ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
Factors Predicting Willingness to Share COVID-19 Misinformation.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Psychological factors contributing to the creation and dissemination of fake news among social media users: a systematic review.BMC psychology · 2024Pooled it
- Contemporary trends in psychological research on conspiracy beliefs. A systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Pooled it
- Summarising data and factors associated with COVID-19 related conspiracy theories in the first year of the pandemic: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.BMC psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Pooled it
- Alternative theories of COVID-19: social dimensions and information sources.Journal of public health policy · 2025Review
- Source-credibility information and social norms improve truth discernment and reduce engagement with misinformation online.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- [Mis- and disinformation in social media: mitigating risks in digital health communication].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Review
- What motivates individuals to share information with governments when adopting health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic?BMC public health · 2023Article
- The role of perceived minority-group status in the conspiracy beliefs of factual majority groups.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine-specific COVID-19 misinformation on social media: A scoping review.Integrative medicine research · 2023Article
- Impact of Social Reference Cues on Misinformation Sharing on Social Media: Series of Experimental Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Acceptance and Adherence to COVID-19 Preventive Measures are Shaped Predominantly by Conspiracy Beliefs, Mistrust in Science and Fear - A Comparison of More than 20 Psychological Variables.Psychological reports · 2023Article
- Avoiding Covid-19 risk information in the United States: The role of attitudes, norms, affect, social dominance orientations, and perceived trustworthiness of scientists.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2023Article
- Scientific reasoning is associated with rejection of unfounded health beliefs and adherence to evidence-based regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Varieties of corona news: a cross-national study on the foundations of online misinformation production during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of computational social science · 2023Article
- Distractions, analytical thinking and falling for fake news: A survey of psychological factors.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2023Review
- Article
- What predicts people's belief in COVID-19 misinformation? A retrospective study using a nationwide online survey among adults residing in the United States.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a preregistered exploratory survey to assess whether patterns of individual differences in political orientation, social dominance orientation (SDO), traditionalism, conspiracy ideation, or attitudes about science predict willingness to share different kinds of misinformation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic online. Analyses revealed two orthogonal models of individual differences predicting the willingness to share misinformation over social media platforms. Both models suggest a sizable role of different aspects of political belief, particularly SDO, in predicting tendencies to share different kinds of misinformation, predominantly conspiracy theories. Although exploratory, results from this study can contribute to the formulation of a socio-cognitive profile of individuals who act as vectors for the spread of scientific misinformation online, and can be useful for computationally modeling misinformation diffusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.