IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v328y2023ics0277953623003362.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From pandemic to Plandemic: Examining the amplification and attenuation of COVID-19 misinformation on social media

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, Edmund W.J.
  • Bao, Huanyu
  • Wang, Yixi
  • Lim, Yi Torng

Abstract

This study examines the proliferation of COVID-19 misinformation through Plandemic—a pseudo-documentary of COVID-19 conspiracy theories—on social media and examines how factors such as (a) themes of misinformation, (b) types of misinformation, (c) sources of misinformation, (d) emotions of misinformation, and (e) fact-checking labels amplify or attenuate online misinformation during the early days of the pandemic. Using CrowdTangle, a Facebook API, we collected a total of 5732 publicly available Facebook pages posts containing Plandemic-related keywords from January 1 to December 19, 2020. A random sample of 600 posts was subsequently coded, and the data were analyzed using negative binomial regression to examine factors associated with amplification and attenuation. Overall, the extended an extended Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF) provided a theoretical lens to understand why certain misinformation was amplified, while others were attenuated. As for posts with misinformation, results showed that themes related to private firms, treatment and prevention of virus transmission, diagnosis and health impacts, virus origins, and social impact were more likely to be amplified. While the different types of misinformation (manipulated, fabricated, or satire) and emotions were not associated with amplification, the type of fact-check labels did influence the virality of misinformation. Specifically, posts that were flagged as false by Facebook were more likely to be amplified, while the virality of posts flagged as containing partially false information was attenuated. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, Edmund W.J. & Bao, Huanyu & Wang, Yixi & Lim, Yi Torng, 2023. "From pandemic to Plandemic: Examining the amplification and attenuation of COVID-19 misinformation on social media," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 328(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:328:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623003362
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115979
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623003362
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115979?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. Roxanne E. Lewis & Michael G. Tyshenko, 2009. "The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 714-728, May.
    2. Christopher D. Wirz & Michael A. Xenos & Dominique Brossard & Dietram Scheufele & Jennifer H. Chung & Luisa Massarani, 2018. "Rethinking Social Amplification of Risk: Social Media and Zika in Three Languages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2599-2624, December.
    3. Yu Jie Ng & Z. Janet Yang & Arun Vishwanath, 2018. "To fear or not to fear? Applying the social amplification of risk framework on two environmental health risks in Singapore," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(12), pages 1487-1501, December.
    4. Dietram A. Scheufele & Nicole M. Krause, 2019. "Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(16), pages 7662-7669, April.
    5. 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.
    6. John Fellenor & Julie Barnett & Clive Potter & Julie Urquhart & J.D. Mumford & C.P. Quine, 2018. "The social amplification of risk on Twitter: the case of ash dieback disease in the United Kingdom," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(10), pages 1163-1183, October.
    7. Dominic H. P. Balog-Way & Katherine A. McComas, 2020. "COVID-19: Reflections on trust, tradeoffs, and preparedness," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7-8), pages 838-848, August.
    8. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.
    2. Huiyun Zhu & Kecheng Liu, 2021. "Capturing the Interplay between Risk Perception and Social Media Posting to Support Risk Response and Decision Making," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Carlos Carrasco-Farré, 2022. "The fingerprints of misinformation: how deceptive content differs from reliable sources in terms of cognitive effort and appeal to emotions," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Matteo Iacopini & Carlo R.M.A. Santagiustina, 2021. "Filtering the intensity of public concern from social media count data with jumps," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(4), pages 1283-1302, October.
    5. Susan Mello & Robert C. Hornik, 2016. "Media Coverage of Pediatric Environmental Health Risks and its Effects on Mothers’ Protective Behaviors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(3), pages 605-622, March.
    6. Constanze Rossmann & Lisa Meyer & Peter J. Schulz, 2018. "The Mediated Amplification of a Crisis: Communicating the A/H1N1 Pandemic in Press Releases and Press Coverage in Europe," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 357-375, February.
    7. Christopher D. Wirz & Michael A. Xenos & Dominique Brossard & Dietram Scheufele & Jennifer H. Chung & Luisa Massarani, 2018. "Rethinking Social Amplification of Risk: Social Media and Zika in Three Languages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2599-2624, December.
    8. Yanlan Mei & Yan Tu & Kefan Xie & Yicheng Ye & Wenjing Shen, 2019. "Internet Public Opinion Risk Grading under Emergency Event Based on AHPSort II-DEMATEL," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Chen, Long & Huang, Jiahui & Jing, Peng & Wang, Bichen & Yu, Xiaozhou & Zha, Ye & Jiang, Chengxi, 2023. "Changing or unchanging Chinese attitudes toward ride-hailing? A social media analytics perspective from 2018 to 2021," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    10. Jamie K. Wardman & Ragnar Löfstedt, 2018. "Anticipating or Accommodating to Public Concern? Risk Amplification and the Politics of Precaution Reexamined," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1802-1819, September.
    11. Ik Jae Chung, 2011. "Social Amplification of Risk in the Internet Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(12), pages 1883-1896, December.
    12. Jun Sekizawa, 2013. "Other Aspects of BSE Issues in East Asian Countries," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 1952-1957, November.
    13. Yaodong Yang & Huaqing Ren & Han Zhang, 2022. "Understanding Consumer Panic Buying Behaviors during the Strict Lockdown on Omicron Variant: A Risk Perception View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    14. Yao Lu & Zheng Ji & Xiaoqi Zhang & Yanqiao Zheng & Han Liang, 2020. "Re-Thinking the Role of Government Information Intervention in the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Agent-Based Modeling Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-17, December.
    15. Yongyou Nie & Jinbu Zhao & Yiyi Zhang & Jizhi Zhou, 2020. "Risk Evaluation of “Not-In-My-Back-Yard” Conflict Potential in Facilities Group: A Case Study of Chemical Park in Xuwei New District, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Roxanne E. Lewis & Michael G. Tyshenko, 2009. "The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 714-728, May.
    17. Loredana Antronico & Roberto Coscarelli & Francesco De Pascale & Giovanni Gull?, 2018. "La comunicazione del rischio e la percezione pubblica dei disastri: il caso studio della frana di Maierato (Calabria, Italia)," PRISMA Economia - Societ? - Lavoro, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 9-29.
    18. 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).
    19. Hung‐Chih Hung & Tzu‐Wen Wang, 2011. "Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 668-683, April.
    20. Robert D. Jagiello & Thomas T. Hills, 2018. "Bad News Has Wings: Dread Risk Mediates Social Amplification in Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(10), pages 2193-2207, October.

    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:328:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623003362. 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.