published in fall 2021 suggested that visual information (e.g., infographics) about science and scientists, designed to address trust, might be able to mitigate belief in misinformation about COVID-19. [28]

Combatting infodemics

Researchers have been seeking tools to combat infodemics. Gunther Eysenbach brings up four pillars of infodemic management: (1) information monitoring (infoveillance); (2) building eHealth literacy and science literacy capacity; (3) encouraging knowledge refinement and quality improvement processes such as fact-checking and peer-review; and (4) accurate and timely knowledge translation which minimizes distorting factors such as political or commercial influences. [13] Scholars also advocate for tech platforms to police their content more effectively, and empower individuals to make better decisions on their own to promote the emergence of truth. Social media companies may offer a variety of cues to help people make better judgments of whether a message is legitimate or not. For example, Facebook might, in addition to showing how many "likes" a post has received, allow the count of "dislikes" to offer a more symmetric view of opinions. [29]

Research on information dissemination during the COVID-19 pandemic identified issues with standardization and presentation of related information on official U.S. government sources, specifically state and federal government COVID-19 dashboards. [2] [23] When the most authoritative sources of information are not presenting the data accurately, bad conclusions are inevitable. The research suggested official sources for information take steps to ensure the way data are collected, analyzed, and presented is up to the highest standards and adheres to all conventions. [23] Standards of web-maps for government agencies should be developed, widely published, and adhered to. [2] The web-based maps and dashboards are, if properly employed, suggested as possible ways to combat infodemics in the future. [2]

However, scholars emphasize that traditionally proposed ways to combat misinformation tend to rely on the assumption that if people encounter the correct information about an issue, they will make rational decisions based on the best scientific information available. [26] Research shows that this is often not the case and that people do not act in the best interest of scientific fact for reasons including "cognitive preferences for old habits, forgetfulness, small inconveniences in the moment, preferences for the path of least resistance, and motivated reasoning." [30] Thus, combatting misinformation should rely on a more nuanced analysis of both the content of the misinformation, as well as the socio-political environment in which it was disseminated.

Criticism

Financial Times journalist Siddharth Venkataramakrishnan said in his 20 August 2021 article that casting the spread of misinformation and disinformation in terms of disease risks oversimplifying the problem and that "unlike the status of being healthy or infected by an actual disease, what constitutes accurate information is also subject to change." Venkataramakrishnan also pointed out that the focus of the infodemic has often been on "conspiracy theorists and snake-oil salesmen", largely ignoring the at times problematic actions and confusing messaging of governments and public health bodies throughout the pandemic. [31]

Communication scholars Felix Simon and Chico Camargo at Oxford University said in their 20 July 2021 New Media & Society article that infodemic as metaphor "can be misleading, as it conflates multiple forms of social behaviour, oversimplifies a complex situation and helps constitute a phenomenon for which concrete evidence remains patchy." Pointing out that the infodemic as a concept is "journalistically powerful, intuitively satisfying, and in strong resonance with personal experiences and intuition", Simon and Camargo argue that empirical evidence for many of the claims surrounding the term is lacking. Instead of a genuine phenomenon they see the infodemic as "a territorial claim for those who want to apply their skills, a signal to others that they are working in this area, or a framing device to tie one's work to larger debates". [4] Along the same lines, Krause, Freiling, and Scheufele warn of difficulties related to creating "an infodemic about the infodemic" and that research surrounding the term warrants clarification and acknowledgment of uncertainties related to its novelty and impact. [32]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pandemic</span> Widespread, often global, epidemic of severe infectious disease

A pandemic is an epidemic of an infectious disease that has a sudden increase in cases and spreads across a large region, for instance multiple continents or worldwide, affecting a substantial number of individuals. Widespread endemic diseases with a stable number of infected individuals such as recurrences of seasonal influenza are generally excluded as they occur simultaneously in large regions of the globe rather than being spread worldwide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SARS</span> Disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a viral respiratory disease of zoonotic origin caused by the virus SARS-CoV-1, the first identified strain of the SARS-related coronavirus. The first known cases occurred in November 2002, and the syndrome caused the 2002–2004 SARS outbreak. In the 2010s, Chinese scientists traced the virus through the intermediary of Asian palm civets to cave-dwelling horseshoe bats in Xiyang Yi Ethnic Township, Yunnan.

<i>Cordon sanitaire</i> (medicine) Quarantine of a geographic area

A cordon sanitaire is the restriction of movement of people into or out of a defined geographic area, such as a community, region, or country. The term originally denoted a barrier used to stop the spread of infectious diseases. The term is also often used metaphorically, in English, to refer to attempts to prevent the spread of an ideology deemed unwanted or dangerous, such as the containment policy adopted by George F. Kennan against the Soviet Union.

Public health surveillance is, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), "the continuous, systematic collection, analysis and interpretation of health-related data needed for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of public health practice." Public health surveillance may be used to track emerging health-related issues at an early stage and find active solutions in a timely manner. Surveillance systems are generally called upon to provide information regarding when and where health problems are occurring and who is affected.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">ProMED-mail</span> Emerging diseases and outbreak reporting system

Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases is among the largest publicly available emerging diseases and outbreak reporting systems in the world. The purpose of ProMED is to promote communication amongst the international infectious disease community, including scientists, physicians, veterinarians, epidemiologists, public health professionals, and others interested in infectious diseases on a global scale. Founded in 1994, ProMED has pioneered the concept of electronic, Internet-based emerging disease and outbreak detection reporting. In 1999, ProMED became a program of the International Society for Infectious Diseases. As of 2016, ProMED has more than 75,000 subscribers in over 185 countries. With an average of 13 posts per day, ProMED provides users with up-to-date information concerning infectious disease outbreaks on a global scale.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social distancing</span> Infection control technique by keeping a distance from each other

In public health, social distancing, also called physical distancing, is a set of non-pharmaceutical interventions or measures intended to prevent the spread of a contagious disease by maintaining a physical distance between people and reducing the number of times people come into close contact with each other. It usually involves keeping a certain distance from others and avoiding gathering together in large groups.

Infoveillance is a type of syndromic surveillance that specifically utilizes information found online. The term, along with the term infodemiology, was coined by Gunther Eysenbach to describe research that uses online information to gather information about human behavior.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Superspreading event</span> Event in which 3 or more people attend and an infectious disease is spread much more than usual

A superspreading event (SSEV) is an event in which an infectious disease is spread much more than usual, while an unusually contagious organism infected with a disease is known as a superspreader. In the context of a human-borne illness, a superspreader is an individual who is more likely to infect others, compared with a typical infected person. Such superspreaders are of particular concern in epidemiology.

Infodemiology was defined by Gunther Eysenbach in the early 2000s as information epidemiology. It is an area of science research focused on scanning the internet for user-contributed health-related content, with the ultimate goal of improving public health. Later, it is also defined as the science of mitigating public health problems resulting from an infodemic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">COVID-19 pandemic</span> Pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), began with an outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. It spread to other areas of Asia, and then worldwide in early 2020. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the outbreak a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020, and assessed the outbreak as having become a pandemic on 11 March.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">COVID-19 misinformation</span> False or misleading virus information

False information, including intentional disinformation and conspiracy theories, about the scale of the COVID-19 pandemic and the origin, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of the disease has been spread through social media, text messaging, and mass media. False information has been propagated by celebrities, politicians, and other prominent public figures. Many countries have passed laws against "fake news", and thousands of people have been arrested for spreading COVID-19 misinformation. The spread of COVID-19 misinformation by governments has also been significant.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dale Fisher</span> Australian physician (born 1960)

Dale Andrew Fisher FRACP is an infectious diseases physician who specialises in Infectious Diseases and a Senior Consultant in the Division of Infectious Diseases at the National University Hospital, Singapore. He is also a professor of medicine at the Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, and the chair of the National Infection Prevention and Control Committee through the Ministry of Health, Singapore. In 2020, he became group chief of Medicine for National University Health Systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Media coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic</span> Aspect of viral outbreak

Media coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic has varied by country, time period and media outlet. News media has simultaneously kept viewers informed about current events related to the pandemic, and contributed to misinformation or fake news.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on social media</span>

Social media became an important platform for interaction during the COVID-19 pandemic, coinciding with the onset of social distancing. According to a study conducted by Facebook's analytics department, messaging rates rose by over 50% during this period. Individuals confined to their homes utilized social media not only to maintain social connections but also as a source of entertainment to alleviate boredom. Concerns arose regarding the overreliance on social media for primary social interactions, particularly given the constraints imposed by the pandemic.

Allison Joan McGeer is a Canadian infectious disease specialist in the Sinai Health System, and a professor in the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology at the University of Toronto. She also appointed at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health and a Senior Clinician Scientist at the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, and is a partner of the National Collaborating Centre for Infectious Diseases. McGeer has led investigations into the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak in Toronto and worked alongside Donald Low. During the COVID-19 pandemic, McGeer has studied how SARS-CoV-2 survives in the air and has served on several provincial committees advising aspects of the Government of Ontario's pandemic response.

Sylvie Champaloux Briand is a French physician who is Director of the Pandemic and Epidemic Diseases Department at the World Health Organization. Briand led the Global Influenza Programme during the 2009 swine flu pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Briand launched the WHO Information Network for Epidemics which looked to counter the spread of COVID-19 misinformation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public health mitigation of COVID-19</span> Measures to halt the spread of the respiratory disease among populations

Part of managing an infectious disease outbreak is trying to delay and decrease the epidemic peak, known as flattening the epidemic curve. This decreases the risk of health services being overwhelmed and provides more time for vaccines and treatments to be developed. Non-pharmaceutical interventions that may manage the outbreak include personal preventive measures such as hand hygiene, wearing face masks, and self-quarantine; community measures aimed at physical distancing such as closing schools and cancelling mass gathering events; community engagement to encourage acceptance and participation in such interventions; as well as environmental measures such surface cleaning. It has also been suggested that improving ventilation and managing exposure duration can reduce transmission.

Misinformation related to immunization and the use of vaccines circulates in mass media and social media in spite of the fact that there is no serious hesitancy or debate within mainstream medical and scientific circles about the benefits of vaccination. Unsubstantiated safety concerns related to vaccines are often presented on the internet as being scientific information. A large proportion of internet sources on the topic are mostly inaccurate which can lead people searching for information to form misconceptions relating to vaccines.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chinese government response to COVID-19</span>

During the COVID-19 pandemic in mainland China, the government of China under CCP general secretary Xi Jinping's administration pursued a zero-COVID strategy to prevent the domestic spread of COVID-19 until late 2022. Aspects of the response have been controversial, with the zero-COVID approach being praised and the government's lack of transparency, censorship, and spread of misinformation being criticized. The government abandoned its zero-COVID policy on 7 December 2022.

This timeline includes entries on the spread of COVID-19 misinformation and conspiracy theories related to the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. This includes investigations into the origin of COVID-19, and the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 which is caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2. Social media apps and platforms, including Facebook, TikTok, Telegram, and YouTube, have contributed to the spread of misinformation. The Canadian Anti-Hate Network (CAHN) reported that conspiracy theories related to COVID-19 began on "day one". CAHN reported on March 16, 2020, that far-right groups in Canada were taking advantage of the climate of anxiety and fear surrounding COVID, to recycle variations of conspiracies from the 1990s, that people had shared over shortwave radio. COVID-19 disinformation is intentional and seeks to create uncertainty and confusion. But most of the misinformation is shared online unintentionally by enthusiastic participants who are politically active.

References

  1. 1 2 3 "Novel Coronavirus(2019-nCoV) Situation Report - 13" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2 February 2020. Retrieved 30 July 2022.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Mooney, Peter; Juhász, Levente (July 2020). "Mapping COVID-19: How web-based maps contribute to the infodemic". Dialogues in Human Geography . 10 (2): 265–270. doi: 10.1177/2043820620934926 . S2CID   220415906.
  3. ↑ Zielinski, Chris (2021). "Infodemics and infodemiology: a short history, a long future". Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública . 45: e40. doi: 10.26633/RPSP.2021.40 . PMC   8110882 . PMID   33995517.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Simon, Felix M; Camargo, Chico Q (20 July 2021). "Autopsy of a metaphor: The origins, use and blind spots of the 'infodemic'". New Media & Society . 25 (8): 2219–2240. doi: 10.1177/14614448211031908 . S2CID   237692119.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rothkopf, David J. (11 May 2003). "When the Buzz Bites Back". The Washington Post . Washington, D.C. p. B.01. Retrieved 19 September 2022.
  6. ↑ Rothkopf, David J. (14 May 2003). "SARS Also Spurs an 'Information Epidemic'". Newsday . Long Island, N.Y. p. A29. ProQuest   279705520.
  7. 1 2 3 Rothkopf, David J. (18 May 2003). "SARS, fear, rumors feed unprecedented 'infodemic'". The Record . Bergen County, N.J. p. O01. ProQuest   279705520.
  8. ↑ "SARS triggers an information epidemic". Oakland Tribune . Oakland, Calif. 18 May 2003. ProQuest   351861262.
  9. 1 2 Ricchiardi, Sherry (1 June 2003). "On the SARS beat". American Journalism Review . 25 (5): 36–42. Gale   A102904047 ProQuest   216859150.
  10. ↑ "Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security — Biosecurity, Global Health Security, and Global Catastrophic Risks". Open Philanthropy Project. 13 January 2017. Retrieved 8 February 2017.
  11. ↑ Low, Donald (2004). "SARS: Lessons from Toronto". Learning from SARS: Preparing for the Next Disease Outbreak: Workshop Summary. National Academies Press. pp. 63–71. doi:10.17226/10915. ISBN   978-0-309-09154-1. PMID   22553895.
  12. 1 2 Eysenbach, Gunther (December 2002). "Infodemiology: the epidemiology of (mis)information". The American Journal of Medicine. 113 (9): 763–765. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.8.8283 . doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(02)01473-0. PMID   12517369. S2CID   35788388.
  13. 1 2 3 4 Eysenbach, Gunther (29 June 2020). "How to Fight an Infodemic: The Four Pillars of Infodemic Management". Journal of Medical Internet Research . 22 (6): e21820. doi: 10.2196/21820 . PMC   7332253 . PMID   32589589. S2CID   220120867.
  14. ↑ Eysenbach, Gunther (2006). "Infodemiology: tracking flu-related searches on the web for syndromic surveillance". AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. 2006: 244–248. PMC   1839505 . PMID   17238340.
  15. ↑ "UN tackles 'infodemic' of misinformation". United Nations . 31 March 2020.
  16. ↑ Capaldo, Giuliana Ziccardi (October 2020). The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2019. Oxford University Press. p. 341. ISBN   978-0-19-751355-2 . Retrieved 20 May 2021.
  17. 1 2 "Infodemic". World Health Organization . 26 February 2021. Retrieved 19 September 2022. 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.
  18. ↑ Royal Society; The British Academy (21 October 2020). COVID-19 vaccine deployment: Behaviour, ethics, misinformation and policy strategies (PDF) (Report). Royal Society.
  19. ↑ Knapton, Sarah (10 November 2020). "Spreading anti-vaxx myths 'should be made a criminal offence'". The Telegraph .
  20. ↑ INFODEMIC – Documentary Series Launch Event (Video). The Aspen Institute. 29 April 2021. Retrieved 30 April 2021– via YouTube.
  21. ↑ "250 recommendations on how to stop 'infodemics'". Forum on Information & Democracy . 12 November 2020. Retrieved 15 November 2020.
  22. ↑ "Infodemic: An Epidemic of Information". Merriam-Webster . Spring 2020.
  23. 1 2 3 Adams, Aaron M.; Chen, Xiang; Li, Weidong; Chuanrong, Zhang (27 July 2023). "Normalizing the pandemic: exploring the cartographic issues in state government COVID-19 dashboards". Journal of Maps . 19 (5): 1–9. Bibcode:2023JMaps..19Q...1A. doi: 10.1080/17445647.2023.2235385 .
  24. ↑ Engel, Claudia; Rodden, Jonathan; Tabellini, Marco (18 March 2022). "Policies to influence perceptions about COVID-19 risk: The case of maps". Science Advances . 8 (11): eabm5106. Bibcode:2022SciA....8M5106E. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abm5106. PMC   8932671 . PMID   35302842.
  25. ↑ Abbott, Rebecca; Bethel, Alison; Rogers, Morwenna; Whear, Rebecca; Orr, Noreen; Shaw, Liz; Stein, Ken; Thompson Coon, Jo (3 June 2021). "Characteristics, quality and volume of the first 5 months of the COVID-19 evidence synthesis infodemic: a meta-research study". BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 27 (3): bmjebm–2021–111710. doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111710. PMC   9132873 . PMID   34083212.
  26. 1 2 Scheufele, Dietram A.; Krause, Nicole M.; Freiling, Isabelle (December 2021). "Misinformed about the 'infodemic?' Science's ongoing struggle with misinformation". Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition . 10 (4): 522–526. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2021.10.009 . ISSN   2211-369X.
  27. ↑ Gerosa, T.; Gui, M.; Hargittai, E.; & Nguyen, M. H. (2021). "(Mis) informed During COVID-19: How Education Level and Information Sources Contribute to Knowledge Gaps". International Journal of Communication. 15: 22.
  28. ↑ Agley, Jon; Xiao, Yunyu; Thompson, Esi E; Chen, Xiwei; Golzarri-Arroyo, Lilian (14 October 2021). "Intervening on Trust in Science to Reduce Belief in COVID-19 Misinformation and Increase COVID-19 Preventive Behavioral Intentions: Randomized Controlled Trial". Journal of Medical Internet Research . 23 (10): e32425. doi: 10.2196/32425 . PMC   8519341 . PMID   34581678.
  29. ↑ Buchanan, Mark (September 2020). "Managing the infodemic". Nature Physics . 16 (9): 894. Bibcode:2020NatPh..16..894B. doi: 10.1038/s41567-020-01039-5 . S2CID   225343682.
  30. ↑ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering (23 July 2020). Encouraging Adoption of Protective Behaviors to Mitigate the Spread of COVID-19: Strategies for Behavior Change. doi:10.17226/25881. ISBN   978-0-309-68101-8. S2CID   241252994.
  31. ↑ Venkataramakrishnan, Siddharth (25 August 2020). "The real fake news about Covid-19" . Financial Times .
  32. ↑ Krause, Nicole M.; Freiling, Isabelle; Scheufele, Dietram A. (22 May 2022). "The 'Infodemic' Infodemic: Toward a More Nuanced Understanding of Truth-Claims and the Need for (Not) Combatting Misinformation". The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science . 700 (1). doi: 10.1177/0002716222108626 (inactive 24 June 2024). S2CID   246965663 . Retrieved 21 March 2024.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of June 2024 (link)
  33. ↑ "PODCAST_FAKE NEWS_3". Goethe-Institut (in Spanish).
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.