Search

Despite the robust scientific evidence affirming the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, the proliferation of misinformation on social media platforms poses a threat by potentially exacerbating vaccine hesitancy. In response, certain social media platforms have taken measures to flag posts containing such misinformation with warning labels, aiming to dispel false beliefs. This present study employs a survey experiment (N = 304) to examine the effectiveness of two distinct warning labels – disputed and neutral warning labels – in the Twitter (the social media platform now known as X) context, specifically targeting misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. This study investigates the nuanced effects of vaccine hesitancy on the perceived credibility of debunked misinformation posts following the application of warning flags. The results demonstrated that disputed labels significantly reduced the perceived credibility of misinformation regarding anti-COVID-19 vaccines in comparison to posts without any labeling. Nevertheless, individuals exhibiting higher levels of vaccine hesitancy tended to view the misinformation as more credible than their counterparts with lower levels of hesitancy. These findings present the efficacy of warning labels in combatting misinformation on social media platforms, particularly among those who are least hesitant about vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study used rigorous meta-analytic approaches to analyze empirical agenda-setting studies published from 1972 to 2015, and 67 studies that met the inclusion criteria for analysis produced a moderate grand mean effect size of 0.487. A multiple regression analysis revealed one most notable predictor that classified the basis for the study correlation as either content categories or survey participants. A multiple regression of a subgroup using content categories produced homogeneity. The mean effect size for these studies was 0.51. This is an indication of consistency in findings across agenda-setting studies and the presence of strong news media's public agenda-setting effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]