Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39478793›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

How life circumstances during public health crises affect people to share and correct misinformation: a perspective of the third-person effect.

Xiang Tian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Xiang TianSchool of Media and Communication, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Misinformation spreading on social media often parallels public crises, such as the outbreak of COVID-19, because people's behaviors regarding misinformation may be influenced by their typical life circumstances. With the increasing severity of living conditions, misinformation is believed to spread more widely, while corrective behaviors tend to decrease. Furthermore, social comparison also affects the perception of life circumstances and subsequent behaviors. Taking Shanghai's COVID-19 lockdown as an example, this study examined whether two representative factors-the duration of the lockdown and the satisfaction with relief measures-affected people's tendency to share and correct misinformation. By employing the third-person effect (TPE) theory, the underlying mechanisms of social comparison were also explored. Methods: An online survey was conducted in April 2022, when the Zero-COVID policy was implemented in Shanghai. In addition to questions about life circumstances, a third-person perception scale, a behaviors of sharing misinformation scale, and a behaviors of correcting misinformation scale were included in the survey. Finally, 7,962 valid responses were collected. Results: It was found that both behaviors-sharing and correcting misinformation-were affected by life circumstances but in different ways. The evidence also supported the existence of third-person perception (TPP). It was observed that the relationship between satisfaction with relief measures and sharing behavior was mediated by Third-Person Perception. Conclusion: This study reveals that the proliferation of misinformation during crises is related to the deterioration of people's perception of life circumstances. Social comparison often plays a significant role, as was reflected by the TPE.

Indexed as

COVID-19health communicationmisinformationShanghai’s lockdownthird-person effect

Identifiers

PMID39478793
PMCPMC11521909

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.