ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2022
When the influencer says jump! How influencer signaling affects engagement with COVID-19 misinformation.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining the spread of nutrition-based misinformation by TikTok influencers: an experimental analysis of trust among young adults.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2026Article
- Is Social Media a Boon or Bane for Orthodontics in the Current Digital Age: A Cross-Sectional Electronic Survey.Cureus · 2025Article
- Helpful or harmful? Navigating the impact of social media influencers' health advice: insights from health expert content creators.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Social Media Promotion of Health Tests With Potential for Overdiagnosis or Overuse: Protocol for a Content Analysis.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With signaling theory, credibility, and social media engagement (SME) as guiding frameworks, this study used an experiment to examine how social media influencers (SMIs) affect how people engage with COVID-19 misinformation. SMI-promoted information elicited more SME, credibility, and purchase likelihood than non-SMI promoted information. The most effective message was a post promoted by an SMI that contained detailed information about an authentic product. However, data indicated nuance regarding the effect of SMIs. The authenticity of the information as well as the amount of detail in the post played a role. Additionally, mediated effects analysis showed that the impact of SME on purchase likelihood was higher among non-SMI followers. Data suggests that using a multi-signal messaging approach is suitable regardless of promotion by an SMI. This has important implications to public health messaging and the author discusses how health agencies may effectively signal information to the public.
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.