Division of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Government, Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut, USA.
Health Commun. 2023 Feb;38(2):349-362. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2021.1951958. Epub 2021 Jul 14.
As scientific evidence evolves and clinical guidelines change, a certain amount of conflicting health information in the news media is to be expected. However, research is needed to better understand the public's level of exposure to conflicting health information and the possible consequences of such exposure. This study quantifies levels of public exposure to one paradigmatic case: conflicting information about breast cancer screening for women in their 40s. Using a nationally-representative survey of U.S. adults aged 18-59 in 2016, we implemented four distinct types of measures of exposure to conflicting mammography information: an ecological measure based on keyword counts of local news closed-captioning, an inferred exposure measure based on a series of knowledge questions, a thought-listing exercise where respondents described their perceptions of mammography without prompting, and an explicit measure of self-assessed exposure to conflict. We examined the relationship between these exposure measures and four outcomes: confusion about mammography, backlash toward mammography recommendations, and confusion and backlash about health information more generally. We found moderate amounts of exposure to conflicting information about mammography, more among women than men. Exposure to conflicting information - across multiple measures - was associated with more confusion about mammography, more mammography-related backlash, and general health information backlash, but not general confusion about health information. These observational findings corroborate experimental-based findings that suggest potentially undesirable effects of exposure to conflicting health information. More research is needed to better understand how to mitigate these possible outcomes, in the context of a media landscape that proliferates exposure to multiple scientific perspectives.
随着科学证据的不断发展和临床指南的变化，新闻媒体中出现一定数量的相互矛盾的健康信息是可以预料的。然而，需要进行研究，以更好地了解公众接触相互矛盾的健康信息的程度以及这种接触可能产生的后果。本研究量化了公众接触一个典型案例的程度：有关 40 多岁女性乳腺癌筛查的相互矛盾的信息。本研究使用了 2016 年对美国 18-59 岁成年人进行的全国代表性调查，实施了四种不同类型的接触相互矛盾的乳房 X 光检查信息的测量方法：基于本地新闻字幕关键词计数的生态测量方法、基于一系列知识问题的推断接触测量方法、在没有提示的情况下让受访者描述他们对乳房 X 光检查的看法的思维列表练习，以及自我评估接触冲突的明确测量方法。我们研究了这些接触措施与四个结果之间的关系：对乳房 X 光检查的困惑、对乳房 X 光检查建议的抵触，以及对一般健康信息的困惑和抵触。我们发现，人们接触到有关乳房 X 光检查的相互矛盾的信息的程度中等，女性比男性更高。接触相互矛盾的信息——通过多种测量方法——与对乳房 X 光检查的困惑程度增加、与乳房 X 光检查相关的抵触增加以及对一般健康信息的抵触增加有关，但与对一般健康信息的困惑无关。这些观察结果与基于实验的发现相吻合，表明接触相互矛盾的健康信息可能会产生不良影响。需要进一步研究如何在媒体环境中传播多种科学观点的情况下减轻这些可能的后果。
