Faculty of Communication, Culture and Society, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
Department of Communication Studies, University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium.
BMC Public Health. 2023 Aug 18;23(1):1577. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16404-1.
The proliferation of health misinformation on social media is a growing public health concern. Online communities for mental health (OCMHs) are also considered an outlet for exposure to misinformation. This study explored the impact of the self-reported volume of exposure to mental health misinformation in misinformation agreement and the moderating effects of depression literacy and type of OCMHs participation (expert vs. peer-led).
Participants (n = 403) were recruited in Italian-speaking OCMHs on Facebook. We conducted regression analyses using PROCESS macro (moderated moderation, Model 3). Measures included: the Depression Literacy Questionnaire (Griffiths et al., 2004), the self-reported misinformation exposure in the OCMHs (3 items), and misinformation agreement with the exposure items (3 items). Whether participants were members of expert or peer-led OCMHs was also investigated.
The final model explained the 12% variance in the agreement. There was a positive and significant relationship between misinformation exposure and misinformation agreement (β = 0.3221, p < .001), a significant two-way interaction between misinformation exposure and depression literacy (β = - 0.2179, p = .0014 ), and between self-reported misinformation exposure and type of OCMH (β = - 0.2322, p = .0254), such that at higher levels of depression literacy and in case of participation to expert-led OCMHs, the relationship misinformation exposure-misinformation agreement was weaker. Finally, a three-way interaction was found (β = 0.2497, p = .0144) that showed that depression literacy moderated the positive relationship between misinformation exposure and misinformation agreement such that the more misinformation participants were exposed to, the more they agreed with it unless they had higher levels of depression literacy; this, however, occurred only if they participated in peer-led groups.
Results provide evidence that the more members reported being exposed to mental health misinformation, the more they tended to agree with it, however this was only visible when participants had lower depression literacy and were participating in peer-led OCMHs. Results of this study suggest that both internal factors (i.e., high depression literacy) and external factors (the type of online community individuals were participating in) can buffer the negative effects of misinformation exposure. It also suggests that increasing depression literacy and expert community moderation could curb the negative consequences of misinformation exposure related to mental health. Results will guide interventions to mitigate the effects of misinformation in OCMHs, including encouraging health professionals in their administration and implementing health education programs.
社交媒体上健康错误信息的泛滥是一个日益严重的公共卫生问题。心理健康在线社区（OCMHs）也被认为是接触错误信息的一种途径。本研究探讨了自我报告的心理健康错误信息暴露量对错误信息一致性的影响，以及抑郁知识和 OCMH 参与类型（专家主导与同伴主导）的调节作用。
参与者（n=403）是在 Facebook 上的意大利语 OCMHs 中招募的。我们使用 PROCESS 宏（调节调节，模型 3）进行回归分析。测量包括：抑郁知识问卷（Griffiths 等人，2004 年）、OCMHs 中自我报告的错误信息暴露量（3 项）和对暴露项目的错误信息一致性（3 项）。还调查了参与者是否是专家主导或同伴主导 OCMHs 的成员。
最终模型解释了 12%的一致性方差。错误信息暴露与错误信息一致性之间存在正相关且显著（β=0.3221，p<0.001），错误信息暴露与抑郁知识之间存在显著的双向交互作用（β=-0.2179，p=0.0014），以及自我报告的错误信息暴露与 OCMH 类型之间存在显著的双向交互作用（β=-0.2322，p=0.0254），即抑郁知识水平较高且参与专家主导的 OCMHs 时，错误信息暴露与错误信息一致性之间的关系较弱。最后，还发现了一个三向相互作用（β=0.2497，p=0.0144），表明抑郁知识调节了错误信息暴露与错误信息一致性之间的正相关关系，即参与者接触的错误信息越多，他们越同意，除非他们有较高的抑郁知识水平；然而，这种情况仅发生在他们参与同伴主导的小组时。
结果表明，参与者报告的接触心理健康错误信息越多，他们越倾向于同意，但只有当参与者的抑郁知识水平较低且参与同伴主导的 OCMHs 时，这种情况才会出现。本研究结果表明，内部因素（即高抑郁知识水平）和外部因素（个体参与的在线社区类型）都可以缓冲错误信息暴露的负面影响。这也表明，提高抑郁知识水平和专家社区管理可以遏制与心理健康相关的错误信息暴露的负面影响。研究结果将指导干预措施，以减轻 OCMHs 中错误信息的影响，包括鼓励卫生专业人员参与管理和实施健康教育计划。
