In today's fast-paced digital age, the challenge of discerning reliable health information has become increasingly complex. Humans inherently possess a tendency known as confirmation bias, which involves selectively seeking evidence that supports pre-existing beliefs and anxieties. This bias can be incredibly resistant to change, posing significant hurdles to altering one’s viewpoint, especially in health matters. Misinformation and disinformation often stem from negative experiences within the healthcare system, further complicating the landscape of health information.
A significant factor contributing to disinformation is the individual's susceptibility, often rooted in legitimate past experiences. These experiences can shape attitude roots, which are neither inherently good nor bad, yet they can lead to misinformed beliefs about crucial topics such as vaccination. Dawn Holford, an expert in understanding these cognitive challenges, explains that there are 11 distinct attitude roots influencing misbeliefs about vaccination. These include concerns about adverse medical outcomes, religious beliefs, and reactance—a tendency to resist being told what to do.
“For example, my team and I have looked at 11 different attitude roots that drive misinformed beliefs about vaccination; these include fears about adverse medical outcomes, religious concerns, or even a tendency to push back against being told to do things — a trait known as ‘reactance.’” – Dawn Holford
Individuals often gravitate towards information that aligns with their existing beliefs, regardless of its accuracy. This inclination underscores the importance of verifying health information through multiple sources. Relying on a single source can be misleading, and platforms such as the World Health Organization (WHO) provide comprehensive health information across various topics. In the UK, Patient Info serves as a valuable resource by gathering expert advice on numerous health concerns.
The role of trusted health providers or community health representatives is crucial in guiding individuals towards credible information. Dawn Holford emphasizes the importance of these relationships:
“If you have a trusted health provider or community health representative whom you can talk to, it is really worth seeking them out to ask for advice on where to look.” – Dawn Holford
Furthermore, health professionals play a pivotal role in facilitating conversations about healthcare decisions. Holford stresses the value of dialogue in navigating the complexities of health information:
“Being able to have that conversation, if you have access to that, is probably the best I could recommend,” – Dawn Holford
However, the responsibility for verifying information should not rest solely on patients and consumers. Holford advocates for enhanced quality control measures on platforms where people frequently seek health information:
“I […] strongly believe that the onus [to verify the accuracy of information] cannot only be on patients and consumers.” – Dawn Holford
“Rather than accepting that it’s just up to us to work out what is true, we can advocate for better information quality control on platforms where people go to find health information,” – Dawn Holford
Governmental public health organizations often provide reliable information due to their accountability to citizens. These organizations also strive to communicate using accessible language:
“Ironically, governmental public health organizations are often the places where the information is reliable — because they are accountable to citizens in a way that other content generators would not be,” – Dawn Holford
“Many also make an effort to share information using accessible language.” – Dawn Holford
Despite the availability of trusted sources, social media and personal networks remain popular channels for seeking health advice. While convenient, these sources may not always offer reliable information. Verifying data through independent sources enhances credibility and helps individuals make informed healthcare decisions.
Leave a Reply