Trust In Experts Research Articles

Lack of Trust, Conspiracy Beliefs, and Social Media Use Predict COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy.

As COVID-19 vaccines are rolled out across the world, there are growing concerns about the roles that trust, belief in conspiracy theories, and spread of misinformation through social media play in impacting vaccine hesitancy. We use a nationally representative survey of 1476 adults in the UK between 12 and 18 December 2020, along with 5 focus groups conducted during the same period. Trust is a core predictor, with distrust in vaccines in general and mistrust in government raising vaccine hesitancy. Trust in health institutions and experts and perceived personal threat are vital, with focus groups revealing that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is driven by a misunderstanding of herd immunity as providing protection, fear of rapid vaccine development and side effects, and beliefs that the virus is man-made and used for population control. In particular, those who obtain information from relatively unregulated social media sources—such as YouTube—that have recommendations tailored by watch history, and who hold general conspiratorial beliefs, are less willing to be vaccinated. Since an increasing number of individuals use social media for gathering health information, interventions require action from governments, health officials, and social media companies. More attention needs to be devoted to helping people understand their own risks, unpacking complex concepts, and filling knowledge voids.

Big COVID, Red State: The Value of Over-Communication in a Public Health Crisis

This Community Case Study examines the challenges of communicating about the COVID-19 crisis in a politically conservative American state, Idaho. The study presents an analysis of one local expert’s communication strategies in the face of significant partisanship, threats of violence, and widespread refusal to comply with recommended public health behaviors. Findings suggest that consistent, cross-platform communication that emphasizes personalized recommendations and advice, transparency, and humility, are key strategies in a fractured information environment. However, while micro-level communication strategies are important, more must be done to help Americans regain trust in institutions, expertise, and information at a macro-level.

A cure worse than the disease? Exploring the health-economy trade-off during COVID-19

Nationwide lockdowns implemented by governments to confront the COVID-19 pandemic came at a high economic price. The article investigates citizens’ evaluation of the trade-off between public health measures and their economic consequences. Using a vignette experiment conducted in June 2020 on 7,500 respondents in seven European countries the article tests whether perceived threats of the health and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic affect citizens’ preferences for strict or mild lockdown measures. Findings show that European citizens tend to prefer strict measures protecting public health despite their damage to the economy. Even individuals more concerned about the pandemic’s economic impact do not prefer milder restrictions. Sociodemographic factors only indirectly affect public preferences, through perceived threats. Additionally, findings show that trust in experts and political orientations matter. These results resonate with previous research showing that public opinion in hard times is likely to be guided by risk perceptions and subjective attitudes. Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2021.1933310 .

DEVELOPMENT OF MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESSES OF TRANSCONTINENTAL HIGHWAYS, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE INTERESTS OF AGENTS OF DIFFERENT LEVELS

The paper deals with the development of multi-agent systems to support the implementation of projects of transcontinental highways. Decisions on transport routes are more influenced by the weight, trust of experts, geostrategists, various government agencies, think-centers, etc., as well as the information field that is formed as this topic is covered in the media, including on the Internet. space. The statement of the problem and the formalization of the multi-agent system was carried out on the example of transport projects in Central and Central Asia. The article provides a formalized model and characteristics of the role of individual elements of the environment and the agents themselves.

Impact of COVID-19 and intensive care unit capacity on vaccination support: Evidence from a two-leg representative survey in the United Kingdom

BackgroundOvercoming coronavirus disease (COVID-19) will likely require mass vaccination. With vaccination scepticism rising in many countries, assessing the willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 is of crucial global health importance. ObjectiveThe goal of this study was to examine how personal and family COVID-19 risk and ICU (intensive care unit) availability just before the pandemics influence the acceptance of future COVID-19 vaccines. MethodsA two-leg survey was carried out for comparing vaccination attitudes pre-and post-COVID-19. UK residents were surveyed in October 2019 about their vaccination attitudes, and again in a follow-up survey in April 2020, containing the previous questions and further ones related to COVID-19 exposure and COVID-19 vaccine attitudes. The study combined survey results with local COVID-19 incidence and pre-COVID-19 measures of ICU capacity and occupancy. Regression analysis of the impact of individual and public health factors on attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination was performed. ResultsThe October 2019 survey included a nationally representative sample of 1653 UK residents. All of them were invited for the follow-up survey in April 2020, and 1194 (72%) participated. The April 2020 sample remained nationally representative. Overall, 85% of respondents (and 55% of vaccine sceptics) would be willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Higher personal and family risk for COVID-19 was associated with stronger COVID-19 vaccination willingness, whereas low pre-COVID-19 ICU availability was associated with lower trust in medical experts and lower COVID-19 vaccine support. Further, general vaccination support has risen during the COVID-19 pandemic. ConclusionSupport for COVID-19 vaccination is high amongst all groups, even vaccine sceptics, boding well for future vaccination take-up rates. Vaccination willingness is correlated with health care availability during the COVID-19 crisis, suggesting a powerful synergy between health care system performance during crisis and the general population's trust in the medical profession – as reflected in vaccination support.

Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy in the Context of COVID-19: The Role of Trust and Confidence in a Seventeen-Country Survey.

Objectives: An effective vaccine to SARS-CoV-2 cannot be successfully deployed if a significant number of people worldwide are unwilling to accept it. We investigated the relationship between trust in scientists and medical professionals and perceptions of vaccine safety and effectiveness. We also build on past studies by exploring the relationship between confidence in global health organizations and vaccine hesitancy. Methods: We conducted an online survey in seventeen countries/territories across five world regions between May -June 2020. We assessed the relationship between COVID19 vaccine hesitancy, confidence in public health organizations, and trust in key experts and leaders. Results: Our findings strongly suggest that confidence in the World Health Organization combined with trust in domestic scientists and healthcare professionals is a strong driver of vaccine acceptance across multiple countries/territories. Conclusion: We find that hesitancy is widespread, and uptake would be insufficient to achieve herd immunity. There is widespread confidence in how public health organizations have responded to the current pandemic and this is related to vaccine acceptance. Our results also highlight the important role of trust in health care providers and scientists in reducing COVID19 vaccine hesitancy.

How Internet Access Drives Global Vaccine Skepticism

Abstract Counterintuitively, wealthier countries tend to be more vaccine skeptical than poorer countries. One possible explanation—the Online Accessibility hypothesis—posits that internet access facilitates the spread of antivaccine misinformation, particularly for those lower in scientific and medical expert trust. Another explanation—the Out of Sight hypothesis—is that some citizens in richer countries fail to consider the risks of vaccine-preventable diseases because they are rarely experienced directly. Merging country-level data with nationally representative survey data (N = 149,014) from 144 countries, we find evidence for the Online Accessibility hypothesis. These findings are robust to alternate measures of wealth and modeling strategies.

Trust in experts, not trust in national leadership, leads to greater uptake of recommended actions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Evidence suggests that people vary in their desire to undertake protective actions during a health emergency, and that trust in authorities may influence decision making. We sought to examine how the trust in health experts and trust in White House leadership during the COVID‐19 pandemic impacts individuals' decisions to adopt recommended protective actions such as mask‐wearing. A mediation analysis was conducted using cross‐sectional U.S. survey data collected between March 27 and 30, 2020, to elucidate how individuals' trust in health experts and White House leadership, their perceptions of susceptibility and severity to COVID‐19, and perceived benefits of protecting against COVID‐19, influenced their uptake of recommended protective actions. Trust in health experts was associated with greater perceived severity of COVID‐19 and benefits of taking action, which led to greater uptake of recommended actions. Trust in White House leadership was associated with lower perceived susceptibility to COVID‐19 and was not associated with taking recommended actions. Having trust in health experts is a greater predictor of individuals' uptake of protective actions than having trust in White House leadership. Public health messaging should emphasize the severity of COVID‐19 and the benefits of protecting oneself while ensuring consistency and transparency to regain trust in health experts.

Trust in expert versus lay comments in online articles about spanking and car seat safety.

In this study, we experimentally examined parents' perceptions of scientific information about spanking, a controversial topic, and car seat safety, a consensus topic, presented in online news articles. Specifically, we tested whether parents of children ages 2 to 8 years would trust scientific experts (speaking from professional expertise) more than online lay commenters (speaking from personal experience). One hundred and eighty parents across 41 U.S. states were recruited online from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (124 mothers, 56 fathers; 74% White, 9% Black, 8% Latino, 8% Asian, and 1% other or multiple ethnicities). Parents were randomly assigned to read a news article with an expert discussing spanking research that varied by two conditions: The news article contained either anti-spanking lay comments or pro-spanking lay comments. All parents also read a second news article on car seat safety (a consensus topic). Between-condition analyses were used to compare perceptions of the comment conditions, and within-condition analyses were used to compare perceptions of the expert knowledge versus the comments and to compare perceptions of the spanking expert versus the car seat expert. Moderation analyses were used to compare parents' perceptions based on their attitudes toward spanking. Parents with positive attitudes toward spanking recognized pro-spanking comments as opinion, yet still found them more trustworthy than a scientist taking the opposite position. All parents perceived the car seat expert as trustworthy. The results highlight challenges in disseminating information about controversial topics to the public. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The History of Saskatchewan's Public Health Association Policy Initiatives, 1954-86: A Regional Comparison for Preventative Health Policy Work in Canada.

After the Second World War, health prevention work in Canada shifted from a focus on sanitation and hygiene to illness prevention and health promotion. Canada became a significant global leader, beginning with the Lalonde Report of 1974. Yet less is known about the provincial public health associations and how their work differed from that of the national body. The purpose of this article is to examine the Saskatchewan Public Health Association's (SPHA) policy work from 1954 to 1986. Utilizing meeting minutes and newsletters, we found that while both national and provincial associations made efforts to prevent accidents, reduce tobacco use, and fluoridate water, the SPHA tended to advocate more for child health, and the cautious use of nuclear power. At the same time, the SPHA's resolutions tended to ignore emerging factors shaping health, including the social determinants of health, regional inequities, lack of public trust in experts, misinformation, and human psychology. Examining the SPHA's records revealed that region mattered in preventative policy work.

Factors Affecting Attitudes towards COVID-19 Vaccination: An Online Survey in Slovenia.

While the problem of vaccine hesitancy is not new, it has become more pronounced with the new COVID-19 vaccines and represents an obstacle to resolving the crisis. Even people who would usually trust vaccines and experts now prefer to wait for more information. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in Slovenia in December 2020 to find out the attitudes of the population regarding COVID-19 vaccination and the factors that affect these attitudes. Based on 12,042 fully completed questionnaires, we find that higher intention to get vaccinated is associated with men, older respondents, physicians and medical students, respondents who got the influenza vaccination, those who knew someone who had gotten hospitalised or died from COVID-19 and those who have more trust in experts, institutions and vaccines. Nurses and technicians were less likely to get vaccinated. In answers to an open question, sceptics were split into those doubting the quality due to the rapid development of the vaccine and those that reported personal experiences with side effects of prior vaccinations. Although the Slovenian population is diverse in its attitudes towards vaccination, the results are comparable to those found in other countries. However, there are potential limitations to the generalizability of the findings that should be addressed in future studies.

The acceptability to women of techniques for managing an impacted fetal head at caesarean section and of randomised trials evaluating those techniques: a qualitative study

BackgroundThis study aimed to explore women’s views on the acceptability of different techniques for managing an impacted fetal head at caesarean; and the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a trial in this area.MethodsQualitative semi-structured interviews with a systematic sample of women who experienced second stage emergency caesarean section at a tertiary National Health Service (NHS) hospital in England, UK. Thematic analysis was used to extract women’s views.ResultsWomen varied in their perceptions of the acceptability of different techniques for managing impacted fetal head. Trust in medical expertise and prioritising the safety of the baby were important contextual factors. Greater consensus was found around informed choice in trials where subthemes considered the timing of invitation, reduced capacity to give consent in emergency situations, and the importance of birth outcomes and having good rapport with healthcare professionals who invite women into trials. Finally, women reflected on the importance of supportive antenatal and postpartum education for impacted fetal head.ConclusionsThis research provides information on the acceptability of techniques and any trial to evaluate these techniques. Findings illustrate the importance of context and quality of care to both acceptability and approaching women to take part in a future trial.

“Architects’ mistakes should be covered with ivy and doctors’ with sod”: Medical Malpractice, Morton Shulman, and the “Conspiracy of Silence”

Every year thousands of Canadians are killed or injured because of medical mistakes. Plaintiffs, however, face several challenges to suing doctors successfully for malpractice. One challenge is the reluctance of some doctors to criticize other medical professionals, sometimes referred to as the “conspiracy of silence.” This article focuses on the attention given to the conspiracy of silence in Ontario in the 1960s when Dr. Morton Shulman, the pugnacious and flamboyant Chief Coroner of Toronto, alleged that doctors routinely covered up medical errors. Shulman drew media attention to irresponsible doctors, poor practice, and negligent treatment. He demanded more accountability and better care, and deplored efforts to silence him to protect the reputation of doctors. A decline in public trust of experts and of the professions created conditions that lent credence to Shulman’s claims. However, many medical professionals chafed at the questioning of their professionalism, expertise, and ethics. The provincial government’s responses, which included coroner system reforms, expanding the powers of the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, and attempting to silence Shulman, primarily aimed to meet the concerns of the state and medical professionals, rather than those of patients and the public.

Heritage-based tribalism in Big Data ecologies: Deploying origin myths for antagonistic othering

This article presents a conceptual and methodological framework to study heritage-based tribalism in Big Data ecologies by combining approaches from the humanities, social and computing sciences. We use such a framework to examine how ideas of human origin and ancestry are deployed on Twitter for purposes of antagonistic ‘othering’. Our goal is to equip researchers with theory and analytical tools for investigating divisive online uses of the past in today’s networked societies. In particular, we apply notions of heritage, othering and neo-tribalism, and both data-intensive and qualitative methods to the case of people’s engagements with the news of Cheddar Man’s DNA on Twitter. We show that heritage-based tribalism in Big Data ecologies is uniquely shaped as an assemblage by the coalescing of different forms of antagonistic othering. Those that co-occur most frequently are the ones that draw on ‘Views on Race’, ‘Trust in Experts’ and ‘Political Leaning’. The framings of the news that were most influential in triggering heritage-based tribalism were introduced by both right- and left-leaning newspaper outlets and by activist websites. We conclude that heritage-themed communications that rely on provocative narratives on social media tend to be labelled as political and not to be conducive to positive change in people’s attitudes towards issues such as racism.

Why do we wear masks? Legitimacy, trust and norm compliance during pandemic

Health regulations curbing the spread of the Kovid-19 virus have brought a number of restrictions into our social life, from wearing masks and maintaining physical distance, to the complete abolition of important segments of social life. In doing so, the government has responded to the key risks of a pandemic: the health of individuals and the ability of health systems to care for large numbers of patients. At the very beginning of the pandemic, two notions took shape in the public: that young people are at lower risk than the elderly and the sick, and that they adhere less to epidemiological measures. Using a dana obtained through the survey at a sample of students at the Faculty of Law in Belgrade, I tried to establish the extent to which they comply with the regulations and which factors influence it the most. The results show that a relatively small percentage of respondents regularly comply with health regulations and that most of them are in the ambivalence zone. Compliance with the measures is influenced by the following factors: belief that the measures are justified and effective, that is, agreement with the content of the norms; trust in institutions, and especially trust in experts and doctors; as well as regular media consumption and trust in their objectivity. Social control, that is, moral and legal condemnation for non-compliance with measures, did not prove to be significant. These findings show that in crisis such as this, clear and transparent communication, and the behavior of actors and institutions that instills trust, can ensure voluntary compliance with legal measures.

Reliance on scientists and experts during an epidemic: Evidence from the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy.

Research suggests trust in experts and authorities are important correlates of compliance with public health measures during infectious disease outbreaks. Empirical evidence on the dynamics of reliance on scientists and public health authorities during the early phases of an epidemic outbreak is limited. We examine these processes during the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy by leveraging data from Twitter and two online surveys, including a survey experiment. We find that reliance on experts followed a curvilinear path. Both Twitter and survey data showed initial increases in information-seeking from expert sources in the three weeks after the detection of the first case. Consistent with these increases, knowledge about health information linked to COVID-19 and support for containment measures was widespread, and better knowledge was associated with stronger support for containment policies. Both knowledge and containment support were positively associated with trust in science and public health authorities. However, in the third week after the outbreak, we detected a slowdown in responsiveness to experts. These processes were corroborated with a survey experiment, which showed that those holding incorrect beliefs about COVID-19 gave no greater – or even lower – importance to information when its source was stated as coming from experts than when the source was unstated. Our results suggest weakened trust in public health authorities with prolonged exposure to the epidemic as a potential mechanism for this effect. Weakened responsiveness to expert sources may increase susceptibility to misinformation and our results call for efforts to sustain trust in adapting public health response.

Take politics off the table: A study of Italian youth’s self-managed dairy restriction and healthy consumerism

The last 20 years have been characterized by very different dynamics: massive reduction of milk and, to a lesser extent, dairy consumption; fewer positive attitudes towards milk; no reclaims for affordable, public dairy production; the development of a large conversation about the presumed risks associated with the intake of lactose; and semantic battles on non-dairy ‘milk’ alternatives. These new attitudes haven’t been systematically studied. We explore here the links between milk/dairy consumption, health concerns, and trust in medical expertise. Through an online survey of highly educated youth in Italy (N=378) we have investigated: milk and dairy consumption; attitudes towards items carried out by vegan movements; attitudes towards medical expertise and trust in counseling by general practitioners. Results show that anti-speciesist and vegan movements are very little known among consumers. Data display very limited impact of the ideas and concepts of anti-milk movements within our sample. The results highlight that milk consumption shrinking is due to health concern and an unfavorable perception of dangerous consequences in lactose intake, and additionally to a general distrust towards medical expertise and evidence-based arguments. Indeed, we observe a tendency to self-diagnose intolerance/allergies, questioning the role of physicians and medical knowledge in advising for dietary choices among highly educated youth. The analysis of the patterns of consumption and motives clearly shows that health considerations, not politics, are behind the Italian youth’s dairy restrictions. Healthy consumerism emerges as a concept fitting better than political consumerism for interpreting our results.

COVID-19: effective policymaking depends on trust in experts, politicians, and the public

In a crisis, almost-instant choices about who to trust or distrust could make a difference between life and death. Trust is necessary for cooperation, coordination, social order, and to reduce the need for coercive state imposition. During a pandemic, people need to trust experts to help them understand and respond to the problem, governments to coordinate policy instruments and make choices about levels of coercion, and citizens as they cooperate to minimize infection. We compare these general requirements with specific developments in the UK and US, identifying: the variable reliance by elected politicians on scientific experts, worrying levels of distrust in elected leaders, and a shift from a trust-based to more impositional forms of government action (with more variation in responses in the US). While trust is difficult to define and measure, these examples show that people miss it when it is gone.

Control as a Core Component of User Involvement in Reablement: A Qualitative Study.

BackgroundReablement, also known as restorative care, supports older adults in regaining or maintaining their independence in daily life through the optimization of functional ability. Users’ goals and healthcare professionals’ use of a “hands-off” approach are key, thus user involvement is central to reablement logic. The aim of this study was to explore user involvement in reablement from users’ perspectives from the beginning of an intervention.MethodsThe study has an explorative qualitative design and includes thematic content analysis of data from repeat, individual semi-structured interviews with ten users accepting reablement intervention services in an urban Norwegian municipality.FindingsControl emerged as a core component. Users handed control over their time and body to professionals, balanced by drawing on an inner strength to control own limits, retain the right to make own judgements and decisions, and dream. Five themes were seen: Positive, but with a “wait and see” attitude; Professionals have goals, users have dreams; Desire to control schedule and activity; Regaining faith in one’s own capacity and strengthening one’s dreams; and Keep going, hold on to your dreams.ConclusionUser involvement interpreted as user-set goals may be over-emphasized. Users possess the information that professionals need to set goals, consider these the goals important for professionals, and seek to facilitate professionals in their work. Based on a belief in own competence and a trust in professional’s expertise, users invite professionals into a co-creation process. User involvement has previously been defined as a willingness and positive attitude toward reablement activities, but we find it can be expressed in different ways. Reablement logic does not always match users’ understanding or desires, and it may be time to rethink user involvement in reablement. The reablement concept should be developed further, so that it better suits the individuals it should serve.

Social Media and Trust in Scientific Expertise: Debating the Covid-19 Pandemic in The Netherlands

This article examines the role of social media dynamics in the public exchange of information between scientists (experts), government (policy-makers), mass media (journalists), and citizens (nonexperts) during the first 4 months after the Covid-19 outbreak in the Netherlands. Over the past decade, the institutional model of science communication, based on linear vectors of information flows between institutions, has gradually converted into a networked model where social media propel information flows circulating between all actors involved. The question driving our research is, “How are social media deployed to both undermine and enhance public trust in scientific expertise during a health crisis?” Analyzing the public debate during the period of the corona outbreak in the Netherlands, we investigate two stages: the emergency response phase and the “smart exit strategy” phase, discussing how scientific experts, policy-makers, journalists, and citizens appropriate social media logic to steer information and to control the debate. We conclude by outlining the potential risks and benefits of adopting social media dynamics in institutional contexts of science communication.