A Cross-National Study of Fear Appeal Messages in YouTube Trending Videos About COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has underlined the need for investigating the prevalence and nature of health communication on social media. Applying the Extended Parallel Process Model, this study analyzes the use of fear appeals in 2,152 YouTube trending videos across six countries (the United States, Brazil, Russia, Taiwan, Canada, and New Zealand) from January to May 2020. The findings reveal that, during the early stage of the outbreak, COVID-19-themed videos gained early attention in Taiwan but encountered a prolonged delay in the United States and Brazil. Specifically, COVID-19 videos featured the least in Brazil’s trending list. The results from a supervised machine learning coding approach further suggest that videos’ threat levels exceeded efficacy beliefs across all countries. This imbalance of threat–efficacy messages was most significant in hard-hit countries Brazil and Russia, which social media may run the risk of feeding fear to the public agenda. These findings alert content creators and social media platforms to create a threat–efficacy equilibrium, prioritizing content that promotes a sense of self- and community efficacy and increases people’s belief that effective protective actions are available.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".