scholarly journals Assessing Mechanisms Underlying the Sharing of Official and Unofficial Information during a Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (24) ◽  
pp. 13298
Author(s):  
Stephanie Jean Tsang ◽  
Xinyan Zhao ◽  
Yi-Ru Regina Chen
Keyword(s):  
Information Sharing ◽  
Information Flows ◽  
Outbreak Response ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Affective Experiences ◽  
Information Verification ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
Official Information

The COVID-19 disease outbreak has seen mixed information flows comprising top-down communication from health authorities to the public and citizen-to-citizen communication. This study aimed to identify mechanisms underlying the sharing of official versus unofficial information during the outbreak. Survey findings based on a nationally representative U.S. sample (N = 856) showed that individuals’ predispositions affected their information consumption and affective experiences, leading to distinct types of information-sharing behaviors. While anger toward the U.S. government’s outbreak response was directly associated with unofficial information sharing, anxiety was directly associated with official information sharing. These findings enhance our understanding of the propagation of different kinds of pandemic information and provide implications for public education on information verification based on source authoritativeness.

scholarly journals Heritage Artefacts in the COVID-19 Era: The Aura and Authenticity of 3D Models

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 519-539
Author(s):  
Thiago Minete Cardozo ◽  
Costas Papadopoulos
Keyword(s):  
User Experience ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
3D Models ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
The Other ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
The Public ◽  
Affective Experiences ◽  
The One ◽  
Digital Engagement

Abstract Museums have been increasingly investing in their digital presence. This became more pressing during the COVID-19 pandemic since heritage institutions had, on the one hand, to temporarily close their doors to visitors while, on the other, find ways to communicate their collections to the public. Virtual tours, revamped websites, and 3D models of cultural artefacts were only a few of the means that museums devised to create alternative ways of digital engagement and counteract the physical and social distancing measures. Although 3D models and collections provide novel ways to interact, visualise, and comprehend the materiality and sensoriality of physical objects, their mediation in digital forms misses essential elements that contribute to (virtual) visitor/user experience. This article explores three-dimensional digitisations of museum artefacts, particularly problematising their aura and authenticity in comparison to their physical counterparts. Building on several studies that have problematised these two concepts, this article establishes an exploratory framework aimed at evaluating the experience of aura and authenticity in 3D digitisations. This exploration allowed us to conclude that even though some aspects of aura and authenticity are intrinsically related to the physicality and materiality of the original, 3D models can still manifest aura and authenticity, as long as a series of parameters, including multimodal contextualisation, interactivity, and affective experiences are facilitated.

Accessibility and public information of medical students’ Facebook profiles in Peru: A call to adapt e-professionalism guidelines in the Latin American context (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Jesús Aragón-Ayala ◽  
Henry Rodriguez-Carrillo ◽  
Aldor Cornejo-Estrada ◽  
Cender Udai Quispe-Juli
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Social Networking Sites ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Male Students ◽  
The Public ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Professional Information ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
The University

BACKGROUND Use of Facebook has increased and poses new challenges for adoption of professionalism. In this study we describe the accessibility of Facebook profiles in medical students, the disclosure of personal and professional information, and its association with sex and year of study. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to explore the public accessibility of Facebook profiles of medical students from a Peruvian university and the disclosure of personal and professional information, as well as its association with sex and the year of studies. METHODS Through a systematic search on Facebook, the profiles of medical students from the 2nd to the 7th year were located using fictitious profiles. The presence of different types of information in accessible profiles were evaluated. Furthermore, the proportion of the disclosed content was calculated. The data were compared according to year of study and sex. RESULTS 80% of students (488/611) presented publicly accessible profiles. We did not find a significant difference according year of study (p = 0.098) and sex (p = 0.912). Proportion of disclosed content was greater in higher years: 2nd and 3rd (p = 0.022), 2nd and 6th (p < 0.001), and 2nd and 7th (p = 0.002) and in men (33.25 ± 12.47) compared to women (30.38 ± 11.95) (p = 0.01). Some photos (p = 0.009) and links to other social networking sites (p = 0.036) were more commonly visible in women’s profiles, while showing the university (p = 0.017), medical school (p = 0.043) and sexual orientation (p = 0.001) was more common amongst men. CONCLUSIONS Most of the Facebook profiles of medical students were accessible, the disclosed content was greater in senior and male students. It is necessary to create and implement guidelines on e-professionalism in Latin America.

Public perception of COVID-19 vaccines from the digital footprints left on Twitter: analyzing positive, neutral and negative sentiments of Twitterati

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aasif Ahmad Mir ◽  
Sevukan Rathinam ◽  
Sumeer Gul
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
English Language ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Application Programming Interface ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Reaction ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
The Impact

PurposeTwitter is gaining popularity as a microblogging and social networking service to discuss various social issues. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic and is discussed worldwide. Social media is an instant platform to deliberate various dimensions of COVID-19. The purpose of the study is to explore and analyze the public sentiments related to COVID-19 vaccines across the Twitter messages (positive, neutral, and negative) and the impact tweets make across digital social circles.Design/methodology/approachTo fetch the vaccine-related posts, a manual examination of randomly selected 500 tweets was carried out to identify the popular hashtags relevant to the vaccine conversation. It was found that the hashtags “covid19vaccine” and “coronavirusvaccine” were the two popular hashtags used to discuss the communications related to COVID-19 vaccines. 23,575 global tweets available in public domain were retrieved through “Twitter Application Programming Interface” (API), using “Orange Software”, an open-source machine learning, data visualization and data mining toolkit. The study was confined to the tweets posted in English language only. The default data cleaning and preprocessing techniques available in the “Orange Software” were applied to the dataset, which include “transformation”, “tokenization” and “filtering”. The “Valence Aware Dictionary for sEntiment Reasoning” (VADER) tool was used for classification of tweets to determine the tweet sentiments (positive, neutral and negative) as well as the degree of sentiments (compound score also known as sentiment score). To assess the influence/impact of tweets account wise (verified and unverified) and sentiment wise (positive, neutral, and negative), the retweets and likes, which offer a sort of reward or acknowledgment of tweets, were used.FindingsA gradual decline in the number of tweets over the time is observed. Majority (11,205; 47.52%) of tweets express positive sentiments, followed by neutral (7,948; 33.71%) and negative sentiments (4,422; 18.75%), respectively. The study also signifies a substantial difference between the impact of tweets tweeted by verified and unverified users. The tweets related to verified users have a higher impact both in terms of retweets (65.91%) and likes (84.62%) compared to the tweets tweeted by unverified users. Tweets expressing positive sentiments have the highest impact both in terms of likes (mean = 10.48) and retweets (mean = 3.07) compared to those that express neutral or negative sentiments.Research limitations/implicationsThe main limitation of the study is that the sentiments of the people expressed over one single social platform, that is, Twitter have been studied which cannot generalize the global public perceptions. There can be a variation in the results when the datasets from other social media platforms will be studied.Practical implicationsThe study will help to know the people's sentiments and beliefs toward the COVID-19 vaccines. Sentiments that people hold about the COVID-19 vaccines are studied, which will help health policymakers understand the polarity (positive, negative, and neutral) of the tweets and thus see the public reaction and reflect the types of information people are exposed to about vaccines. The study can aid the health sectors to intensify positive messages and eliminate negative messages for an enhanced vaccination uptake. The research can also help design more operative vaccine-advocating communication by customizing messages using the obtained knowledge from the sentiments and opinions about the vaccines.Originality/valueThe paper focuses on an essential aspect of COVID-19 vaccines and how people express themselves (positively, neutrally and negatively) on Twitter.

scholarly journals What the Public Think about Social Services: A Report from Scotland

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 1146-1166
Author(s):  
Trish McCulloch ◽  
Stephen Webb
Keyword(s):  
Social Services ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Service Workers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Welfare Institutions ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Two Stages

Abstract This article reports on findings of a government-funded research project which set out to understand what the public think about social services in Scotland. The authors were particularly keen to examine issues of legitimacy, trust and licence to operate for social services as they are framed in public perceptions. Drawing on a national online survey of 2,505 nationally representative adults, the findings provide the first and largest empirical data set on public perceptions of social services in Scotland. Data analysis occurred in two stages and employed descriptive statistical measurement and cross-tabulation analysis. The findings indicate that, overall, people in Scotland are positive about social services and the value of their impact on society. Furthermore, they believe that social services perform a valuable public role. These findings are significant for debates surrounding social services and suggest that the Scottish public has a more positive view of social services than social service workers and welfare institutions typically perceive. The findings demonstrate the need to develop a more theoretically rich understanding of the relationships between public perception, legitimacy and social licence in social services, including attention to co-productive models of engagement.

scholarly journals Free and Frank Advice and the Official Information Act

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Kibblewhite ◽  
Peter Boshier
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Government Agency ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
The Public ◽  
Good Government ◽  
Work Programme ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Official Information

Concern exists that New Zealand hasn’t struck the right balance between two potentially competing principles of good government: officials should provide free and frank advice to ministers, and the public should have opportunities to participate in decision making and hold the government to account. Steps we have taken to address this include: strengthening constitutional underpinnings for free and frank advice (Cabinet Manual changes and issuing expectations for officials); a work programme to improve government agency practice in relation to the Official Information Act; and the Office of the Ombudsman reducing uncertainty about when advice can be withheld by issuing new principles-based guidance and providing more advisory services.

scholarly journals Policing During COVID-19: Perspectives from MET Police, UK

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 128-131
Author(s):  
CASIS Vancouver
Keyword(s):  
Information Sharing ◽  
West Coast ◽  
Online Environment ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Building Trust ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Question And Answer ◽  
The Right

On November 26th, 2020, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Lucy D'Orsi presented Policing During COVID-19: Perspectives from MET Police, UK at the 2020 CASIS West Coast Security Conference. The presentation was followed by a panel question and answer period with other speakers. The key points of discussion focused on the challenges faced by MET Police in a saturated online environment, harvesting the right information, sharing it with the public and private sectors, and building trust.

scholarly journals Weather Literacy in Times of Climate Change

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 435-452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Fleischhut ◽  
Stefan M. Herzog ◽  
Ralph Hertwig
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Weather Conditions ◽  
Extreme Weather ◽  
Extreme Weather Events ◽  
The Public ◽  
Weather Events ◽  
The Future ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
And Migration ◽  
Weather Risks

AbstractAs climate change unfolds, extreme weather events are on the rise worldwide. According to experts, extreme weather risks already outrank those of terrorism and migration in likelihood and impact. But how well does the public understand weather risks and forecast uncertainty and thus grasp the amplified weather risks that climate change poses for the future? In a nationally representative survey (N = 1004; Germany), we tested the public’s weather literacy and awareness of climate change using 62 factual questions. Many respondents misjudged important weather risks (e.g., they were unaware that UV radiation can be higher under patchy cloud cover than on a cloudless day) and struggled to connect weather conditions to their impacts (e.g., they overestimated the distance to a thunderstorm). Most misinterpreted a probabilistic forecast deterministically, yet they strongly underestimated the uncertainty of deterministic forecasts. Respondents with higher weather literacy obtained weather information more often and spent more time outside but were not more educated. Those better informed about climate change were only slightly more weather literate. Overall, the public does not seem well equipped to anticipate weather risks in the here and now and may thus also fail to fully grasp what climate change implies for the future. These deficits in weather literacy highlight the need for impact forecasts that translate what the weather may be into what the weather may do and for transparent communication of uncertainty to the public. Boosting weather literacy may help to improve the public’s understanding of weather and climate change risks, thereby fostering informed decisions and mitigation support.

Exploring the differences in SPC convective outlook interpretation using categorical and numeric information

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Severe Weather ◽  
Correct Interpretation ◽  
Representative Survey ◽  
Risk Levels ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Interpretation ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Numeric Information ◽  
The Given ◽  
Level 2

Abstract While previous work has shown the Storm Prediction Center (SPC) convective outlooks accurately capture meteorological outcomes, evidence suggests stakeholders and the public may misinterpret the categorical words currently used in the product. This work attempts to address this problem by investigating public reactions to alternative information formats that include numeric information: (1) numeric risk levels (i.e., “Level 2 of 5”) and (2) numeric probabilities (i.e., “a 5% chance”). In addition, it explores how different combinations of the categorical labels with numeric information may impact public reactions to the product. Survey data comes from the 2020 Severe Weather and Society Survey, a nationally representative survey of US adults. Participants were shown varying combinations of the information formats of interest, and then rated their concern about the weather and the likelihood of changing plans in response to the given information. Results indicate that providing numeric information (in the form of levels or probabilities) increases the likelihood of participants correctly interpreting the convective outlook information relative to categorical labels alone. Including the categorical labels increases misinterpretation, regardless of whether numeric information was included alongside the labels. Finally, findings indicate participants’ numeracy (or their ability to understand and work with numbers) had an impact on correct interpretation of the order of the outlook labels. Although there are many challenges to correctly interpreting the SPC convective outlook, using only numeric labels instead of the current categorical labels may be a relatively straightforward change that could improve public interpretation of the product.

‘Flying Gas Mains’: Rumour, Secrecy, and Morale during the V-2 Bombardment of Britain

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie Hall
Keyword(s):  
Government Policy ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
British Government ◽  
The South ◽  
The Public ◽  
Firing Line ◽  
Missile Attack ◽  
Official Information

Abstract Britain was the first country to suffer casualties as the result of a ballistic missile attack, when German V-2 rockets began landing in London and the South-East in September 1944. This new menace posed critical challenges, not only to the civilians whose lives were endangered once again, but also to the British government. Policymakers had to decide what, if any, information they released to the public, amid fears of creating panic, providing free propaganda to the Nazis, and helping the V-2 launching units improve their aim. Their commitment to secrecy in this period was both resolute and largely unnecessary, not to mention ineffective. In the absence of official information released from above, the public drew their own conclusions and myriad rumours emerged, many of which were remarkably accurate. This article will explore the ways in which government policy surrounding censorship and publicity changed during the V-2 bombardment and the extent to which this affected those in the firing line. It will also add considerable nuance to our understanding of public morale in this period, which was rather less steadfast than many accounts suggest, and which continued to be a major government preoccupation, despite the diminishing likelihood of a descent into mass panic or defeatism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document