Search

BackgroundIn an effort to signal the authenticity of user accounts, social networking sites (SNSs) such as Facebook and X, formerly known as Twitter, use visual heuristics (blue checkmarks) to signify whether accounts are verified. While these verification badges are generally well recognized (and often coveted) by SNS users, relatively little is known about how they affect users’ perceptions of accuracy or their likelihood of engaging with web-based information. This is particularly true in the case of information posted by medical experts and health care professionals. ObjectiveThis study aims to use an experimental survey design to assess the effect of these verification badges on SNS users’ assessments of information accuracy as well as their proclivity to recirculate health information or follow verified medical experts in their social network. MethodsA survey experiment using random assignment was conducted on a representative sample of 534 adult SNS users in Florida, United States. A total of 2 separate experimental scenarios exposed users to vaccine-related posts from verified medical experts on X. In each case, the original post contained a platform-issued verification badge (treatment group), which was subsequently edited out of the image as an experimental control. For each scenario, respondents were randomly assigned to either the treatment or control group, and responses to 3 follow-up questions were assessed through a series of chi-square analyses and 2 logit regression models. Responses were fielded using a stratified quota sampling approach to ensure representativeness of the state’s population based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, and political affiliation. ResultsUsers’ assessments of information accuracy were not significantly impacted by the presence or absence of verification badges, and users exposed to the experimental treatment (verification badge) were not any more likely to repost the message or follow the author. While verification badges did not influence users’ assessments or subsequent behaviors, reliance on social media for health-related information and political affiliation were substantial predictors of accuracy assessments in both experimental scenarios. In scenario 1, which included a post addressing COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, users who relied on social media “a great deal” for health information were 2 times more likely to assess the post as accurate (odds ratio 2.033, 95% CI 1.129-3.661; P=.01). In scenario 2, which included a post about measles vaccines, registered Republicans were nearly 6 times less likely to assess the post as accurate (odds ratio 0.171, 95% CI 0.097-0.299; P

BackgroundResearch examining online health communities suggests that individuals affected by chronic health conditions can obtain valuable information and social support through participation in peer-to-peer web-based information exchanges, including information sharing and seeking behaviors. The risks and rewards of these same behaviors in the case of acute illnesses, such as COVID-19, are less well understood, though there is reason to believe that individuals with COVID-19 and other acute illnesses may accrue similar benefits. ObjectiveThis study examines the propensity of American adults to disclose and discuss their COVID-19 diagnosis and symptoms on social media while actively infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, as well as to engage in peer-to-peer information seeking in order to better understand the illness that they are experiencing. Additionally, this study seeks to identify the motivations for these behaviors as well as their subsequent impacts on perceived social connectedness and health anxiety in patients with COVID-19. MethodsWe conducted a representative survey of 2500 US-based adults using a sample purchased through an industry-leading market research provider. Participants were selected through a stratified quota sampling approach to ensure a representative sample of the US population. Balanced quotas were determined (by region of the country) for gender, age, race, ethnicity, and political affiliation. Responses were analyzed from 946 participants who reported having an active social media account and testing positive for COVID-19 at least once since the start of the pandemic. ResultsThe results show that only a small portion of social media users (166/946, 18%) chose to disclose and discuss their COVID-19 diagnosis while infected with the virus. However, among those who did, an overwhelming majority (206/251, 82%) said that doing so helped them feel more connected and supported while infected with the virus. A larger percentage of the 946 respondents (n=319, 34%) engaged in peer-to-peer information seeking while infected with COVID-19. Among those who did, a large majority (301/319, 94%) said that doing so was “helpful,” but more than one-third (115/319, 36%) said that reading about other people’s experiences made them “more worried” about having COVID-19, while 33% (108/319) said that it made them “less worried.” Illness severity and political affiliation were significant predictors of both information sharing and seeking. ConclusionsThe findings suggest that the benefits (and risks) associated with online health communities are germane to patients with acute illnesses such as COVID-19. It is recommended that public health officials and health care providers take a proactive approach to cultivating professionally moderated forums supporting peer-to-peer engagement during future outbreaks of COVID-19 and other acute illnesses in order to improve patient outcomes and promote social support and connectedness among infected patients.