Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38734610›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2024

Does a perceptual gap lead to actions against digital misinformation? A third-person effect study among medical students.

Zongya Li, Jun Yan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Zongya LiJournalism and Information Communication School, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4479-5971
Jun YanJournalism and Information Communication School, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China. junyan@hust.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-9539-8466

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe are making progress in the fight against health-related misinformation, but mass participation and active engagement are far from adequate. Focusing on pre-professional medical students with above-average medical knowledge, our study examined whether and how third-person perceptions (TPP), which hypothesize that people tend to perceive media messages as having a greater effect on others than on themselves, would motivate their actions against misinformation.

methodsWe collected the cross-sectional data through a self-administered paper-and-pencil survey of 1,500 medical students in China during April 2022.

resultsStructural equation modeling (SEM) analysis, showed that TPP was negatively associated with medical students' actions against digital misinformation, including rebuttal of misinformation and promotion of corrective information. However, self-efficacy and collectivism served as positive predictors of both actions. Additionally, we found professional identification failed to play a significant role in influencing TPP, while digital misinformation self-efficacy was found to broaden the third-person perceptual gap and collectivism tended to reduce the perceptual bias significantly.

conclusionsOur study contributes both to theory and practice. It extends the third-person effect theory by moving beyond the examination of restrictive actions and toward the exploration of corrective and promotional actions in the context of misinformation., It also lends a new perspective to the current efforts to counter digital misinformation; involving pre-professionals (in this case, medical students) in the fight.

Indexed as

CommunicationStudents, MedicalAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleSelf EfficacySurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCollectivismDigital misinformationEfficacyPre-professionalsProfessional identificationThird-person perception

Identifiers

PMID38734610
PMCPMC11088137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.