Objective

Both legacy media, such as television and newspapers, and online social media are potentially important but incompletely understood sources of information in the face of emerging public health risks. This research aimed to understand media effects on risk perceptions and behaviors concerning the Zika virus in the United States.

Methods

We analyzed a multi-wave nationally representative survey (N = 29,062) and the volume of communications in social and legacy media (i.e., legacy media data from news sources and databases, N = 2,660 and social media data from Twitter, N = 1,605,752) in the United States between April and October 2016, dates coinciding with the early cases of local transmission of Zika in the United States (i.e., 25 weeks). The present study conducted econometric analyses (i.e., Granger causality tests) to assess the associations of legacy and social media coverage with risk perceptions and protective behaviors in the total sample and specific groups separated by pregnancy status/intent, geographic region, income, education level, age, and ethnicity.

Results

The results from the overall sample suggested that changes in the volume of information in legacy and social media (i.e., Twitter) were followed by different changes in community risk perceptions and protective behaviors. Specifically, social media coverage correlated with the level of risk perceptions, whereas the legacy media coverage correlated with the level of protective behaviors. Analyses across different subpopulations, including those of different pregnancy status/intent, geographic Zika risk, income, education level, age, and ethnicity, replicated the social media associations with risk perceptions in most cases. However, legacy media and protective behaviors were linked only in some vulnerable subpopulations (e.g., the less-educated populations).

Conclusion

Understanding how media coverage relates to Zika risk perceptions and protective behaviors will help to facilitate effective risk communications by healthcare professionals and providers, particularly when a health risk emerges.

In keeping with the growing movement in scientific publishing toward transparency in data and methods, we propose changes to journal authorship policies and procedures to provide insight into which author is responsible for which contributions, better assurance that the list is complete, and clearly articulated standards to justify earning authorship credit. To accomplish these goals, we recommend that journals adopt common and transparent standards for authorship, outline responsibilities for corresponding authors, adopt the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) (docs.casrai.org/CRediT) methodology for attributing contributions, include this information in article metadata, and require authors to use the ORCID persistent digital identifier (https://orcid.org). Additionally, we recommend that universities and research institutions articulate expectations about author roles and responsibilities to provide a point of common understanding for discussion of authorship across research teams. Furthermore, we propose that funding agencies adopt the ORCID identifier and accept the CRediT taxonomy. We encourage scientific societies to further authorship transparency by signing on to these recommendations and promoting them through their meetings and publications programs.

Improve incentives to support research integrity