The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic brought about several features that increased the sense of fear and confusion, such as quarantine and financial losses among other stressors, which may have led to adverse psychosocial outcomes. The influence of such stressors took place within a broader sociocultural context that needs to be considered. The objective was to examine how the psychological response to the pandemic varied across countries and identify which risk/protective factors contributed to this response. An online survey was conducted from 29 May 2020–12 June 2020, among a multinational sample of 8806 adults from eight countries/regions (Canada, United States, England, Switzerland, Belgium, Hong Kong, Philippines, New Zealand). Probable generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and major depression episode (MDE) were assessed. The independent role of a wide range of potential factors was examined using multilevel logistic regression. Probable GAD and MDE were indicated by 21.0% and 25.5% of the respondents, respectively, with an important variation according to countries/regions (GAD: 12.2–31.0%; MDE: 16.7–32.9%). When considered together, 30.2% of the participants indicated probable GAD or MDE. Several factors were positively associated with a probable GAD or MDE, including (in descending order of importance) weak sense of coherence (SOC), lower age, false beliefs, isolation, threat perceived for oneself/family, mistrust in authorities, stigma, threat perceived for country/world, financial losses, being a female, and having a high level of information about COVID-19. Having a weak SOC yielded the highest adjusted odds ratio for probable GAD or MDE (3.21; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.73–3.77). This pandemic is having an impact on psychological health. In some places and under certain circumstances, however, people seem to be better protected psychologically. This is a unique opportunity to evaluate the psychosocial impacts across various sociocultural backgrounds, providing important lessons that could inform all phases of disaster risk management.

Nearly a year after the classification of the COVID-19 outbreak as a global pandemic, it is clear that different factors have contributed to an increase in psychological disorders, including public health measures that infringe on personal freedoms, growing financial losses, and conflicting messages. This study examined the evolution of psychosocial impacts with the progression of the pandemic in adult populations from different countries and continents, and identified, among a wide range of individual and country-level factors, which ones are contributing to this evolving psychological response. An online survey was conducted in May/June 2020 and in November 2020, among a sample of 17,833 adults (Phase 1: 8806; Phase 2: 9027) from eight countries/regions (Canada, the United States, England, Switzerland, Belgium, Hong Kong, the Philippines, New Zealand). Probable generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and major depressive episode (MDE) were assessed. The independent role of potential factors was examined using multilevel logistic regression. Probable GAD or MDE was indicated by 30.1% and 32.5% of the respondents during phases 1 and 2, respectively (a 7.9% increase over time), with an important variation according to countries/regions (range from 22.3% in Switzerland to 38.8% in the Philippines). This proportion exceeded 50% among young adults (18–24 years old) in all countries except for Switzerland. Beyond young age, several factors negatively influenced mental health in times of pandemic; important factors were found, including weak sense of coherence (adjusted odds ratio aOR = 3.89), false beliefs (aOR = 2.33), and self-isolation/quarantine (aOR = 2.01). The world has entered a new era dominated by psychological suffering and rising demand for mental health interventions, along a continuum from health promotion to specialized healthcare. More than ever, we need to innovate and build interventions aimed at strengthening key protective factors, such as sense of coherence, in the fight against the adversity caused by the concurrent pandemic and infodemic.

The COVID-19 crisis has unique features that increase the sense of fear, and comes with additional stressors (e.g., confusion, discrimination, quarantine), which can lead to adverse psychological responses. There is however limited understanding of differences between sociocultural contexts in psychological response to pandemics and other disasters. To examine how Canadians in different provinces, and with different governance modes and sociocultural contexts, understand and react to the COVID-19 pandemic. A web-based survey was conducted from April 8–11, 2020, among a representative sample of 600 Canadian adults from two different contexts (n=300 in Quebec, the French part of Canada, and n=300 elsewhere in Canada). Two psychological outcomes were assessed: probable post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and probable generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The roles of various stressors (i.e., threat perceived for oneself or family/friends, quarantine or isolation, financial losses, victims of stigma), assets (i.e., trust in authorities, information received, and compliance with directives) and sources of information used on these two outcomes were also examined. Chi-square tests were performed to examine differences in the distribution of probable PTSD and GAD according to these stressors and assets. Probable PTSD and GAD were observed in 25.5% and 25.4% of the respondents, respectively. These proportions were significantly lower in Quebec than elsewhere in Canada. Perceiving a high level of threat and being a victim of stigma were positively associated with probable PTSD and GAD (but not quarantine/isolation and financial losses). A high level of trust in authorities was the only asset associated with a lower risk of PTSD or GAD. Interestingly, this asset was more frequently reported in Quebec than elsewhere in Canada. The COVID-19 pandemic represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the psychosocial impacts on various sociocultural groups and contexts, providing important lessons that could help respond to future disasters.

La perméabilité de la division information/publicité dans les salles de rédaction fait récursivement l’objet de débats au sein de l’industrie journalistique. Mus par des logiques différentes, univers marketing et journalistique sont supposés se prémunir de toute influence mutuelle. L’arrivée des plateformes socio numériques, l’éclatement du modèle économique des médias d’information et l’irritation face à l’intrusion publicitaire et les stratégies de blocage encouragent de nouveaux chevauchements, dont la publicité native (PN). Les différentes justifications ou critiques de cette technique controversée constituent une entrée pour analyser le rapport à l’éthique des deux professions, journalisme et marketing. Cette communication propose d’interroger ce phénomène par une double analyse. D’abord en repérant dans le discours des professionnels du marketing et de l’information les différentes rationalités entourant l’utilisation, ou non, de la PN. Ces rationalités sont ensuite adossées aux codes, chartes et guides déontiques. Au final, nous arguons que les guides actuels sont insuffisants pour encadrer le bouleversement professionnel qu’engendre la PN, entre autres sous la force de tensions séculaires, mais fortement bousculées par des rationalités convergentes. Ce paradoxe semble se solder par l’arrivée d’un nouveau type de professionnel, le producteur de contenu. Nous ouvrons quelques pistes pour explorer plus avant cette transformation professionnelle. Mots Clés : publicité native, journalisme, analyse de discours, éthique The porousness of the information/advertising division in newsrooms is a recursive topic of debate in the journalism industry. With their distinct logics, the worlds of marketing and journalism are supposed to guard against any mutual influence, as enshrined in ethical codes and charters. But the rise of social media platforms, the fragmentation of the economic model of the news media, the irritation of advertising intrusion, and the ad blocking software are encouraging new overlaps, one being native advertising (NA). The various justifications or criticisms of this controversial technique constitute for us the entry point to analyze the ethics of both journalism and marketing in regard of NA. First, we identify, within the discourse of both marketing and information professionals, the different rationalities surrounding the use or non use of NA. These rationalities are then compared to codes, charters and deontic guides in use. In the end, we argue that the current guides are insufficient to frame the professional upheaval that NA generates, under the force of deep-rooted tensions, now strongly shaken by convergent economical rationalities. This paradox seems to result in the arrival of a new type of professional, the content producer. We open up some avenues to explore this professional transformation further. Keywords: Ethics, deontology, native advertising, marketing, journalism

Communication & professionnalisation, la revue sciencitifique du réseau RESIPROC

Widespread belief in scientific misinformation circulating online is a critical challenge for democracies. While research to date has focused on psychological, sociodemographic, and political antecedents to this phenomenon, fewer studies have explored the role of media literacy educational efforts, especially with children. Recent findings indicate that children are unprepared for critically evaluating scientific information online and that literacy instruction should address this gap. The aim of this study is to examine the ability to detect fake science news and the evaluation strategies employed by pupils after a news media literacy intervention. In addition, we explore the impact of the news media literacy intervention on their self-efficacy beliefs for detecting fake science news, and on their views of science news. A one-group experimental design was employed with a sample of 74 primary school pupils. A few weeks following a 2-hour media literacy intervention, pupils ranked ten Twitter posts on various scientific topics and were invited to justify their ranking in an open-ended question to unveil their evaluation strategies. Participants also completed one pre-test and one post-test designed to elicit their confidence in their ability to detect fake science news and their views of science news. We averaged pupils’ judgement accuracy, categorized student’s evaluation strategies, and compared self-efficacy beliefs before and after the intervention. On average, pupils’ accuracy when asked to detect fake science news was 68%. This performance is higher than success rates reported in previous studies where no news media literacy intervention was tested. Pupils relied mostly on knowledge in news media literacy to detect fake science news, but also in great proportion on prior scientific knowledge and intuitive reasoning. Fake news self-efficacy beliefs increased significantly after the intervention, but views of science news were not impacted by the intervention. Findings indicate that primary school pupils are capable of careful examination of the credibility of scientific news. Children are regularly exposed to misinformation, and knowledge on how to critically engage with scientific information should be taught as soon as this exposure begins. Our findings suggest that news media literacy training can be successfully facilitated with primary school pupils and could be effective in fighting scientific misinformation from a young age.