How Official Social Media Affected the Infodemic among Adults during the First Wave of COVID-19 in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that social media can impact society both positively (e.g., keeping citizens connected and informed) and negatively (e.g., the deliberate spreading of misinformation). This study aims to examine the underlying mechanisms of the relationship between official social media accounts and the infodemic, experienced during the first wave of COVID-19 in China. A theoretical model is proposed to examine how official social media accounts affected the infodemic during this period. In total, 1398 questionnaire responses were collected via WeChat and Tencent QQ, two leading Chinese social media platforms. Data analysis was conducted using Partial Lease Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), moderation effect analysis, and mediation effect analysis. Results indicate that the Information Quality (IQ) of Official social media accounts (β = −0.294, p < 0.001) has a significant negative effect on the infodemic. Mediation effect analysis revealed that both social support (β = −0.333, 95% Boot CI (−0.388, −0.280)) and information cascades (β = −0.189, 95% Boot CI (−0.227, −0.151)) mediate the relationship between IQ and the infodemic. Moderation effect analysis shows that private social media usage (F = 85.637, p < 0.001) positively moderates the relationship between IQ and the infodemic, while health literacy has a small negative moderation effect on the relationship between IQ and the infodemic. Our findings show that, in the context of Chinese media, official social media accounts act as a major source of information for influencing the infodemic through increasing social support and reducing information cascades for citizens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".