The DOI matches its Crossref record; 110 of the 110 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toward effective government communication strategies in the era of COVID-19
Open accessAbstract
Several countries have successfully reduced their COVID-19 infection rate early, while others have been overwhelmed. The reasons for the differences are complex, but response efficacy has in part depended on the speed and scale of governmental intervention and how communities have received, perceived, and acted on the information provided by governments and other agencies. While there is no ‘one size fits all’ communications strategy to deliver information during a prolonged crisis, in this article, we draw on key findings from scholarship in multiple social science disciplines to highlight some fundamental characteristics of effective governmental crisis communication. We then present ten recommendations for effective communication strategies to engender maximum support and participation. We argue that an effective communication strategy is a two-way process that involves clear messages, delivered via appropriate platforms, tailored for diverse audiences, and shared by trusted people. Ultimately, the long-term success depends on developing and maintaining public trust. We outline how government policymakers can engender widespread public support and participation through increased and ongoing community engagement. We argue that a diversity of community groups must be included in engagement activities. We also highlight the implications of emerging digital technologies in communication and engagement activities.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-42 · Cited by 13,697 · cited 1×
“Since a coherence of values is conducive to trust, civic engagement (or community engagement) is necessary to identify shared values and enable communities and social networks to be involved in the decisions that will affect them (Adler and Goggin, 2005; Miranti and Evans, 2019).”
BackgroundUsing social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response
Bavel, J. J. V., Baicker, K., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., Crockett, M. J., Crum, A. J., Douglas, K. M., Druckman, J. N., et al. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z · Cited by 4,964 · cited 2×
“This ‘frailty’ perspective risks suppressing community solidarity and resilience (Jetten et al., 2020; van Bavel et al., 2020).”
BackgroundThe Constructive, Destructive, and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms
Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x · Cited by 3,643
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504 · Cited by 2,714
Quantifying SARS-CoV-2 transmission suggests epidemic control with digital contact tracing
Ferretti, L., Wymant, C., Kendall, M., Zhao, L., Nurtay, A., Abeler-Dörner, L., Parker, M., Bonsall, D., & Fraser, C. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abb6936 · Cited by 2,512
Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era.
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017) · Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008 · Cited by 1,985
Self-citationPennycook, G., McPhetres, J., Zhang, Y., Lu, J. G., & Rand, D. G. (2020) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797620939054 · Cited by 1,715
Helping Doctors and Patients Make Sense of Health Statistics
Gigerenzer, G., Gaissmaier, W., Kurz-Milcke, E., Schwartz, L. M., & Woloshin, S. (2007) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6053.2008.00033.x · Cited by 1,336
(2008) · Cited by 1,325
The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories
Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M., & Cichocka, A. (2017) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721417718261 · Cited by 1,316
Cited by
The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y · Cited by 1,372
Self-citationSocial media trust: Fighting misinformation in the time of crisis
Shahbazi, M., & Bunker, D. (2024) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2024.102780 · Cited by 126
Continued Influence of Misinformation and the Information Disorder
Tay, L. Q., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2025) · The Remaking of Memory in the Age of the Internet and Social Media · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197661260.003.0009 · Cited by 12
Self-citationStrategies and bottlenecks to tackle infodemic in public health: a scoping review
Gentili, A., Villani, L., Osti, T., Corona, V. F., Gris, A. V., Zaino, A., Bonacquisti, M., De Maio, L., Solimene, V., Gualano, M. R., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1438981 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Hyland-Wood, B., Gardner, J., Leask, J., & Ecker, U. K. H.
- Venue
- Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
- Published
- 2021-01-27
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2055-1045 (ISSN-L)
- 2662-9992
- OpenAlex
- W3124278966
- Cited by
- 488
- References
- 110
- FWCI
- 122.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Toward effective government communication strategies in the era of COVID-19. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1057/s41599-020-00701-w
- The paper
- Hyland-Wood, B., Gardner, J., Leask, J., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2021). Toward effective government communication strategies in the era of COVID-19. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00701-w
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
