The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evidence from internet search data shows information-seeking responses to news of local COVID-19 cases
Open accessAbstract
The COVID-19 outbreak is a global pandemic with community circulation in many countries, including the United States, with confirmed cases in all states. The course of this pandemic will be shaped by how governments enact timely policies and disseminate information and by how the public reacts to policies and information. Here, we examine information-seeking responses to the first COVID-19 case public announcement in a state. Using an event study framework for all US states, we show that such news increases collective attention to the crisis right away. However, the elevated level of attention is short-lived, even though the initial announcements are followed by increasingly strong policy measures. Specifically, searches for “coronavirus” increased by about 36% (95% CI: 27 to 44%) on the day immediately after the first case announcement but decreased back to the baseline level in less than a week or two. We find that people respond to the first report of COVID-19 in their state by immediately seeking information about COVID-19, as measured by searches for coronavirus, coronavirus symptoms, and hand sanitizer. On the other hand, searches for information regarding community-level policies (e.g., quarantine, school closures, testing) or personal health strategies (e.g., masks, grocery delivery, over-the-counter medications) do not appear to be immediately triggered by first reports. These results are representative of the study period being relatively early in the epidemic, and more-elaborate policy responses were not yet part of the public discourse. Further analysis should track evolving patterns of responses to subsequent flows of public information.
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
An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time
Dong, E., Du, H., & Gardner, L. (2020) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30120-1 · Cited by 10,048
The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak
Chinazzi, M., Davis, J. T., Ajelli, M., Gioannini, C., Litvinova, M., Merler, S., Pastore y Piontti, A., Mu, K., Rossi, L., Sun, K., et al. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aba9757 · Cited by 3,694
The Parable of Google Flu: Traps in Big Data Analysis
Lazer, D., Kennedy, R., King, G., & Vespignani, A. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1248506 · Cited by 2,523
Designing Difference in Difference Studies: Best Practices for Public Health Policy Research
Wing, C., Simon, K., & Bello-Gomez, R. A. (2018) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-013507 · Cited by 1,470 · cited 1×
“The third limitation comes from potential confounding factors in our event study framework, including anticipatory behavior and unobservable local events (15).”
BackgroundSelf-citationPublic health interventions and epidemic intensity during the 1918 influenza pandemic
Hatchett, R. J., Mecher, C. E., & Lipsitch, M. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0610941104 · Cited by 778 · cited 1×
“These nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are effective and powerful ways to control transmission (7), as shown by earlier epidemics (8) and the steady decline of COVID-19 cases in China (2).”
Cited by
Social distancing responses to COVID-19 emergency declarations strongly differentiated by income
Weill, J. A., Stigler, M., Deschenes, O., & Springborn, M. R. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2009412117 · Cited by 406
Kim, H. K., Ahn, J., Atkinson, L., & Kahlor, L. A. (2020) · Science Communication · doi:10.1177/1075547020959670 · Cited by 313
Fridman, I., Lucas, N., Henke, D., & Zigler, C. K. (2020) · JMIR Public Health and Surveillance · doi:10.2196/22060 · Cited by 264
Global Infodemiology of COVID-19: Analysis of Google Web Searches and Instagram Hashtags.
Rovetta, A., & Bhagavathula, A. S. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/20673 · Cited by 182
Powering an AI Chatbot with Expert Sourcing to Support Credible Health Information Access
Xiao, Z., Liao, Q. V., Zhou, M., Grandison, T., & Li, Y. (2023) · Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3581641.3584031 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Bento, A. I., Nguyen, T., Wing, C., Lozano-Rojas, F., Ahn, Y.-Y., & Simon, K.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2020-05-04
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 11220-11222
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W3021141494
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 77.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Evidence from internet search data shows information-seeking responses to news of local COVID-19 cases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.2005335117
- The paper
- Bento, A. I., Nguyen, T., Wing, C., Lozano-Rojas, F., Ahn, Y.-Y., & Simon, K. (2020). Evidence from internet search data shows information-seeking responses to news of local COVID-19 cases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2005335117
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.