• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

错误信息与美国埃博拉疫情传播危机:分析与引发恐慌的传染病爆发相关的社交媒体信息的真实性和内容

Misinformation and the US Ebola communication crisis: analyzing the veracity and content of social media messages related to a fear-inducing infectious disease outbreak.

作者信息

Sell Tara Kirk, Hosangadi Divya, Trotochaud Marc

机构信息

Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, Baltimore, USA.

Department of Environmental Health and Engineering Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.

出版信息

BMC Public Health. 2020 May 7;20(1):550. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-08697-3.

DOI:10.1186/s12889-020-08697-3
PMID:32375715
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7202904/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Ebola communication crisis of 2014 generated widespread fear and attention among Western news media, social media users, and members of the United States (US) public. Health communicators need more information on misinformation and the social media environment during a fear-inducing disease outbreak to improve communication practices. The purpose of this study was to describe the content of Ebola-related tweets with a specific focus on misinformation, political content, health related content, risk framing, and rumors.

METHODS

We examined tweets from a random 1% sample of all tweets published September 30th - October 30th, 2014, filtered for English-language tweets mentioning "Ebola" in the content or hashtag, that had at least 1 retweet (N = 72,775 tweets). A randomly selected subset of 3639 (5%) tweets were evaluated for inclusion. We analyzed the 3113 tweets that meet inclusion criteria using public health trained human coders to assess tweet characteristics (joke, opinion, discord), veracity (true, false, partially false), political context, risk frame, health context, Ebola specific messages, and rumors. We assessed the proportion of tweets with specific content using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Of non-joke tweets, 10% of Ebola-related tweets contained false or partially false information. Twenty-five percent were related to politics, 28% contained content that provoked reader response or promoted discord, 42% contained risk elevating messages and 72% were related to health. The most frequent rumor mentioned focused on government conspiracy. When comparing tweets with true information to tweets with misinformation, a greater percentage of tweets with misinformation were political in nature (36% vs 15%) and contained discord-inducing statements (45% vs 10%). Discord-inducing statements and political messages were both significantly more common in tweets containing misinformation compared with those without(p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Results highlight the importance of anticipating politicization of disease outbreaks, and the need for policy makers and social media companies to build partnerships and develop response frameworks in advance of an event. While each public health event is different, our findings provide insight into the possible social media environment during a future epidemic and could help optimize potential public health communication strategies.

摘要

背景

2014年埃博拉疫情引发的传播危机在西方新闻媒体、社交媒体用户以及美国公众中引起了广泛的恐惧和关注。在引发恐惧的疾病爆发期间,健康传播者需要更多关于错误信息和社交媒体环境的信息,以改进传播实践。本研究的目的是描述与埃博拉相关的推文内容,特别关注错误信息、政治内容、健康相关内容、风险框架和谣言。

方法

我们检查了2014年9月30日至10月30日发布的所有推文中随机抽取的1%样本,筛选出内容或主题标签中提及“埃博拉”的英文推文,这些推文至少有1次转发(N = 72775条推文)。随机抽取3639条(5%)推文作为评估纳入对象。我们使用经过公共卫生培训的人工编码员对符合纳入标准的3113条推文进行分析,以评估推文特征(笑话、观点、分歧)、真实性(真、假、部分虚假)、政治背景、风险框架、健康背景、埃博拉特定信息和谣言。我们使用描述性统计和卡方检验评估具有特定内容的推文比例。

结果

在非笑话推文中,10%的与埃博拉相关的推文包含虚假或部分虚假信息。25%与政治相关,28%包含引发读者反应或促进分歧的内容,42%包含风险提升信息,72%与健康相关。提及最多的谣言集中在政府阴谋。将包含真实信息的推文与包含错误信息的推文进行比较时,包含错误信息的推文中,具有政治性质的比例更高(36%对15%),且包含引发分歧的陈述(45%对10%)。与不包含错误信息的推文相比,包含错误信息的推文中引发分歧的陈述和政治信息都明显更常见(p < 0.001)。

结论

结果凸显了预见到疾病爆发政治化的重要性,以及政策制定者和社交媒体公司在事件发生前建立伙伴关系并制定应对框架的必要性。虽然每次公共卫生事件都不同,但我们的研究结果为未来疫情期间可能的社交媒体环境提供了见解,并有助于优化潜在的公共卫生传播策略。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b441/7203791/61b8460222a8/12889_2020_8697_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b441/7203791/ea2adb726995/12889_2020_8697_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b441/7203791/61b8460222a8/12889_2020_8697_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b441/7203791/ea2adb726995/12889_2020_8697_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b441/7203791/61b8460222a8/12889_2020_8697_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Misinformation and the US Ebola communication crisis: analyzing the veracity and content of social media messages related to a fear-inducing infectious disease outbreak.错误信息与美国埃博拉疫情传播危机:分析与引发恐慌的传染病爆发相关的社交媒体信息的真实性和内容
BMC Public Health. 2020 May 7;20(1):550. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-08697-3.
2
Local Health Departments Tweeting About Ebola: Characteristics and Messaging.地方卫生部门在推特上发布有关埃博拉的信息:特点与内容
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2017 Mar/Apr;23(2):e16-e24. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000342.
3
Too Far to Care? Measuring Public Attention and Fear for Ebola Using Twitter.关心过度?利用推特衡量公众对埃博拉的关注与恐惧。
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jun 13;19(6):e193. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7219.
4
Social Media's Initial Reaction to Information and Misinformation on Ebola, August 2014: Facts and Rumors.社交媒体对2014年8月埃博拉信息与错误信息的初步反应:事实与谣言
Public Health Rep. 2016 May-Jun;131(3):461-73. doi: 10.1177/003335491613100312.
5
What can we learn about the Ebola outbreak from tweets?从推文当中,我们能了解到有关埃博拉疫情的哪些信息呢?
Am J Infect Control. 2015 Jun;43(6):563-71. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.02.023.
6
News media coverage of U.S. Ebola policies: Implications for communication during future infectious disease threats.美国埃博拉政策的新闻媒体报道:对未来传染病威胁期间沟通的启示。
Prev Med. 2016 Dec;93:115-120. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.09.016. Epub 2016 Sep 21.
7
COVID-19 and the 5G Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data.新冠疫情与5G阴谋论:基于推特数据的社交网络分析
J Med Internet Res. 2020 May 6;22(5):e19458. doi: 10.2196/19458.
8
Analyzing Social Media Messaging on Masks and Vaccines: A Case Study on Misinformation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.分析社交媒体上关于口罩和疫苗的信息:以新冠疫情期间的错误信息为例
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2023 Jan 10:1-9. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2023.16.
9
"Thought I'd Share First" and Other Conspiracy Theory Tweets from the COVID-19 Infodemic: Exploratory Study.“我想率先分享”和其他有关 COVID-19 信息疫情的阴谋论推文:探索性研究。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Apr 14;7(4):e26527. doi: 10.2196/26527.
10
Geospatial Distribution of Local Health Department Tweets and Online Searches About Ebola During the 2014 Ebola Outbreak.2014年埃博拉疫情期间地方卫生部门关于埃博拉的推文及在线搜索的地理空间分布
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2018 Jun;12(3):287-290. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2017.69. Epub 2017 Aug 24.

引用本文的文献

1
Local response to global risk: a case study of risk perception and communication on Chinese social media regarding Fukushima's treated radioactive water discharge.对全球风险的本土反应:关于福岛处理后放射性废水排放问题在中国社交媒体上的风险认知与传播的案例研究
Sci Rep. 2025 May 25;15(1):18136. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-02845-8.
2
Anti-masking Posts on Instagram: Content Analysis During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Instagram上的反口罩帖子:COVID-19大流行期间的内容分析
Saf Health Work. 2025 Mar;16(1):27-35. doi: 10.1016/j.shaw.2024.11.002. Epub 2024 Nov 14.
3
When Infodemic Meets Epidemic: Systematic Literature Review.

本文引用的文献

1
How to fight an infodemic.如何应对信息疫情。
Lancet. 2020 Feb 29;395(10225):676. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30461-X.
2
The effects of corrective information about disease epidemics and outbreaks: Evidence from Zika and yellow fever in Brazil.疾病疫情纠正信息的影响:来自巴西寨卡和黄热病的证据。
Sci Adv. 2020 Jan 29;6(5):eaaw7449. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aaw7449. eCollection 2020 Jan.
3
Temporal trends in anti-vaccine discourse on Twitter.社交媒体上反疫苗言论的时间趋势
当信息疫情遇上疫情:系统文献综述
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2025 Feb 3;11:e55642. doi: 10.2196/55642.
4
Association Between X/Twitter and Prescribing Behavior During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Ecological Study.X/Twitter 与新冠大流行期间的处方行为之间的关联:回顾性生态研究。
JMIR Infodemiology. 2024 Nov 18;4:e56675. doi: 10.2196/56675.
5
Readiness to manage Ebola Virus Disease among emergency healthcare workers in Uganda: a nationwide multicenter survey.乌干达应急医护人员应对埃博拉病毒病能力准备情况:全国多中心调查。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Oct 23;24(1):1271. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11741-2.
6
A Comprehensive Analysis of COVID-19 Misinformation, Public Health Impacts, and Communication Strategies: Scoping Review.全面分析新冠病毒错误信息、公共卫生影响和传播策略:范围综述。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Aug 21;26:e56931. doi: 10.2196/56931.
7
Facebook's shared articles on HPV vaccination: analysis of persuasive strategies.脸书分享的 HPV 疫苗接种文章:说服策略分析。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Jun 24;24(1):1679. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-19099-0.
8
COVID-19 Vaccine Information and Infertility Posts on X: Insights on a Misinformation Pandemic.X 上的 COVID-19 疫苗信息和不孕不育帖子:对错误信息大流行的洞察。
Perm J. 2024 Jun 14;28(2):47-54. doi: 10.7812/TPP/23.142. Epub 2024 May 3.
9
Readiness To Manage Ebola Virus Disease Among Emergency Healthcare Workers in Uganda: A Nationwide Multicenter Survey.乌干达急诊医护人员应对埃博拉病毒病的准备情况:一项全国性多中心调查
Res Sq. 2024 Apr 9:rs.3.rs-4212996. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4212996/v1.
10
Perceptions and Knowledge of Public Towards Emerging Human Monkeypox in Yemen: A Cross-Sectional Study.也门公众对新出现的人类猴痘的认知与了解:一项横断面研究
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2023 Nov 30;16:3689-3701. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S442296. eCollection 2023.
Vaccine. 2019 Aug 14;37(35):4867-4871. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.06.086. Epub 2019 Jul 9.
4
How did Ebola information spread on twitter: broadcasting or viral spreading?埃博拉信息在推特上是如何传播的:广播还是病毒式传播?
BMC Public Health. 2019 Apr 25;19(1):438. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6747-8.
5
Institutional trust and misinformation in the response to the 2018-19 Ebola outbreak in North Kivu, DR Congo: a population-based survey.在应对 2018-19 年刚果民主共和国北基伍埃博拉疫情中的机构信任和错误信息:一项基于人群的调查。
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 May;19(5):529-536. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(19)30063-5. Epub 2019 Mar 27.
6
Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate.武器化的健康传播:推特机器人和俄罗斯水军放大疫苗辩论。
Am J Public Health. 2018 Oct;108(10):1378-1384. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304567. Epub 2018 Aug 23.
7
Tweeting about measles during stages of an outbreak: A semantic network approach to the framing of an emerging infectious disease. tweeted about measles during stages of an outbreak: A semantic network approach to the framing of an emerging infectious disease.
Am J Infect Control. 2018 Dec;46(12):1375-1380. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2018.05.019. Epub 2018 Jun 19.
8
The spread of true and false news online.网络上真实和虚假新闻的传播。
Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1146-1151. doi: 10.1126/science.aap9559.
9
The science of fake news.假新闻的科学。
Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1094-1096. doi: 10.1126/science.aao2998. Epub 2018 Mar 8.
10
A survey instrument for measuring vaccine acceptance.一种用于测量疫苗接受度的调查工具。
Prev Med. 2018 Apr;109:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.01.006. Epub 2018 Jan 11.