Cited by 31Misinformation and Its ImpactsCommunication and COVID-19 ImpactAcademic Publishing and Open Access

Information about the COVID-19 pandemic – A thematic analysis of different ways of perceiving true and untrue information

Open access
Glasdam, Stinne, Stjernswärd, Sigrid·2020·Social Sciences & Humanities Open

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is classified as an infodemic with the circulation of vast amounts of true and untrue information, especially through social media. The study’s aim was to explore different articulations of people’s understanding, handling and evaluation of (true) information, misinformation and disinformation in general and specifically linked to social media related to the COVID-19 pandemic, to illuminate the complexity of the construction of true information. A latent thematic analysis of qualitative data from an international web-based survey on COVID-19 and social media was carried out. The analysis resulted in five themes showing participants’ understanding and assessment of what is deemed as (true) information, misinformation and disinformation. An underlying dominant medico-political discourse on COVID-19 was seen in the articulations about COVID-19. There were expressions showing that scientific knowledge and political viewpoints were met with both blind trust and scepticism, journalists’ information represented a conglomerate of truth and lies, healthcare professionals’ recognition vacillated between trusted and guessing experts, social media were an arena for all kinds of information, and the need for filtering information on COVID-19, although this was impossible as knowledge of COVID-19 was generally considered to be uncertain. What was understood as (true) information, misinformation or disinformation was dependent on the viewpoint of the information consumers and influences potentially affecting their perspectives. Social media could be used to support one’s point of view, whether in line with the dominant medico-political discourse on COVID-19 or not.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100090

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prior experiences with and attitudes towards the trustee are essential antecedents of trust in information found on social media.

    “People's prior experiences with and attitudes towards the trustee infuence their perceptions of that trustee and have been shown to be essential antecedents of trust in information found on social media [5,31,32,40,122].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Bourdieu, P. (1995). 'What talking means'. In Sociology in question (pp. 60-71). London: Sage Publications. London.
  2. qp063oa · DOI · Paper page
  3. S177247 · DOI
  4. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulous, A., & Nielsen, R. K. (2019). Reuters institute digital news report 2019. Reuters institute for the study of journalism. Oxford.
  5. Nielsen, R. K., Fletcher, R., Newman, N., Brennen, J. S., & Howard, P. N. (2020). Navigating the 'infodemic': How people in six countries access and rate news and information about coronavirus. Report. Reuters institute, oxford internet institute and oxford maritime school. Oxford.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Glasdam, S., & Stjernswärd, S.
Affiliations
Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Glasdam, Stinne
Venue
Social Sciences & Humanities Open
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
100090
ISSN
2590-2911 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3108419994
Cited by
31
References
32
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10
FWCI
8.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Sciences & Humanities Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Lund University, Sweden
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, infodemic, misinformation, disinformation, social media, trust in experts, information filtering, skepticism, scientific knowledge, healthcare workers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review