Background: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has affected more than 200 countries and territories worldwide. This disease poses an extraordinary challenge for public health systems because screening and surveillance capacity is often severely limited, especially during the beginning of the outbreak; this can fuel the outbreak, as many patients can unknowingly infect other people. Objective: The aim of this study was to collect and analyze posts related to COVID-19 on Weibo, a popular Twitter-like social media site in China. To our knowledge, this infoveillance study employs the largest, most comprehensive, and most fine-grained social media data to date to predict COVID-19 case counts in mainland China. Methods: We built a Weibo user pool of 250 million people, approximately half the entire monthly active Weibo user population. Using a comprehensive list of 167 keywords, we retrieved and analyzed around 15 million COVID-19–related posts from our user pool from November 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020. We developed a machine learning classifier to identify “sick posts,” in which users report their own or other people’s symptoms and diagnoses related to COVID-19. Using officially reported case counts as the outcome, we then estimated the Granger causality of sick posts and other COVID-19 posts on daily case counts. For a subset of geotagged posts (3.10% of all retrieved posts), we also ran separate predictive models for Hubei province, the epicenter of the initial outbreak, and the rest of mainland China. Results: We found that reports of symptoms and diagnosis of COVID-19 significantly predicted daily case counts up to 14 days ahead of official statistics, whereas other COVID-19 posts did not have similar predictive power. For the subset of geotagged posts, we found that the predictive pattern held true for both Hubei province and the rest of mainland China regardless of the unequal distribution of health care resources and the outbreak timeline. Conclusions: Public social media data can be usefully harnessed to predict infection cases and inform timely responses. Researchers and disease control agencies should pay close attention to the social media infosphere regarding COVID-19. In addition to monitoring overall search and posting activities, leveraging machine learning approaches and theoretical understanding of information sharing behaviors is a promising approach to identify true disease signals and improve the effectiveness of infoveillance.

Purpose: The ballooning health misinformation on social media raises grave concerns. Drawing upon the S-O-R (Stimulus-Organism-Response) model and the information processing literature, this study aims to explore (1) how social media health information seeking (S) affects health misinformation sharing intention (R) through the channel of health misperceptions (O) and (2) whether the mediation process would be contingent upon different information processing predispositions.Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected from a survey comprising 388 respondents from the Chinese middle-aged or above group, one of China's most susceptible populations to health misinformation. Standard multiple linear regression models and the PROCESS Macro were adopted to examine the direct effect and the moderated mediation model.Findings: Results bolstered the S-O-R-based mechanism, in which health misperceptions mediated social media health information seeking's effect on health misinformation sharing intention. As an indicator of analytical information processing, need for cognition (NFC) failed to moderate the mediation process. Contrarily, faith in intuition (FI), an indicator reflecting intuitive information processing, served as a significant moderator. The positive association between social media health information seeking and misperceptions was stronger among respondents with low FI.Originality/value: This study sheds light on health misinformation sharing research by bridging health information seeking, information internalization and information sharing. Moreover, the authors extended the S-O-R model by integrating information processing predispositions, which differs this study from previous literature and advances the extant understanding of how information processing styles work in the face of online health misinformation. The particular age group and the Chinese context further inform context-specific implications regarding online health misinformation regulation.Peer review: The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0157.

The past nine months witnessed COVID-19's fast-spreading at the global level. Limited by medical resources shortage and uneven facilities distribution, online help-seeking becomes an essential approach to cope with public health emergencies for many ordinaries. This study explores the driving forces behind the retransmission of online help-seeking posts. We built an analytical framework that emphasized content characteristics, including information completeness, proximity, support seeking type, disease severity, and emotion of help-seeking messages. A quantitative content analysis was conducted with a probability sample consisting of 727 posts. The results illustrate the importance of individual information completeness, high proximity, instrumental support seeking. This study also demonstrates slight inconformity with the severity principle but stresses the power of anger in help-seeking messages dissemination. As one of the first online help-seeking diffusion analyses in the COVID-19 period, our research provides a reference for constructing compelling and effective help-seeking posts during a particular period. It also reveals further possibilities for harnessing social media’s power to promote reciprocal and cooperative actions as a response to this deepening global concern.

Purpose: Drawing upon the third-person effect (TPE) theory, this study focuses on two types of misinformation countering intentions (i.e. simple correction and correction with justification). Accordingly, it aims to (1) assess the tenability of the third-person perception (TPP) in the face of misinformation on social media, (2) explore the antecedents of TPP and its relationship with individual-level misinformation countering intentions and (3) examine whether the mediating process is contingent on different social media usage conditions.Design/methodology/approach: An online survey was conducted with 1,000 representative respondents recruited in Mainland China in January 2022 using quota sampling. Paired t-test, multiple linear regression and moderated mediation analysis were employed to examine the proposed hypotheses.Findings: Results bolster the fundamental proposition of TPP that individuals perceive others as more susceptible to social media misinformation than they are. The self-other perceptual bias served as a mediator between the perceived consequence of misinformation and misinformation countering (i.e. simple correction and correction with justification) intentions. Furthermore, intensive social media users were likely to be motivated to counter social media misinformation derived from the indirect mechanism.Originality/value: The findings provide further evidence for the role of TPE in explaining misinformation countering intention as prosocial and altruistic behavior rather than self-serving behavior. Practically, promising ways to combat rampant misinformation on social media include promoting the prosocial aspects and beneficial outcomes of misinformation countering efforts to others, as well as reconfiguring the strategies by impelling intensive social media users to participate in enacting countering actionsPeer review: The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-09-2022-0507.

Background: COVID-19 is still rampant all over the world. Until now, the COVID-19 vaccine is the most promising measure to subdue contagion and achieve herd immunity. However, public vaccination intention is suboptimal. A clear division lies between medical professionals and laypeople. While most professionals eagerly promote the vaccination campaign, some laypeople exude suspicion, hesitancy, and even opposition toward COVID-19 vaccines. Objective: This study aims to employ a text mining approach to examine expression differences and thematic disparities between the professionals and laypeople within the COVID-19 vaccine context. Methods: We collected 3196 answers under 65 filtered questions concerning the COVID-19 vaccine from the China-based question and answer forum Zhihu. The questions were classified into 5 categories depending on their contents and description: adverse reactions, vaccination, vaccine effectiveness, social implications of vaccine, and vaccine development. Respondents were also manually coded into two groups: professional and laypeople. Automated text analysis was performed to calculate fundamental expression characteristics of the 2 groups, including answer length, attitude distribution, and high-frequency words. Furthermore, structural topic modeling (STM), as a cutting-edge branch in the topic modeling family, was used to extract topics under each question category, and thematic disparities were evaluated between the 2 groups. Results: Laypeople are more prevailing in the COVID-19 vaccine–related discussion. Regarding differences in expression characteristics, the professionals posted longer answers and showed a conservative stance toward vaccine effectiveness than did laypeople. Laypeople mentioned countries more frequently, while professionals were inclined to raise medical jargon. STM discloses prominent topics under each question category. Statistical analysis revealed that laypeople preferred the “safety of Chinese-made vaccine” topic and other vaccine-related issues in other countries. However, the professionals paid more attention to medical principles and professional standards underlying the COVID-19 vaccine. With respect to topics associated with the social implications of vaccines, the 2 groups showed no significant difference. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that laypeople and professionals share some common grounds but also hold divergent focuses toward the COVID-19 vaccine issue. These incongruities can be summarized as “qualitatively different” in perspective rather than “quantitatively different” in scientific knowledge. Among those questions closely associated with medical expertise, the “qualitatively different” characteristic is quite conspicuous. This study boosts the current understanding of how the public perceives the COVID-19 vaccine, in a more nuanced way. Web-based question and answer forums are a bonanza for examining perception discrepancies among various identities. STM further exhibits unique strengths over the traditional topic modeling method in statistically testing the topic preference of diverse groups. Public health practitioners should be keenly aware of the cognitive differences between professionals and laypeople, and pay special attention to the topics with significant inconsistency across groups to build consensus and promote vaccination effectively.