IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v314y2022ics0277953622007043.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why do people believe health misinformation and who is at risk? A systematic review of individual differences in susceptibility to health misinformation

Author

Listed:
  • Nan, Xiaoli
  • Wang, Yuan
  • Thier, Kathryn

Abstract

Health misinformation poses a significant threat to public health. Understanding why people believe health misinformation and who is at risk is crucial for developing effective interventions to reduce the harmful impact of misinformation.

Suggested Citation

  • Nan, Xiaoli & Wang, Yuan & Thier, Kathryn, 2022. "Why do people believe health misinformation and who is at risk? A systematic review of individual differences in susceptibility to health misinformation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:314:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622007043
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622007043
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115398?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicole M. Krause & Isabelle Freiling & Becca Beets & Dominique Brossard, 2020. "Fact-checking as risk communication: the multi-layered risk of misinformation in times of COVID-19," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7-8), pages 1052-1059, August.
    2. Sahil Loomba & Alexandre Figueiredo & Simon J. Piatek & Kristen Graaf & Heidi J. Larson, 2021. "Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(3), pages 337-348, March.
    3. James N. Druckman & Mary C. McGrath, 2019. "The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 111-119, February.
    4. Johnson, Blair T. & Hennessy, Emily A., 2019. "Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the health sciences: Best practice methods for research syntheses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 233(C), pages 237-251.
    5. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & Daniel Martin, 2011. "Search and Satisficing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2899-2922, December.
    6. Leah Rosenzweig & Bence Bago & Adam J. Berinsky & David Rand, 2021. "Happiness and Surprise are associated with worse truth discernment of COVID-19 headlines among social media users in Nigeria," Post-Print hal-03509537, HAL.
    7. Malik Sallam & Deema Dababseh & Alaa’ Yaseen & Ayat Al-Haidar & Nidaa A. Ababneh & Faris G. Bakri & Azmi Mahafzah, 2020. "Conspiracy Beliefs Are Associated with Lower Knowledge and Higher Anxiety Levels Regarding COVID-19 among Students at the University of Jordan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-15, July.
    8. Salil D. Benegal & Lyle A. Scruggs, 2018. "Correcting misinformation about climate change: the impact of partisanship in an experimental setting," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 61-80, May.
    9. Wang, Yuxi & McKee, Martin & Torbica, Aleksandra & Stuckler, David, 2019. "Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    10. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    11. Jon Roozenbeek & Sander Linden, 2019. "Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Matthew J Page & Joanne E McKenzie & Patrick M Bossuyt & Isabelle Boutron & Tammy C Hoffmann & Cynthia D Mulrow & Larissa Shamseer & Jennifer M Tetzlaff & Elie A Akl & Sue E Brennan & Roger Chou & Jul, 2021. "The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(3), pages 1-15, March.
    13. Motta, Matthew & Callaghan, Timothy & Sylvester, Steven, 2018. "Knowing less but presuming more: Dunning-Kruger effects and the endorsement of anti-vaccine policy attitudes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 274-281.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhao, Xiaoquan & Horoszko, Urszula A. & Murphy, Amy & Taylor, Bruce G. & Lamuda, Phoebe A. & Pollack, Harold A. & Schneider, John A. & Taxman, Faye S., 2023. "Openness to change among COVID misinformation endorsers: Associations with social demographic characteristics and information source usage," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 335(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tobia Spampatti & Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Evelina Trutnevyte & Tobias Brosch, 2024. "Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(2), pages 380-398, February.
    2. Zhao, Xiaoquan & Horoszko, Urszula A. & Murphy, Amy & Taylor, Bruce G. & Lamuda, Phoebe A. & Pollack, Harold A. & Schneider, John A. & Taxman, Faye S., 2023. "Openness to change among COVID misinformation endorsers: Associations with social demographic characteristics and information source usage," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 335(C).
    3. van Mulukom, Valerie & Pummerer, Lotte J. & Alper, Sinan & Bai, Hui & Čavojová, Vladimíra & Farias, Jessica & Kay, Cameron S. & Lazarevic, Ljiljana B. & Lobato, Emilio J.C. & Marinthe, Gaëlle & Pavela, 2022. "Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    4. Matthew P. Taylor, 2017. "Information Acquisition Under Risky Conditions Across Real And Hypothetical Settings," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 352-367, January.
    5. Ronnie Das & Wasim Ahmed, 2022. "Rethinking Fake News: Disinformation and Ideology during the time of COVID-19 Global Pandemic," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 11(1), pages 146-159, January.
    6. Brandts, Jordi & Busom, Isabel & Lopez-Mayan, Cristina & Panadés, Judith, 2022. "Dispelling misconceptions about economics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    7. Bei, Eva & Morrison, Val & Zarzycki, Mikołaj & Vilchinsky, Noa, 2023. "Barriers, facilitators, and motives to provide distance care, and the consequences for distance caregivers: A mixed-methods systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).
    8. Ambuehl, Sandro & Li, Shengwu, 2018. "Belief updating and the demand for information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 21-39.
    9. Bago, Bence & Rosenzweig, Leah & Berinsky, Adam & Rand, David, 2021. "Emotion may predict susceptibility to fake news but emotion regulation does not help," IAST Working Papers 21-127, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    10. Ramona Bran & Laurentiu Tiru & Gabriela Grosseck & Carmen Holotescu & Laura Malita, 2021. "Learning from Each Other—A Bibliometric Review of Research on Information Disorders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-39, September.
    11. Jay J. Van Bavel & Katherine Baicker & Paulo S. Boggio & Valerio Capraro & Aleksandra Cichocka & Mina Cikara & Molly J. Crockett & Alia J. Crum & Karen M. Douglas & James N. Druckman & John Drury & Oe, 2020. "Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 460-471, May.
    12. Alexia Gaudeul & Paolo Crosetto, 2019. "Fast then slow: A choice process explanation for the attraction effect," Working Papers hal-02408719, HAL.
    13. Stephan Lewandowsky & Konstantinos Armaos & Hendrik Bruns & Philipp Schmid & Dawn Liu Holford & Ulrike Hahn & Ahmed Al-Rawi & Sunita Sah & John Cook, 2022. "When Science Becomes Embroiled in Conflict: Recognizing the Public’s Need for Debate while Combating Conspiracies and Misinformation," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 26-40, March.
    14. Gourlan, Mathieu & Ricupero, Sarah & Carayol, Marion & Cousson-Gélie, Florence, 2023. "Efficacy of theory-based interventions aimed at reducing binge drinking in adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 317(C).
    15. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    16. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.
    17. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," Post-Print halshs-02409314, HAL.
    18. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    19. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    20. Giulietti, Corrado & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Zenou, Yves, 2021. "When Reality Bites: Local Deaths and Vaccine Take-Up," GLO Discussion Paper Series 999, Global Labor Organization (GLO).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:314:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622007043. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.