Critical media skills and mitigation of the infodemic

Academic literature offers numerous definitions of media literacy. According to authors such as Potter (2013), media literacy can relate to many different things in diverse fields. While some authors refer to media literacy as the ability to access and manage the media, others focus on people’s ability to understand, analyze and evaluate the texts, images, and sounds that comprise contemporary audiovisual culture. In accordance with these ideas, Ferrés and Piscitelli (2012) propose media literacy as a generic framework of competencies that covers multiple dimensions such as people’s attitudes, perceptions, and abilities in relation to the production, distribution, and reception of media information.

Scientific research has traditionally covered medium-centered literacies, but growing interest in the role of audiences has led to emerging fields of specialization. Critical media literacy has been underlined as a novel field for understanding difficult-to-observe practices such as people’s management of information within a complex media structure (Kendall & McDougall, 2012). As a field of study, critical media literacy explores people’s understanding of media messages and conventions, their ability to analyze stereotyped discourse and dominant values, and their attitudes and perceptions of media messages (Kellner & Share, 2007). Critical media literacy training can take place in both formal and less formal learning environments. It can be inherent to both the process and the outcome of situated learning practices where media users have to deal with media content, make decisions, and make sense of the information they consume or are exposed to (Kendall & McDougall, 2012; Sánchez-Reina, 2020).

In the context of the COVID-19 outbreak, scientific literature has identified critical media skills such as the ability to assess, synthesize, and analyze media content as weapons to defeat the infodemic. Indeed, according to scientific reports, critical media skills such as the evaluation, selection, and fact-checking of media information are likely to decrease the impact of the infodemic. Media literacy training projects conducted by Pérez-Escolar et al. (2021) and Scheibenzuber et al. (2021) during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that training in fact-checking skills may improve people’s abilities to tackle disinformation. Additionally, Espina and Spracklin (2021) evidenced that these literacy skills can support health professionals by increasing their confidence when evaluating online information and specialized health journals.

Furthermore, research has highlighted correlations between critical media competencies and institutional (dis)trust. In their descriptive study, Austin et al. (2021) found a strong relationship between media literacy and the acceptance of official information disseminated by the government. In contrast, Pickles et al. (2020) observed that Australian citizens showed lower institutional trust and greater rejection of official governmental information mostly supported by misinformation (fake news, rumors, and myths). Additional studies have focused on the prebunking: the inoculation of knowledge and experiences to deal not only with disinformation, but also with associated situations t (e.g., deception, manipulation, and polarization). Basol et al. (2021) evaluated the efficacy of two pre-bunking interventions and determined that media literacy training can increase critical attitudes, including the ability to perceive manipulative information about COVID-19, the confidence to spot misinformation, and the willingness to share fake news with others. Similarly, Guldin et al. (2021) compared the performance of individuals to deal with misinformation by observing new and existing critical skills, concluding that people with previous training were better protected against the infodemic. Forsythe (2020) offers a different perspective, observing that although the infodemic can be diminished by enhancing critical media attitudes, training in information skills might not tackle the overall problem of many people’s lack of health literacy, such as little knowledge of what a virus is, how contagion and immunization work, and so forth. To this argument, authors such as Brodsky et al. (2021) posit the idea of curricula, raising that to improve critical media skills, it is first necessary to equip the individual with a curriculum programmed for specific scenarios.

In the context of an unprecedented event in modern history such as the COVID-19 outbreak, media literacy has emerged as a resource for dealing with the infodemic. Fake news, conspiracy theories, and other myths around the COVID-19 pandemic have variously influenced populations in correlation with the lack of media education and health literacies (Forsythe, 2020; Patel et al., 2020). Both inoculated skills and the current implementation of media literacy programs have succeeded as important tools to fight the negative impacts of the COVID-19 infodemic. While current literature has focused on assessing the outcomes of interventions, few studies have explored the role of inoculated critical media literacies and their relation to other subsidiary variables. In this respect, this study observed the following concepts:

Infodemic perception and awareness (IPA): Described as the ability to evaluate the state of information, IPA encompasses the ability to monitor one’s media consumption and execute copying skills against unreliable and deceitful information. In line with the studies conducted by Espina and Spracklin (2021), Pérez-Escolar et al. (2021), Scheibenzuber et al. (2021), and Vraga et al. (2020), higher critical media attitudes correspond to higher infodemic awareness. It was thus hypothesized that high levels of infodemic awareness would be associated with high levels of critical media literacy (H1). Infodemic and socio-emotional wellbeing (ISW): This refers to both the physiological and socio-emotional mechanisms that the exposure of information produces in individuals, as well as the strategies they develop to protect themselves from them. As discussed by recent studies, higher critical media skills may be associated with lower levels of stress, fear, and anxiety (de-Bruin et al., 2020; Ouedraogo, 2020). Moreover, critical media skills may decrease the emotional reactions to infodemic (ERI) (Borah et al., 2021; Scribano & Lisdero, 2020). In this line, we hypothesized that the higher levels of critical media literacy would be associated with lower levels of socio-emotional effects and emotional reactions (H2).

Media trust and confidence (MTC): This refers to the confidence people grant in media sources. It comprises people’s acceptance and reliability of information elaborated or coming from it. According to prior research (Austin et al., 2021; Okan et al., 2020; Pérez-Escoda et al., 2021; Pickles et al., 2020), a higher level of critical media attitudes correlates with higher trust in information from primary sources (e.g., institutional media, government media) and less reliability in non-formal media (e.g., social media, and primary circles of socialization). We, therefore, hypothesized that higher levels of critical media literacy might be associated with higher institutional media trust and confidence (H3).

Sample and procedure

A cross-sectional descriptive study was designed using an online questionnaire to measure media consumption habits, perceptions, and attitudes towards information during the COVID-19 outbreak. As in similar studies conducted in virtual environments (Baltar & Brunet, 2012; Rife et al., 2016), convenience sampling was used. Two project researchers shared the online questionnaire with non-official social media groups of two university virtual communities, namely FCCom BUAP (N=4,100), and Facultad de Psicología, BUAP (N=3,400). To gain wider heterogeneity in the sample, the snowball technique was applied by asking participants to share the questionnaire among potential participants. Additionally, the questionnaire was shared via researchers’ social media profiles on LinkedIn and Twitter.

Data collection took place from March to June 2021 from a total of 414 individuals. After data verification and cleaning, the final sample was set at 404 participants. Demographically, 41.1% (n=166) of participants were men, 57.9% (n=234) were women, and 2% (n=4) preferred not to specify. The mean age of participants was 32.8 years (SD=12.65). The highest educational attainment was university studies (79.2%, n=320), and 65.6% of respondents (n=265) declared themselves to be employed.

The expressly designed questionnaire was adapted to Google Forms and consisted of five sections with a total of 55 items. Collected data included a) demographic information, b) a self-report of media consumption habits, c) a self-report of news consumption, d) assessment of perceptions and attitudes towards media information, and e) assessment of the socioemotional effects of the infodemic. All participants were informed of the project’s purpose, and the questionnaire included an information sheet on the nature of the project and the participants’ right to withdraw at any time. In compliance with the ethical protocol of Pompeu Fabra University and the GDPR 2018 regulation, the questionnaire was fully anonymous and only non-sensitive information was collected.

Measurement

The study encompassed how the following variables were impacted by critical media skills (CMS): infodemic perception and awareness (IPA), infodemic and socio-emotional wellbeing (ISW), emotional reactions to infodemic (ERI), and media trust and confidence (MTC). Following recent literature on media literacy and the COVID-19 infodemic, a list of variables and indicators was compiled and translated into a questionnaire. A first version of the questionnaire was revised by two senior researchers in media communication and sociology, and piloted with a group of university students. Adjustments were made to improve interaction and readability. An overall description of the analyzed variables is provided below. Table 1 summarizes the frequencies for the measured items in the employed scales.

Critical media skills (CMS). We constructed a 6-item scale to assess CMS toward media information based on the indicators of media literacy competencies proposed by Ferrés and Piscitelli (2012). The CMS scale was reported on a 5-point scale rating agreement from (1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree. The section yielded scores of M=21.8 and SD=5.0 and a reliability coefficient of α=.86.Infodemic perception and awareness (IPA). This variable measured perceptions and attitudes towards the infodemic using a 6-item scale reported on 5-rating points (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree). The section results had a mean of 18.67, SD=3.72, and α=0.61. Infodemic and socio-emotional wellbeing (ISW). This variable assessed the self-perceived effects of the infodemic on physical health, stress, and emotions. The variable was measured with three items reported on a 5-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree). The scale reported an average score of M=9.02, SD=3.36, and α=0.83. Additionally, respondents were asked to grade their emotional reactions to news information (ERI). As per prior research (Scribano & Lisdero, 2020), ERI was rated on a 4-point scale (1=not at all, 4=very much). The scale yielded values of M=21.60, SD=4.94, and α=0.79.

Media Trust and Confidence (MTC). In line with prior research (Losada-Díaz et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2020), confidence in the news and COVID-19 information disseminated by mass media, the government, social media, and the primary social sphere (family and friends) was measured. MTC was reported on a 5-point scale (1=not at all to 5=very much). This section yielded scores of M=11.46, SD=2.56, and α=0.64. As part of the descriptive analysis, media consumption habits (MCH) were also measured. This variable included self-reporting of news consumption during the pandemic in terms of the frequency of consumption and media preferences. While frequency was measured using a 5-point scale for news consumption (“How often have you consumed news concerning the COVID-19 outbreak?”; 0=never to 5=always), media preference was measured via a multiple-choice question to identify the most and least consumed media sources. Responses were classified into two categories, namely digital media and traditional media consumption.

Data analysis

The age variable was divided into two age groups constructed according to the criteria of the Panamerican Health Organization (2009): youth included participants from 18 to ≤ 26 years (n=187, 46.3%), while adults included participants from 27 to 65+ years (n=217, 53.7%). The first level of analysis included descriptive statistics analysis and normality tests for both age groups. A chi-square test observed the differences in CMS, IPA, ISW, ERI, and MTC scale items. The second level of analysis included hypothesis testing. As a first step, the average score of the scales was computed considering the transformation of the Likert items that required inversion (Suárez-Álvarez et al., 2018) and a Pearson test was performed to observe zero-order correlations. The second level of analysis included an ANOVA test for age groups according to their CMS levels (i.e., youth with lower CMS, youth with higher CMS, adults with lower CMS, and adults with higher CMS). CMS levels were computed as a binary variable according to the distribution of percentiles of CMS-scored values. Lower CMS was defined as a score ≤ the 50^th percentile (6–22 points), while higher CMS was defined as a score ≥ the 50^th percentile (23–30 points).

Descriptive analysis

Adults reported higher values for the frequency of news consumption (M=3.24, SD=.94) in comparison to youth (M=3.00, SD=.86, t(402)=-2,52, p=<0.05). Regarding media preferences, both groups were more likely to use digital media to be informed. Preference for digital media was greater among adults (M=1.66, SD=.88 vs M=1.22, SD=.80, t(402)=5.30, p=<0.05). Media consumption preferences varied between age groups: digital press, websites, and social media were preferred by youth over traditional media (press, radio, and television). Concerning media formats, audiovisual content such as podcasts, videos, and infographics were mostly preferred among young people. Table 2 summarizes the reported media consumption habits and preferences for media formats.

As shown in Table 3, both youth and adults reflected high mean values for CMS scale, and no statistically significant differences were reported in the scale items.

With regards to IPA, young people showed higher mean values for the perception of larger media consumption in comparison to adults (M=3.41 vs M=3.05), and higher mean values for infodemic awareness (M=3.96 vs M=3.65). Adults, on their part, reported larger mean values for feeling confused due to the excess of information (M=3.04 vs M=2.97) and avoiding information to prevent emotional stress (M=2.76 vs M=2.44). Significant statistical differences were found only in three scale items. Similarly, the ISW variable had larger mean values among youth for items such as the effects of the infodemic on well-being and emotional state. Adults reported higher values for feeling stress after being exposed to COVID-19 information (M=3.00 vs M=2.39). No statistically significant differences were reported in the scale items. Aligned with this, ERI was higher among young people in comparison to adults, with anxiety and uncertainty being revealed as the most frequently manifested emotions. Positive emotional reactions such as joy and surprise reported statistically significant differences as youth reported higher mean values (M=2.30 vs M=2.17). Lastly, the MTC analysis yielded larger mean values among youth for information sources such as the government, mass media, and social media. Significant statistical differences were found in these items. Adults reported higher trust in information from family and friends.

Critical media skills in young people and adults

Table 4 displays the descriptive statistics of the scales and zero-order correlations. On average, CMS, IPA, and ISW had large mean values, while ERI and MTC yielded moderate numbers. Correlational analysis revealed a significant association between CMS, IPA, ISW, ERI, and MTC. However, correlations were weak. IPA was also positively associated with ISW and ERI and negatively correlated with MTC. ERI was moderately correlated with ISW, whereas the MTC was generally negatively correlated with IPA.

Group observations according to CMS level (Table 5) indicate the lowest IPA value for youth with L-CMS (M=3.05) and the highest for adults with H-CMS (M=3.19). However, no significant statistical differences were reported. Youth and adults with H-CMS had higher mean values for ISW (M=3.19 and M=3.20, correspondingly), and significant statistical differences were observed (p<.001). Consistent with this, youth and adults with H-CMS also reported higher values for ERI. Lastly, youth and adults with H-CMS had larger values for MTC, and statistically significant differences confirmed the mean differences within groups (p<.001).