نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری تخصصی، علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، گروه علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

2 استاد، علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، گروه علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه: در زمان بحران‌های سلامت مانند همه‌گیری کووید 19، افزایش اخبار نادرست و شایعات، تشخیص اخبار صحیح را دشوار می‌کند. همچنین، با وجود خطرات موجود، برخی با نپذیرفتن واکسن، ایمنی جامعه را به خطر می‌اندازند. در تلاش برای روشن ساختن علل این رفتار مخاطره‌آمیز، در تلاش برای روشن ساختن علل این رفتار مخاطره‌آمیز، پژوهش حاضر با هدف تعیین توانایی تشخیص اخبار جعلی بر پذیرش واکسن کووید 19 در دانشجویان دانشگاه شیراز انجام شد.
روش بررسی: ایاین مطالعه به روش پیمایشی انجام گردید. ابزار تحقیق، پرسش‌نامه الکترونیکی ترکیبی شامل پرسش‌نامه پذیرش واکسن Montagni و همکاران، مقیاس تشخیص اخبار جعلی طراحی شده توسط محقق و پرسش‌نامه درک خطر Champion بود. نمونه‌گیری به روش داوطلبانه انجام شد. 382 دانشجوی دانشگاه شیراز (در سال تحصیلی 1401-1400) به پرسش‌نامه پاسخ دادند. داده‌ها با استفاده از آزمون‌های 2c و Binary Logistic Regression مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت.
یافته‌ها: 72 درصد از دانشجویان پذیرای واکسن بودند و 8/62 درصد درک متوسطی از خطر این بیماری داشتند. رابطه مثبت و معنی‌داری بین متغیر توان تشخیص اخبار جعلی با پذیرش واکسن مشاهده گردید. به عبارت دیگر، هرچه افراد در تشخیص اخبار جعلی توانمندتر بودند، احتمال قرارگیری آن‌ها در گروه «مردد در واکسیناسیون» نسبت به گروه «پذیرای واکسن» نزدیک به 8/0 برابر کمتر بود.
نتیجه‌گیری: پذیرش اخبار جعلی درباره واکسن کووید 19 می‌تواند به کاهش پذیرش واکسن بینجامد. این یافته دلالت بر نقش سواد تشخیص اخبار جعلی در کنترل رفتار افراد و در نتیجه، ارتقای سلامت جامعه دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Role of Risk Perception and Ability to Detect Fake News in Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccine among Students of Shiraz University, Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahsa Torabi 1
  • Hajar Sotudeh 2

1 PhD Student, Knowledge and Information Science, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, School of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

2 Professor, Knowledge and Information Science, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, School of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

چکیده [English]

Introduction: During health crises, such as Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the spread of fake news and rumors makes it difficult to distinguish real news. Besides, despite dangers, some endanger public safety by avoiding vaccination. It is not clear to what extent the individuals understand the dangers, and are influenced by the fake news. To elucidate the causes of this risky behavior, this study examined the role of fake news detection and risk perception in vaccine acceptance among students of Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
Methods: Research method was survey, and research tool was a combined electronic questionnaire, including vaccine acceptance questionnaire of Montagni et al., fake news detection, developed by the researcher, and the risk perception questionnaire of Champion. The sampling method was voluntary. 382 students from Shiraz University (academic year of 2021-2022) answered the questionnaire. Data were analyzed through chi-square and binary logistic regression tests.
Results: 72.0% of students were vaccine acceptant, and 62.8% had a moderate risk perception regarding the disease. Although the students' demographic characteristics and risk perception showed no significant correlation with the vaccine acceptance, their ability to detect fake news had a significant positive correlation. In effect, the participants with higher fake news detection scores were 0.8 times less likely to be classed in the vaccine hesitant group, compared to the vaccine acceptance ones.
Conclusion: Acceptance of fake news about COVID-19 vaccine may reduce the vaccine acceptance. This finding highlights the key role of fake news detection literacy in controlling the behavior of individuals, and thus the safety of society.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • COVID-19 Vaccines
  • Disinformation
  • Students
  1. Montagni I, Ouazzani-Touhami K, Mebarki A, Texier N, Schuck S, Tzourio C. Acceptance of a Covid-19 vaccine is associated with ability to detect fake news and health literacy. J Public Health (Oxf) 2021; 43(4): 695-702.
  2. Ahmed W, Vidal-Alaball J, Downing J, Lopez SF. COVID-19 and the 5G conspiracy theory: Social network analysis of Twitter data. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22(5): e19458.
  3. Moscadelli A, Albora G, Biamonte MA, Giorgetti D, Innocenzio M, Paoli S, et al. Fake news and covid-19 in Italy: Results of a quantitative observational study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020; 17(16).
  4. Siebenhaar KU, Kother AK, Alpers GW. Dealing with the COVID-19 infodemic: Distress by information, information avoidance, and compliance with preventive measures. Front Psychol 2020; 11: 567905.
  5. Quandt T, Frischlich L, Boberg S, Schatto-Eckrodt T. Fake News. In: Vos TP, Hanusch F, Dimitrakopoulou D, Geertsema-Sligh M, Sehl A, editors. The International Encyclopedia of Journalism Studies; 2019. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 1-6.
  6. Limaye RJ, Holroyd TA, Blunt M, Jamison AF, Sauer M, Weeks R, et al. Social media strategies to affect vaccine acceptance: A systematic literature review. Expert Rev Vaccines 2021; 20(8): 959-73.
  7. Kessels R, Luyten J, Tubeuf S. Willingness to get vaccinated against Covid-19 and attitudes toward vaccination in general. Vaccine 2021; 39(33): 4716-22.
  8. World Health Organization. Report of the SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy. Geneva, Switzerland; WHO; 2014.
  9. Troiano G, Nardi A. Vaccine hesitancy in the era of COVID-19. Public Health 2021; 194: 245-51.
  10. Jemielniak D, Krempovych Y. An analysis of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and fear mongering on Twitter. Public Health 2021; 200: 4-6.
  11. Lyu H, Zheng Z, Luo J. Both rates of fake news and fact-based news on twitter negatively Correlate with the state-level COVID-19 vaccine uptake. arXiv:2106.07435. 2021.
  12. Frugoli AG, Prado RS, Silva TMR, Matozinhos FP, Trapé CA, Lachtim SAF. Vaccine fake news: An analysis under the World Health Organization's 3Cs model. Rev Esc Enferm USP 2021; 55: e03736.
  13. Kanozia R, Arya R. “Fake news”, religion, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Media Asia 2021; 48(4): 313-21.
  14. Islam MS, Kamal AM, Kabir A, Southern DL, Khan SH, Hasan SMM, et al. COVID-19 vaccine rumors and conspiracy theories: The need for cognitive inoculation against misinformation to improve vaccine adherence. PLoS One 2021; 16(5): e0251605.
  15. Tawat, Mahama, Fake news and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A study of practices and sociopolitical implications in Cameroon. SSRN [Online]. [cited 2021 May 21]; Available from: URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3850603
  16. Chor JS, Pada SK, Stephenson I, Goggins WB, Tambyah PA, Clarke TW, et al. Seasonal influenza vaccination predicts pandemic H1N1 vaccination uptake among healthcare workers in three countries. Vaccine 2011; 29(43): 7364-9.
  17. Hong S, Collins A. Societal responses to familiar versus unfamiliar risk: Comparisons of influenza and SARS in Korea. Risk Anal 2006; 26(5): 1247-57.
  18. Setbon M, Raude J. Factors in vaccination intention against the pandemic influenza A/H1N1. Eur J Public Health 2010; 20(5): 490-4.
  19. Lehmann BA, Ruiter RAC, Chapman G, Kok G. The intention to get vaccinated against influenza and actual vaccination uptake of Dutch healthcare personnel. Vaccine 2014; 32(51): 6986-91.
  20. Schmid P, Rauber D, Betsch C, Lidolt G, Denker ML. Barriers of influenza vaccination intention and behavior - a systematic review of influenza vaccine hesitancy, 2005-2006. PLoS One 2017; 12(1): e0170550.
  21. Caserotti M, Girardi P, Rubaltelli E, Tasso A, Lotto L, Gavaruzzi T. Associations of COVID-19 risk perception with vaccine hesitancy over time for Italian residents. Soc Sci Med 2021; 272: 113688.
  22. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal 2004; 24(2): 311-22.
  23. Slovic P, Peters E. Risk Perception and affect. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2006; 15(6): 322-5.
  24. Champion VL. Instrument development for health belief model constructs. ANS Adv Nurs Sci 1984; 6(3): 73-85.
  25. Hassenteufel P. Handling the COVID-19 crisis in France: Paradoxes of a centralized state-led health system. Eur Policy Anal 2020; 6(2): 170-9.
  26. Carrieri V, Madio L, Principe F. Vaccine hesitancy and (fake) news: Quasi-experimental evidence from Italy. Health Econ 2019; 28(11): 1377-82.
  27. Ibuka Y, Chapman GB, Meyers LA, Li M, Galvani AP. The dynamics of risk perceptions and precautionary behavior in response to 2009 (H1N1) pandemic influenza. BMC Infect Dis 2010; 10: 296.
  28. Gu D, Feng Q. COVID-19 and Its Impacts on Older Adults: Global Perspectives. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2021; 76(7): e246-e248.
  29. Delellis N, Rubin V. 'Fake News' in the context of information literacy: A Canadian case study. In: Dalkir K, Katz R, editors. Navigating fake news, alternative facts, and misinformation in a post-truth world. Hershey PA: IGI Global; 2020. p. 89-115.
  30. Sørensen K, Van den Broucke S, Fullam J, Doyle G, Pelikan J, Slonska Z, et al. Health literacy and public health: A systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health 2012; 12(1): 80.
  31. Scheibenzuber C, Hofer S, Nistor N. Designing for fake news literacy training: A problem-based undergraduate online-course. Comput Hum Behav 2021; 121: 106796.