Measuring Media Exposure to Contradictory Health Information: A Comparative Analysis of Four Potential Measures

Abstract

There is increasing concern that the news media present conflicting health information on topics including cancer screening and nutrition, yet little is known about whether people notice such content. This study proposes four potential measures of media exposure to contradictory health information, using nutrition as an example (Measures I–IV). The measures varied on two dimensions: (1) content specificity, or whether specific nutrition topics and health consequences were mentioned in the question scripting, and (2) obtrusiveness, or whether “contradictory or conflicting information” was mentioned. Using data from the Annenberg National Health Communication Survey (ANHCS), we evaluated the performance of each measure against a set of validity criteria including nomological, convergent, and face validity. Overall, measure IV, which was moderately content-specific and obtrusive, performed consistently well and may prove most useful to researchers studying media effects of contradictory health information. Future directions and applications are discussed.

Source-specific Exposure to Contradictory Nutrition Information: Documenting Prevalence and Effects on Adverse Cognitive and Behavioral Outcomes

“…Consistent with prior research (Nagler, 2014; Nagler & Hornik, 2012), the current study finds that many people report exposure to contradictory information about topics such as red wine or other alcohol, fish, coffee, vitamins/supplements. This exposure occurs across media, interpersonal, and medical sources, and data suggest that some sources—such as television—may be particularly important vehicles of conflicting information.…”

“…Overall, few studies have specifically assessed whether people are exposed to contradictory information—whether through the media or other sources—during their routine interactions (Nagler, 2014; Nagler & Hornik, 2012; Tan et al, 2015). To our knowledge, only one study (Tan et al, 2015) has assessed source-specific exposure to contradictory information, which found that, in the context of e-cigarettes, the primary sources of contradictory exposure were television, print newspapers or magazines, and interpersonal sources such as friends, family, and co-workers.…”

“…Both quantitative and qualitative studies have found that people perceive conflict about these and other topics (Carpenter, Elstad, Blalock, & DeVellis, 2014; Vardeman & Aldoory, 2008), which may drive them to seek more information (Weeks, Friedenberg, Southwell, & Slater, 2012) and influence their behavior decisions (Gibson et al, 2015). Yet few studies have explicitly assessed media exposure to contradictory information (Nagler, 2014; Nagler & Hornik, 2012; Tan, Lee, & Bigman, 2015), and research examining the effects of such exposure is limited (Chang, 2013, 2015; Dixon & Clarke, 2012; Jensen & Hurley, 2012; Nan & Daily, 2015). Health and scientific controversies are increasingly prominent in the media.…”

“…First, using nutrition as a case example, we assess the extent to which people are exposed to contradictory information from media, interpersonal, and medical sources. Prior research has found substantial self-reported media exposure to contradictory nutrition information in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults (Nagler, 2014; Nagler & Hornik, 2012). However, these studies did not distinguish among media sources, nor did they ask about interpersonal or medical sources—even though there is reason to believe that some sources may be particularly important vehicles of contradictory information exposure (Lee & Niederdeppe, 2011; Niederdeppe et al, 2014).…”

ecancermedicalscience

“…During the last two decades, the media has inundated the public with often contradictory and imbalanced stories regarding cancer [3, 4]. Much of this information has been ambivalent, conflicting, and scientifically questionable, resulting in a public frenzy about cancer [5–7].…”