IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i5p2243-d505103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Science Literacy Guarantee Resistance to Health Rumors? The Moderating Effect of Self-Efficacy of Science Literacy in the Relationship between Science Literacy and Rumor Belief

Author

Listed:
  • Lingnan He

    (School of Communication and Design, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510006, China
    Department of Psychology, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510006, China
    Guangdong Key Laboratory for Big Data Analysis and Simulation of Public Opinion, Guangzhou 510006, China)

  • Yue Chen

    (School of Communication and Design, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510006, China)

  • Xiling Xiong

    (School of Tourism Management, Sun Yat-Sen University, Zhuhai 519000, China)

  • Xiqian Zou

    (School of Journalism and Communication, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China)

  • Kaisheng Lai

    (School of Journalism and Communication, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China)

Abstract

Health rumors not only incite unnecessary fears and skepticism, but may also cause individuals to refuse effective remedy and thus delay their treatment. Studies have found that health literacy may help the public identify the falsity of health rumors and avoid their negative impact. However, whether other types of literacy work in helping people disbelieve health rumors is still unknown. With a national survey in China (N = 1646), our study examined the effect of science literacy on rumor belief and further analyzed the moderating role of self-efficacy of science literacy in their relationship. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that science literacy significantly decreased the likelihood of people believing in health rumors, and moderator analysis showed that self-efficacy of science literacy plays a moderating role in this relationship; such that the relationship between science literacy and health rumor belief would be weakened if one′s self-efficacy of science literacy was low. This finding reveals that during campaigns to combat health rumors, improving and enhancing the self-efficacy of people′s science literacy is an effective way to prevent them from believing in health rumors. Our study highlights the benefits of science education in public health and the improvement of public science literacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Lingnan He & Yue Chen & Xiling Xiong & Xiqian Zou & Kaisheng Lai, 2021. "Does Science Literacy Guarantee Resistance to Health Rumors? The Moderating Effect of Self-Efficacy of Science Literacy in the Relationship between Science Literacy and Rumor Belief," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-10, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2243-:d:505103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2243/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2243/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas DiFonzo, 2013. "Rumour research can douse digital wildfires," Nature, Nature, vol. 493(7431), pages 135-135, January.
    2. Lingnan He & Haoshen Yang & Xiling Xiong & Kaisheng Lai, 2019. "Online Rumor Transmission Among Younger and Older Adults," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, September.
    3. Kathleen D. Dyer & Raymond E. Hall, 2019. "Effect of Critical Thinking Education on Epistemically Unwarranted Beliefs in College Students," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 60(3), pages 293-314, May.
    4. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    5. Hu, Yuhan & Pan, Qiuhui & Hou, Wenbing & He, Mingfeng, 2018. "Rumor spreading model considering the proportion of wisemen in the crowd," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 505(C), pages 1084-1094.
    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. Jennifer Dykema & Cameron P. Jones & Dana Garbarski & Mia Farias & Dorothy Farrar Edwards, 2022. "Exploring the Relationship between Medical Research Literacy and Respondents’ Expressed Likelihood to Participate in a Clinical Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-13, November.
    2. Nanae Tanemura & Tsuyoshi Chiba, 2022. "The usefulness of a checklist approach-based confirmation scheme in identifying unreliable COVID-19-related health information: a case study in Japan," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, December.
    3. Lingfei Wang & Mengmeng Yue & Guoyan Wang, 2023. "Too Real to be Questioned: Analysis of the Factors Influencing the Spread of Online Scientific Rumors in China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.

    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. Huo, Liang’an & Chen, Sijing, 2020. "Rumor propagation model with consideration of scientific knowledge level and social reinforcement in heterogeneous network," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 559(C).
    2. Sweldens, Steven & Puntoni, Stefano & Paolacci, Gabriele & Vissers, Maarten, 2014. "The bias in the bias: Comparative optimism as a function of event social undesirability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 229-244.
    3. Nenycz-Thiel, Magda & Romaniuk, Jenni, 2011. "The nature and incidence of private label rejection," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 93-99.
    4. G. Rejikumar & Aswathy Asokan-Ajitha & Sofi Dinesh & Ajay Jose, 2022. "The role of cognitive complexity and risk aversion in online herd behavior," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 585-621, June.
    5. Stalker, Katie Cotter & Wu, Qi & Evans, Caroline B.R. & Smokowski, Paul R., 2018. "The impact of the positive action program on substance use, aggression, and psychological functioning: Is school climate a mechanism of change?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 143-151.
    6. Mr Clive Boddy & Mr Derek Bond & Dr Elaine Ramsey, 2010. "Projective Techniques Are they a Victim of Clashing Paradigms," Accounting, Finance and Economics Research Group Working Papers 1, Ulster Business School.
    7. Frode Alfnes & Chengyan Yue & Helen H. Jensen, 2010. "Cognitive dissonance as a means of reducing hypothetical bias," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(2), pages 147-163, June.
    8. Ruvio, Ayalla A. & Shoham, Aviv, 2016. "Consumer arrogance: Scale development and validation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 3989-3997.
    9. Jie, Yun, 2020. "Responding to requests for help: Effects of payoff schemes with small monetary units," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    10. Datta Gupta, Nabanita & Lausten, Mette & Pozzoli, Dario, 2012. "Does Mother Know Best? Parental Discrepancies in Assessing Child Functioning," IZA Discussion Papers 6962, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Gabriel, Andreas & Rombach, Meike & Wieser, Hannah & Bitsch, Vera, 2021. "Got waste: knowledge, behavior and self-assessment on food waste of university students in Germany," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(6), February.
    12. Ana León-Gómez & José Manuel Santos-Jaén & Daniel Ruiz-Palomo & Mercedes Palacios-Manzano, 2022. "Disentangling the impact of ICT adoption on SMEs performance: the mediating roles of corporate social responsibility and innovation," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 13(3), pages 831-866, September.
    13. Carvalho, Sergio W. & Fazel, Hesham & Trifts, Valerie, 2018. "Transgressing a group value in a transcultural experience: Immigrants' affective response to perceived social identity threats," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 326-333.
    14. An, Xuming & Ding, Li & Hu, Ping, 2020. "Information propagation with individual attention-decay effect on activity-driven networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 556(C).
    15. Rimal, Arbindra & Fletcher, Stanley M. & McWatters, Kay H., 2000. "Nutrition Considerations In Food Selection," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16.
    16. Sjöstedt, Martin & Sundström, Aksel & Jagers, Sverker C. & Ntuli, Herbert, 2022. "Governance through community policing: What makes citizens report poaching of wildlife to state officials?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    17. María Dolores Aledo‐Ruiz & Eva Martínez‐Caro & José Manuel Santos‐Jaén, 2022. "The influence of corporate social responsibility on students' emotional appeal in the HEIs: The mediating effect of reputation and corporate image," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 578-592, May.
    18. Lergetporer, Philipp & Piopiunik, Marc & Simon, Lisa, 2021. "Does the education level of refugees affect natives’ attitudes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    19. Burgstaller, Lilith & Feld, Lars P. & Pfeil, Katharina, 2022. "Working in the shadow: Survey techniques for measuring and explaining undeclared work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 661-671.
    20. Sha Yang & Yi Zhao & Ravi Dhar, 2010. "Modeling the Underreporting Bias in Panel Survey Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 525-539, 05-06.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2243-:d:505103. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.