Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39882127›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Cyber anti-intellectualism and science communication during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study.

Yan Kuang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 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.

Yan KuangSchool of Journalism and New Media, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, science communication played a crucial role in disseminating accurate information and promoting scientific literacy among the public. However, the rise of anti-intellectualism on social media platforms has posed significant challenges to science, scientists, and science communication, hindering effective public engagement with scientific affairs. This study aims to explore the mechanisms through which anti-intellectualism impacts science communication on social media platforms from the perspective of communication effect theory. Method: This study employed a cross-sectional research design to conduct an online questionnaire survey of Chinese social media users from August to September 2021. The survey results were analyzed via descriptive statistics, Results: There were significant differences in anti-intellectualism tendency among groups of different demographic characteristics. The majority of respondents placed greater emphasis on knowledge that has practical benefits in life. Respondents' trust in different groups of intellectuals showed significant inconsistencies, with economists and experts receiving the lowest levels of trust. Anti-intellectualism significantly and positively predicted the level of misconception of scientific and technological information, while significantly and negatively predicting individuals' attitudes toward science communication. It further influenced respondents' behavior in disseminating scientific and technological information through the chain mediation of scientific misconception and attitudes toward science communication. Conclusion: This research enriches the conceptual framework of anti-intellectualism across various cultural contexts, as well as the theoretical framework concerning the interaction between anti-intellectualism and science communication. The findings provide suggestions for developing strategies to enhance the effectiveness of science communication and risk communication during public emergencies.

Indexed as

CommunicationCOVID-19Information DisseminationScienceSocial MediaAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesTrustanti-intellectualismchain mediation modelcommunication effectCOVID-19expert trustscience communication

Identifiers

PMID39882127
PMCPMC11774729

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.