TY - JOUR
T1 - Experience, experts, statistics, or just science? Predictors and consequences of reliance on different evidence types during the COVID-19 infodemic
AU - Lu, Hang
AU - Chu, Haoran
AU - Ma, Yanni
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2021.
PY - 2021/7
Y1 - 2021/7
N2 - As an unprecedented global disease outbreak, the COVID-19 pandemic is also accompanied by an infodemic. To better cope with the pandemic, laypeople need to process information in ways that help guide informed judgments and decisions. Such information processing likely involves the reliance on various evidence types. Extending the Risk Information Seeking and Processing model via a two-wave survey (N = 1284), we examined the predictors and consequences of US-dwelling Chinese’s reliance on four evidence types (i.e. scientific, statistical, experiential, and expert) regarding COVID-19 information. Overall, Risk Information Seeking and Processing variables such as information insufficiency and perceived information gathering capacity predicted the use of all four evidence types. However, other Risk Information Seeking and Processing variables (e.g. informational subjective norms) did not emerge as important predictors. In addition, different evidence types had different associations with subsequent disease prevention behaviors and satisfaction with the US government’s action to address the pandemic. Finally, discrete emotions varied in their influences on the use of evidence types, behaviors, and satisfaction. The findings provide potentially valuable contributions to science and health communication theory and practice.
AB - As an unprecedented global disease outbreak, the COVID-19 pandemic is also accompanied by an infodemic. To better cope with the pandemic, laypeople need to process information in ways that help guide informed judgments and decisions. Such information processing likely involves the reliance on various evidence types. Extending the Risk Information Seeking and Processing model via a two-wave survey (N = 1284), we examined the predictors and consequences of US-dwelling Chinese’s reliance on four evidence types (i.e. scientific, statistical, experiential, and expert) regarding COVID-19 information. Overall, Risk Information Seeking and Processing variables such as information insufficiency and perceived information gathering capacity predicted the use of all four evidence types. However, other Risk Information Seeking and Processing variables (e.g. informational subjective norms) did not emerge as important predictors. In addition, different evidence types had different associations with subsequent disease prevention behaviors and satisfaction with the US government’s action to address the pandemic. Finally, discrete emotions varied in their influences on the use of evidence types, behaviors, and satisfaction. The findings provide potentially valuable contributions to science and health communication theory and practice.
KW - COVID-19
KW - emotion
KW - evidence
KW - information processing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85105056091&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/09636625211009685
DO - 10.1177/09636625211009685
M3 - Article
C2 - 33892612
AN - SCOPUS:85105056091
SN - 0963-6625
VL - 30
SP - 515
EP - 534
JO - Public Understanding of Science
JF - Public Understanding of Science
IS - 5
ER -