What characterize the rumors circulating on social media in Israel in the first wave of COVID-19?

Abstract

The outbreak of COVID-19 has transformed our daily lives, raising concerns about transmission, infection, and recovery rates. This has led to a proliferation of rumors. Online social media platforms have played a significant role in fueling the spread of these rumors. To better understand the character of rumors that circulated on social media during the initial months of the COVID-19 crisis, we collected and analyzed the content of around 100 major rumors, collected in Israel mainly from websites that track of the dissemination of rumors. We found that the majority of rumors focused on health-related issues. In addition: (1) The majority of rumors focused on ways to prevent contracting the virus or how to recover from it, with a significant emphasis on the body and health of individuals. There were significantly fewer rumors that addressed more “distant” issues, such as the origin of the virus. (2) Many rumors cited the name of a researcher or institution, either in Israel or abroad, arguably to enhance the credibility of the rumor. (3) While the number of rumors that aimed to downplay the severity of the pandemic (e.g., claims that government institutions intentionally exaggerated the threat, in order to control the population) was relatively small, it was double the number of rumors that inflated the significance of the pandemic (i.e., that it may be more severe and fatal than it appears).

Full text

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023, 13(4), e202352
e-ISSN: 1986-3497
Copyright © 2023 by authors; licensee OJCMT by Bastas, CY. This article is an open access article distributed under the
terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
What characterize the rumors circulating on social media in
Israel in the first wave of COVID-19?
Hodaya Avikasis 1
0009-0000-6997-2340
Adi Shalem-Rabinovich 1
0009-0009-8915-5351
Yehudit Yehezkeli 1
0009-0003-4588-2748
Azi Lev-on 1*
0000-0002-0248-9802
1 Ariel University, Ariel, ISRAEL
* Corresponding author: azilevon@gmail.com
Citation: Avikasis, H., Shalem-Rabinovich, A., Yehezkeli, Y., & Lev-on, A. (2023). What characterize the rumors circulating on
social media in Israel in the first wave of COVID-19?. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352.
https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/13681
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Received: 18 May 2023
Accepted: 2 Sep 2023
The outbreak of COVID-19 has transformed our daily lives, raising concerns about transmission,
infection, and recovery rates. This has led to a proliferation of rumors. Online social media
platforms have played a significant role in fueling the spread of these rumors. To better
understand the character of rumors that circulated on social media during the initial months of
the COVID-19 crisis, we collected and analyzed the content of around 100 major rumors,
collected in Israel mainly from websites that track of the dissemination of rumors. We found that
the majority of rumors focused on health-related issues. In addition: (1) The majority of rumors
focused on ways to prevent contracting the virus or how to recover from it, with a significant
emphasis on the body and health of individuals. There were significantly fewer rumors that
addressed more “distant” issues, such as the origin of the virus. (2) Many rumors cited the name
of a researcher or institution, either in Israel or abroad, arguably to enhance the credibility of
the rumor. (3) While the number of rumors that aimed to downplay the severity of the pandemic
(e.g., claims that government institutions intentionally exaggerated the threat, in order to control
the population) was relatively small, it was double the number of rumors that inflated the
significance of the pandemic (i.e., that it may be more severe and fatal than it appears).
Keywords: social media, rumors, COVID-19
RUMORS: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
A rumor is a piece of information whose origin is uncertain (Buckner, 1965; Rosnow & Fine, 1976). The
distributor of a rumor is often unaware of whether the information is true or false. Every person exposed to
the rumor may evaluate its level of credibility differently, based on their own experiences and biases (Jaeger
et al., 1980; Van Der Linden, 2022).
Rumors can spread in various contexts, but they are particularly prevalent in crisis and disaster situations
(Liu et al., 2014). Research has shown that people often spread rumors in attempts to create order, give
meaning, or manage risks in uncertain or ambiguous situations, such as during disasters, wars, economic
downturns, security threats, and health crises (Bordia & DiFonzo, 2007; Suarez-Lledo & Alvarez-Galvez, 2021).
For instance, during a disaster, it may take a considerable amount of time before the causes and
consequences of the event become known. This is a catalyst for the spread of rumors, as people seek
Research Article

Avikasis et al.
2 / 15 Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352
information that is not immediately available (Comfort et al., 2004; Zook et al., 2010) and may attempt to fill
in the gaps with rumors (Stephens & Malone, 2009).
At the conclusion of World War II, Allport and Postman (1945) conducted a study in which they posited that
rumors arise in situations of ambiguity. They argued that when the future is uncertain and the situation is
important to citizens, rumors tend to spread. The researchers used the Pearl Harbor attack as an example,
where the initial shock created uncertainty among the media and citizens. This shock and uncertainty
provided fertile ground for the dissemination of rumors on a large scale, which became known as the “Pearl
Harbor Rumors”. Years later, Rosnow (1974) presented the sensemaking theory, which proposes that the
primary purpose of passing on rumors is to cope with uncertainty and anxiety (Esposito & Rosnow, 1984;
Rosnow, 1980). The more ambiguous and stressful a situation is, the greater the need to interpret it, to
generate a clear understanding and find ways to alleviate the feeling of ambiguity. In his earlier work, Rosnow
(1974) identified three waves of rumor transmission: the first stage involves the formation of the rumor in
which a story is intentionally or unintentionally created; the second stage involves the spreading of the rumor
and its dissemination among many people; and the third stage involves controlling the rumor, until the story
eventually fades away.
Rumors in Social Media
During routine times, as well as times of emergency, individuals seek to obtain information from both
official and unofficial sources (Bates & Callison, 2008; Sweetser & Metzgar, 2007). Acquaintance-based means
of communication, such as WhatsApp and email, are often used to share information with friends and
acquaintances (Palen & Liu, 2007; Stiegler et al., 2011). Non-acquaintance-based means of communication,
such as Television and Websites are also popular sources for obtaining information, where the intended
recipient is unknown (Boyle et al., 2004; Lev-On & Uziel, 2018).
Online social media have become increasingly popular as a source of information due to its high
availability and accessibility (Doerr et al., 2012; Lev-On, 2012; Lev-On & Uziel, 2018; Palen & Liu, 2007). With
the rise of social networks, people now rely heavily on them to obtain information. Unlike in the past, when
rumors could take a long time to spread through word of mouth, the Internet and online social media have
made it possible for rumors to spread quickly to a large number of people (Hagar, 2013; Simon et al., 2016).
The rapid transmission of messages on social media, contributes significantly to the spread of rumors
(Silverman, 2015). This can be destructive in disaster situations, especially when false rumors are involved
(Tierney et al., 2006). One such example is operation protective edge in Israel (Lev-On & Uziel, 2018), where
both true and false rumors were disseminated. For instance, a family received a WhatsApp message claiming
their son, who was a soldier, had died. The family later discovered that their son was alive, but the initial false
news had taken an emotional toll on them (Averbach, 2016).
Social media platforms operate on the basis of social connections, which can help propagate rumors.
When people receive information from their close and familiar social circles, they tend to believe it and share
it. This phenomenon contributes to the creation of trust in rumors and their rapid spread through social
networks (Garrett, 2011). Researchers have also demonstrated that during a crisis, people often seek
information about their loved ones and may even turn to friends with whom they have limited contact, using
social media platforms as a means of obtaining such information (Abbasi et al., 2010; Hagar, 2013).
Social media platforms have played a significant role in increasing the involvement of citizens in media
and politics, enabling them to become content creators and distributors, and even “citizen journalists” (Hagar,
2013). The combination of official sources of information with content created by citizens and disseminated
through social media contributes to the information overload that occurs during crises. This information
overload, in turn, can increase uncertainty and make it more difficult to make decisions or filter reliable
sources of information. As a result, when official information channels fail to provide answers to essential
questions, unofficial channels often step in to fill the gap (Starbird et al., 2012).
Rumors in Health Contexts
Rumors regarding health can be especially troublesome as they tend to spread more quickly than
established information (Vosoughi et al., 2018). Such rumors can result in people adopting damaging health-

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352 3 / 15
related behaviors and can even impede the efforts of organizations responsible for managing public health
(Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Lee & Oh, 2017; Pluviano et al., 2017; Suarez-Lledo & Alvarez-Galvez, 2021).
HIV/AIDS disease serves as a notable example of how rumors can spread within the context of public
health. Its discovery in Western countries in the late 1970s led to extensive research and discussions, but a
lack of reliable information and social anxiety fueled the dissemination of rumors. Various myths about AIDS
circulated throughout American society, including the belief that only homosexuals could contract the disease
(Fumento, 1990), that it could be transmitted through casual contact with objects like doorknobs, toilet seats,
or swimming pools (Kimmel & Keefer, 1991), and even that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had
developed the disease as a means of targeting African-Americans and homosexuals (Turner, 1993), among
others. As accurate information became more widely available, public anxiety about AIDS decreased, and the
prevalence of rumors surrounding the disease declined (Osmond, 2003).
In 2002, SARS epidemic broke out in China, but the Chinese media remained silent about the disease until
early 2003, when newspapers in one of its provinces started reporting on it (Zhang & Fleming, 2005). The lack
of official information led to the rapid spread of rumors, causing panic among the public. One of the rumors
that gained traction was that drinking rice vinegar could make individuals less susceptible to SARS virus,
leading to people stockpiling rice and salt (Wong, 2003).
According to research, individuals who experience health anxiety are more likely to share rumors with
others as a means of alleviating their mental distress (Anthony, 1973; Pezzo & Beckstead, 2006). It has been
observed that rumors are often created and spread when individuals are in a state of health anxiety about a
topic that is personally relevant to them (Bordia & Difonzo, 2004). In a recent study, researchers investigated
the relationship between health anxiety and the frequency of rumor-sharing and found that individuals with
high levels of health anxiety tend to share more rumors (Oh & Lee, 2019).
People with low health literacy are less likely to search for complex medical information (von Wagner et
al., 2009), which may lead to reliance on intuitive cues for evaluating information (Oh & Lee, 2019). On the
other hand, those with higher health literacy may be more susceptible to biases in decision-making (Swindell
et al., 2010), but they are also more likely to thoroughly evaluate and verify online health information they
come across (Diviani et al., 2015).
Significance of Source of Rumors
The processing likelihood model proposes that people can process information they receive through two
distinct paths: central and peripheral. When processing information through the central path, people engage
in deep processing of the message content (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). In contrast, individuals processing
information through the peripheral path focus on cues around them, such as the credibility of the message
source, rather than the message itself (Pornpitakpan, 2004). Therefore, identifying a rumor with a reliable
source, even if it is not actually reliable, can potentially accelerate its spread.
Source credibility refers to the extent to which an audience perceives an author/speaker’s claims as valid,
considering their expertise in the topic (Hovland et al., 1953; McCroskey, 1966). Research has demonstrated
that source credibility plays a significant role in the persuasion process (Crano, 1970; Crisci & Kassinove, 1973;
Gangloff, 1981; Manfredo & Bright, 1991).
Several studies have explored how individuals evaluate the trustworthiness of medical information found
on various websites (Hu & Sundar, 2010; Sundar & Nass, 2001; Spence et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2008). However,
limited research has been conducted on how people assess the reliability of medical information posted on
social media platforms. Among the few studies that have explored this topic, Spence et al. (2013) investigated
the issue of credibility in medical contexts on social networks within the African-American community.
Similarly, Lin et al. (2016) examined source credibility assessment in social networks regarding medical issues
and found that individuals tend to perceive information as more reliable if it has a certain level of authority.
“Dread” and “Wish” Rumors
The literature distinguishes between two types of rumors: “dread” rumors that convey frightening or
undesirable events or outcomes, and “wish” rumors that express hope for positive or desired outcomes.
According to Allport and Postman (1947), wish rumors sometimes arise in the context of difficult situations,

Avikasis et al.
4 / 15 Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352
offering hope for a resolution. However, fearful rumors tend to be more prevalent than favorable ones (Rosnow
et al., 1988). This is consistent with the findings of Kahneman and Tversky (1979) that negative events or
information have a stronger impact than positive ones.
Rumors in the Context of COVID-19
In late 2019, the coronavirus (COVID-19) was first identified in China. The virus led to a severe respiratory
illness outbreak and rapidly evolved into a global pandemic with unprecedented consequences in the modern
era. The virus has dramatically altered our daily lives, prompting concerns about transmission, infection, and
recovery rates. As a result, rumors have proliferated in an attempt to provide clarity in a time of confusion.
As health officials work to contain the spread of the virus and mitigate its harmful effects on the world’s
population, another threat has emerged: the epidemic has resulted in the proliferation of rumors related to
the disease’s outcomes, prevention, and recovery (Garfin et al., 2020; Ni et al., 2020). This misinformation has
displaced healthy behaviors among the public and encouraged harmful practices that amplify the spread of
the virus, ultimately resulting in poor physical and mental health outcomes (Tasnim et al., 2020). For instance,
in Iran, hundreds of people died due to methanol poisoning after a rumor circulated that drinking alcohol
could cure or prevent infection from COVID-19 (Aghababaeian et al., 2020). Similarly, in the United States,
there were reports of people drinking bleach under the belief that it was a disinfectant capable of curing
COVID-19 (Merchant & Lurie, 2020). A “miracle mineral solution,” containing chlorine dioxide, sodium chloride,
and acetic acid, was also promoted as a cure for COVID-19 (Chary et al., 2020). Another popular myth was that
home remedies like taking vitamin C and eating garlic could cure or prevent the virus, despite a lack of
evidence (Mian & Khan, 2020).
There have been rumors that have not necessarily disrupted citizen behavior but have instead damaged
the public’s trust in authorities. For instance, numerous theories have been circulating on the Internet about
the origin of the virus, with some speculating that it was artificially created (Mian & Khan, 2020). Another
common rumor is that the outbreak is linked to the activation of 5G mobile phone technology and the
placement of new antennas (Bruns et al., 2020). The dissemination of false information had far-reaching
consequences, such as discrediting reliable sources and causing public confusion, which could indirectly
contribute to the further spread of the virus (Mian & Khan, 2020).
The centrality of social media can explain the significant impact on public health. In addition to the rapid
spread of the virus itself, the quick dissemination of both accurate and misleading information about the
outbreak and the disease fueled panic among the public. Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director-
General of the World Health Organization (WHO), noted already in February 2020 that “misinformation about
the coronavirus may be the most contagious thing” (Depoux et al., 2020), highlighting the crucial role of social
media in shaping public perception and response to the pandemic.
Our research aimed to examine the primary content and characteristics of rumors surrounding COVID-19
in Israel. While previous studies on rumors have typically focused on their reasons for dissemination and their
impact on readers (e.g., He et al., 2019; Kwon et al., 2013; Rosnow et al., 1988), our research is unique in that it
centers on the content and characteristics of the rumors, particularly in the Israeli context. We selected Israel as
our data collection location for several reasons. Firstly, the majority of Israelis (6.7 million) are active on social
media and use the Internet regularly, which is considered a basic consumer product in the country. On
average, Israelis spend approximately five hours daily browsing social media and surfing the internet (Bezeq
Report, 2020). Additionally, Israel has experienced many emergencies (Navrátil & Navrátil, 2015), and the
population is thus accustomed to the fact that social media may facilitate rumors (Simon et al., 2016).
Research Questions and Expectations
Following up on the review above, we ask:
1. What are the main themes appearing in rumors about the first wave of COVID-19? Based on studies
about the coverage of past pandemics (for example, Fumento, 1990; Wong, 2003), we expect to find
that the majority of rumors focus on the health of individuals, such as ways to prevent contracting the
virus or how to recover from it.

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352 5 / 15
2. How many rumors include source cues? Based on studies about source cues cited above (for example,
Lin et al., 2016 and Spence et al., 2013), we expect to find that many rumors cite the name of a
researcher or institution as a source.
3. How many rumors downplay vs. inflate the severity of the pandemic? We expect that fearful rumors
will be more prevalent than favorable ones (see Rosnow et al., 1988).
METHOD
In order to answer the research questions, we used a qualitative content analysis of rumors related to
COVID-19. Collecting rumors for analysis is challenging, as there is no official database, where all the rumors
about COVID-19 can be found. Hence, we had to create a database for this purpose. In the initial phase of the
research, we turned to a website called “irrelevant”, which verifies rumors on various issues with officials.
Using this website, we located a total of 68 rumors about the virus. Additionally, we conducted an interview
with the website’s founder and manager, Mr. Hanan Cohen, to understand how rumors are submitted and
filtered for publication on the site.
During the interview, it was revealed that the Davidson Institute, which serves as the educational arm of
the Weizmann Institute of Science, has been collecting various news related to COVID-19 on its website and
verifying their authenticity. We have added a total of 32 rumors from their website to our database. After
removing duplicate rumors, we were left with 80 rumors. We contacted the editor of the Davidson Institute’s
website and inquired about the source of the rumors in our database. He explained that they obtain these
rumors from their Facebook group and media reports, and that their team of writers verifies the information
before publishing it as rumors.
The rumors were published on the “irrelevant” website between February 2, 2020, and October 4, 2020,
and on the Davidson Institute website between March 12, 2020, and July 5, 2020. These rumors were collected
during the first wave of the COVID-19 outbreak in Israel when there was high uncertainty. Consequently, the first
wave created a fertile ground for the spread of rumors, and in retrospect, it can be concluded that during this
period, more rumors were created and collected. As time passed, the reliability of information improved,
resulting in fewer rumors in subsequent waves. It is worth noting that if the study were conducted at a later
stage of the epidemic, it would have likely focused on rumors concerning vaccines, which at that point became
“the hottest topic” on the COVID-19 agenda.
In order to strengthen the validity of the study, in its second phase an online questionnaire was sent out
to respondents, including the list of rumors that was compiled earlier. The questionnaire asked participants
to indicate whether they had heard any of the rumors listed, and to add any additional rumors that were not
included. The purpose of the questionnaire was to eliminate marginal rumors that none of the participants
had heard and to identify significant rumors that were not initially included but to which people were exposed.
A total of 45 anonymous respondents, distributed among different age groups, completed the questionnaire.
After reviewing the responses, it was decided to remove 11 rumors that none or only one respondent had
heard. Additional rumors were presented that were not initially in the database. When the same rumor was
mentioned by two or more respondents (2.5% of all the rumors presented), it was added to the list. As a result,
nine rumors were added, bringing the total number of rumors to 78. The majority of the rumors were related
to medical or health issues, with only 16 rumors dealing with other issues related to the virus. This highlights
the significance of the health dimension of the crisis over its economic or political derivatives, at least in the
early stages of the epidemic. Thus, we decided to focus on medical and health-related rumors and to remove
those related to other issues. As a result, the final list of rumors included 62 items.
After reviewing all the rumors and creating initial prototypes, we conducted another brainstorming
session and distilled the ideas into a few key themes. After further review of all the rumors, the researchers
achieved a 95% consensus on the coding results.
FINDINGS
Following the analysis, we found a few themes in the rumors, which were collected. As expected, over a
third of the rumors (23 rumors accounting for 37% of the total) referred to the way the virus was spread, as in

Avikasis et al.
6 / 15 Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352
this post from 25.3.2020, which provided some unverified information (at the time) about “how long does the
virus survive on surfaces?” (Figure 1).
It is noteworthy that the individuals spreading rumors, like the one mentioned above, went through the
effort of creating an image that suits their narrative and translating it into Hebrew. Other rumors have been
circulating regarding the spread of the virus and its decline, such as claims that warm areas have a lower
distribution and spread of the virus: “According to reports from WHO and other sources, the virus has been
decreasing and disappearing in the region, where Israel is located” (April 15, 2020).
About one-third (19) of the rumors were related to ways of preventing infection (31%). For instance, there
were claims like: “A weekly intake of 400 mg of hydroxychloroquine (PLAQUENIL) can prevent the
development of COVID-19in the body” (23.3.2020). Some of these rumors were utterly ridiculous, such as the
claim that “eating meatballs spice can help prevent COVID-19” (18.03.2020) (see also Figure 2).
The prevalence of rumors focusing on preventative measures for COVID-19 is higher than the number of
rumors claiming cures for the virus (14 rumors, which accounts for 23%). This is likely because people tend to
prioritize preventing infections beforehand rather than attempting to cure the disease once they have
contracted it. Examples of such rumored cures include “the coronavirus can be cured by drinking freshly
boiled garlic water” (16.03.2020) or “the coronavirus can be eliminated from the body by consuming a
particular medication” (26.04.2020).
Figure 1. Corona on surfaces (from a marketing article on disinfection from COVID-19 on the website
“Zissman insect control”)
Figure 2. Seasoning for meatballs against the virus (from the Facebook page of “Tavliney Hashahar”
https://m.facebook.com/shacharspices/)

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352 7 / 15
Also, nine rumors were dealing with the origin of the virus (15%), with the aim of understanding how the
virus originated and where: “the Japanese professor of physiology or medicine, Professor Dr. Tasuko Honjo,
caused a sensation in the media today by saying that the coronavirus is not natural” (27.04.2020).
Only a few rumors dealt with vaccines (3%), and experiments (3%), and they were characterized by a
disconnection from reality: “It is important that you know that tomorrow, 1.5, a law is coming into effect that
approves conducting experiments on humans and can bypass the human consent process if there is a medical
emergency” (3.5 .2020).
Source Specification (Institution or Expert) in the Body of the Rumor
The second theme that comprised about one-third (22) of all rumors was related to the use of the name
of an institution or expert (34%) in the medical field from Israel or abroad to confirm the reliability of the
rumor. Among these rumors, 12 (55%) were attributed to an expert, while the remaining ten were associated
with an institution (45%). Upon examining the breakdown by expert or institution in Israel or abroad, it was
observed that most of the rumors (nine) were associated with experts from abroad (41%) for example: “Dr.
Li-Meng Yan, virologist A senior Chinese woman claims: ‘The virus was engineered in a laboratory and released
to cause harm. I have proof that will come out soon’” (September 23, 2020).
Around a quarter of the rumors (six) cited institutions from abroad (27%), including hospitals, universities,
and WHO, such as the following warning issued by WHO: “WHO cautions against the use of ibuprofen-type
drugs when experiencing symptoms of COVID-19. Such medications may exacerbate the spread of the
disease” (March 18, 2020).
In contrast to the widespread use of the names of foreign institutions or experts, the use of Israeli
institutions or experts was significantly lower. About a quarter (five) of the rumors referenced Israeli
institutions (23%), such as municipalities, health insurance funds, and hospitals, as in the following example:
“Ichilov Hospital issued a sweeping statement today declaring that COVID-19 is not an epidemic,
not an emergency, and not dangerous. Idit Matot, head of the corona department at Ichilov, stated
that a ripple is not a wave and that she does not understand why masks are necessary, as we need
to take care of other neglected patients” (June 28, 2020).
Only two rumors cited an expert from Israel (9%), such as in the following example:
“I am a biochemist with a PhD from the Weizmann Institute and a professor at several academic
institutions ... A basic examination of the growth curve shows that the growth is not logarithmic,
and the virus has been in the stationary phase for two weeks, meaning that it is declining and dying
off” (April 15, 2020).
In a significant percentage of the rumors mentioning a source, the rumors included evidence to support
the words of the expert or institution cited, with the aim of establishing their validity. Some rumors include
links to external sources that purportedly verify and strengthen their claims. For instance:
“For the skeptical public, it’s not just the Indonesian study; there are already super serious studies,
such as randomized double-blind trials, that have been conducted on vitamin D and respiratory
infections, including an analysis by the British Medical Journal” (July 14, 2020).
Another example is a rumor spread in the name of WHO:
“... with scientific explanation provided: WHO now officially recommends avoiding taking ibuprofen
for COVID-19 symptoms” (March 18, 2020).
One point that arose in eight rumors featuring named sources was the inclusion of numerical data that
was unrelated to reality and research. This data served to indicate the researcher’s understanding and
perspective on the subject of the rumor, giving their words a degree of credibility. Some of the rumors
reported numbers of sick or dead, which turned out to be inaccurate. For example, Dr. Rotem Inbar stated,

Avikasis et al.
8 / 15 Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352
“So far, 40,000 patients have been diagnosed in Israel–assuming we discovered a third, or less, there
are perhaps 150,000 of which 380 are dead” (March 19, 2020).
Furthermore, there were rumors containing numerical data related to anti-COVID-19 drugs, such as
“Dr. Vladimir Zelenko treated 699 COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine, zinc, sulfate, and z-
pack. The result was: zero dead, zero ventilated, four hospitalized” (March 1, 2020).
In another example, it was claimed that
“Those who have a vitamin D deficiency have an increased risk of dying from COVID-19 by an
astronomical ratio of 2500%” (July 14, 2020).
Among the rumors featuring named sources, a common theme was the self-importance attributed to the
expert or institution. This topic was present in eight of the rumors and served to convince readers that the
source was qualified and confident in their words. In most of these rumors, the self-importance of the sources
was noticeable, such as the words of Japanese professor Tasuko Honjo:
“I have conducted 40 years of research on animals and viruses [...] I have been working for four
years in the Wuhan laboratory in China [...] I can say with 100% confidence that COVID-19 is not
natural” (April 27, 2020).
Another point that arose in seven rumors was the use of writing in lists, which is not usually characteristic
of official announcements from institutions or even experts who typically formulate their opinions in an
orderly and detailed manner, often through academic articles. However, some rumors were formulated as
long lists, such as the words of Dr. James Robb:
“Here’s what I do and the precautions I take now and will take in the future. These are the same
precautions I use during flu seasons, except for the mask and gloves:
1. Avoid shaking hands. Instead, put your fists together and bow.
2. Use only your knuckles to touch switches.
3. Open doors with a clenched fist or hip.
4. Use disinfectant wipes in stores, if available.
5. Wash your hands with soap for 10-20 seconds and/or use hand sanitizer.
6. Keep a bottle of disinfectant at every entrance to your home and in your car.
7. If possible, cough or sneeze into a tissue and throw it away.
Here are some things I purchased in preparation for the outbreak of the epidemic in the United
States:
1. Disposable latex gloves to use when going shopping.
2. Stock up on disposable surgical masks and use them to prevent touching your nose and mouth.
3. Purchase hand sanitizers and latex gloves now.
4. Buy zinc lozenges now. It has been proven that these lozenges are effective ...” (March 10, 2020).
Distortion of the Extent of the Pandemic: Increasing or Decreasing It
The third and final theme pertains to the misrepresentation of the scope of the epidemic. This theme
comprised 18 rumors, which accounted for about a third (29%) of all the rumors. It can be further subdivided

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352 9 / 15
into two categories. Contrary to our expectations, two-thirds (12) of the rumors aimed to downplay the extent
of the epidemic (67%) in order to reassure the public and normalize the situation. For instance:
“... and the virus gives the impression that it has lost its potency, and by winter, the population will
have developed antibodies that will protect everyone until then” (July 19, 2020).
On the other hand, one-third (six) of the rumors sought to exaggerate the scope of the epidemic (33%) in
order to raise awareness and prevent people from becoming complacent. For example:
“... the worst is yet to come: the incubation period has ended, and many more people will be
diagnosed, statistically, many more people can now infect you” (March 27, 2020).
A significant proportion of discussions, which involved a reduction of the scope of the pandemic have
featured recurring themes, including overly optimistic language that is evident in various rumors regarding
the scope of the outbreak (totaling 12 rumors). This pattern aligns with the general content and tone of such
rumors, which seek to downplay the scale of the epidemic and promote a “balanced” worldview. Some of
these rumors attempted to convey optimism by including factual information, whether verified or not. For
example:
“A basic test of the growth curve shows that the growth is not logarithmic, and the virus has been
at the end of the stationary phase for two weeks, that is, in decline and death” (March 15, 2020).
“Research at the Erasmus Medical Center claims to have found an antibiotic against the
coronavirus” (March 18, 2020).
Similarly, there were rumors that attempted to encourage the public and foster optimism by framing facts
in a positive and friendly manner. For instance:
“Here [in Israel] most of the patients are... healthy” (March 14, 2020).
“A 103-year-old Chinese woman fell ill with corona and made a full recovery after being treated for
six days against corona” (March 18, 2020).
In a third of the rumors that sought to downplay the severity of the epidemic, there was a clear disdain for
public representatives, with criticism aimed at decision-makers and their policies. Some rumor writers
claimed that the exaggeration of the situation was driven by the personal interests of decision-makers and
institutional bodies, and they criticized such officials by minimizing the scale of the epidemic. For instance:
“The Ministry of Health’s gloomy and frightening predictions of your support for thousands and
perhaps tens of thousands of dead have turned out to be completely wrong. It’s time to admit the
mistake, calm down, return Israel to normal activity and restore the economy, the economy,
education, culture and more” (April 15, 2020).
“Enough of the intimidation, enough of lying, the emergency laws and the dictatorship, we will not
let them take away our freedom” (June 28, 2020).
Half of the rumors that dealt with increasing the severity of the epidemic contained prophecies of doom
and gloom, in contrast to the rumors that sought to reduce the scope of the epidemic, which tended to be
overly optimistic. This pattern is consistent with the nature of the rumors that predicted a worsening of the
epidemic and saw it as a potential apocalyptic event. For example:
“If your life is important to you, do not leave the house for anything and do not even go buy bread
if you can freeze, because the worst of everything is about to begin: The incubation end date has
arrived, many more infected people will be diagnosed, statistically much more people can now
infect you [as in the original]!!!” (27.3.2020).

Avikasis et al.
10 / 15 Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352
“The media hides the true information and lies and recommends shutting yourself up at home for
two weeks” (February 2, 2020).
DISCUSSION
Rumors are a type of information whose origin is unclear (Buckner, 1965; Rosnow & Fine, 1976). When
rumors are spread, the person sharing the information often does not know whether it is true or false. Rumors
tend to be particularly common during times of disaster (Liu et al., 2014), when people feel a need to create
order, give meaning, or manage risks in ambiguous situations (Bordia & DiFonzo, 2007).
In the age of social media, the speed and scale of rumor spreading has increased significantly (Hagar,
2013; Simon et al., 2016). Social media platforms have enabled people to become content creators and
distributors, making them more involved in communication and politics (Hagar, 2013). Traditional media
outlets do not always report on every issue, leaving a gap that unofficial information channels can fill (Starbird
et al., 2012).
The widespread use of social media in recent years has led to the rapid dissemination of both official
information and misinformation, similar to the rapid spread of the virus itself, which has caused panic among
the public. In this context, health-related rumors are particularly problematic because they can lead people
to take actions that put their own health and the health of others at risk (Jolley & Douglas, 2014; Lee & Oh,
2017; Pluviano et al., 2017).
For this study, we compiled a database of rumors that spread during the first wave of the virus outbreak
in Israel. We built the database from relevant websites that gather information from Israel and abroad, namely
the “irrelevant” and “Davidson Institute” websites, and it contained 78 rumors. We then cataloged the rumors
by topic and filtered out those that did not relate to the medical or health aspects of the plague but instead
dealt with economic or political fields, leaving us with 62 rumors for the study.
The first topic we analyzed was the understanding of the epidemic. The relatively large number of rumors
related to health can be explained by comparing it to the AIDS epidemic, which, like the COVID-19 outbreak,
was characterized by a lack of knowledge about the disease, leading to social anxiety and the spread of rumors
related to medical aspects of the disease. Rumors related to political and economic issues were less
widespread (Heller, 2015).
A recurring sub-theme is that many rumors focused on the transmission of the virus. This can be attributed
to the ambiguous and uncertain character of the epidemic, as people sought to understand how to modify
their daily habits to avoid infection. The sensemaking theory supports this idea, positing that rumors emerge
as a response to anxiety and uncertainty, as individuals attempt to create a coherent understanding of the
situation (Esposito & Rosnow, 1984; Rosnow, 1980). The similarity between rumors related to the spread of
COVID-19 and those about the transmission of AIDS is notable, with both epidemics generating rumors about
the ways in which the virus can be contracted, such as through contact with door handles, toilet seats, or
swimming pools (Kimmel & Keefer, 1991).
Another sub-theme that emerged, albeit less frequently than the first, focused on preventative measures
to avoid contracting the virus. This is consistent with previous epidemics such as SARS, where rumors
circulated that drinking rice vinegar could reduce the risk of infection (Wong, 2003). This sub-theme is also
connected to the third most common sub-theme, which dealt with potential cures for the virus. Since the
majority of the population was not infected with the virus at the time, their primary concern was on how to
prevent contracting the disease rather than how to recover from it.
The three sub-themes presented above are characterized by their relevance to the daily lives of the
recipients of the rumors. This may explain why sub-themes such as the origin of the virus appeared less
frequently compared to other rumors, as they do not have a direct impact on health and human life. Similar
rumors appeared during the AIDS epidemic, such as the conspiracy theory that AIDS was developed by CIA to
harm African Americans and homosexuals (Turner, 1993).
The second theme present in the rumors concerned the use of an institution or expert’s name, accounting
for about a third of all rumors. Indeed, several studies have shown that source credibility is an important
factor in the persuasion process (Crano, 1970; Crisci & Kassinove, 1973; Gangloff, 1981; Manfredo & Bright,

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352 11 / 15
1991). We propose that the processing plausibility model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) can explain this
phenomenon. Due to the initial ambiguity and uncertainty surrounding the outbreak of the virus, people
processed information through the peripheral route, focusing on cues such as the credibility of the source
rather than the message content (Pornpitakpan, 2004). This may have led people to believe and spread the
rumor. It is worth noting that this may also explain why rumor writers used this ingredient in the first place.
When we divided the rumors based on the source of the institution or expert (Israel or abroad), we found
that twice as many rumors cited foreign sources. This could be attributed to the global nature of the epidemic,
which affected the entire world, and Israelis’ interest in understanding the epidemic and its consequences
from countries facing similar situations.
The third theme focused on distortion in relation to the extent of the epidemic, either by reducing or
exaggerating the reality of COVID-19. This is consistent with the findings in literature, where rumors can be
categorized into two types: “horror” rumors that express fear and anxiety, and “wishful” rumors that express
hope and positivity (Allport & Postman, 1947). We found that most rumors aimed to reduce the scope of the
epidemic, possibly to reassure the public and normalize the situation, or to criticize the establishment for
“inflating” the data and causing panic. However, a small number of rumors aimed to increase the extent of
the epidemic, perhaps to raise awareness about the severity of the situation. These findings contradict the
literature, which suggests that negative horror rumors are more common than positive rumors (Rosnow et
al., 1988). This is particularly interesting in light of Kahneman and Tversky’s (1979) theory that negative
information is perceived as more important and therefore more likely to be shared than positive information.
There are two possible explanations for the contradiction we found regarding the prevalence of negative
rumors in relation to the extent of the epidemic. The first explanation is related to the uniqueness of the
COVID-19 pandemic, which is a global crisis that has not been experienced for about a century. This may have
influenced the way people respond to the pandemic and the rumors that emerge around it, as opposed to
other types of disasters that are more familiar and occur more frequently, such as wars and natural disasters.
The second explanation is related to the political situation in Israel. This situation may have allowed rumor
writers to criticize the conduct of the establishment and to spread rumors that reduce the scope of the
epidemic and question the severity of its impact. Some rumors even targeted public representatives in a
derogatory manner. These rumors may have served as a way for people to express their frustration and
dissatisfaction with the authorities, and to cope with the uncertainty and anxiety caused by the pandemic.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, we analyzed the rumors that emerged during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in
Israel. The outbreak of COVID-19 created a global state of emergency, causing uncertainty and ambiguity
about the virus’s effects, which served as fertile ground for rumors. Our research focused on rumors related
to the healthcare sector, which dealt with topics such as the transmission of the virus and potential
treatments. This subject matter is particularly relevant and essential to human life, and previous literature
suggests that people tend to engage more with rumors about topics that are important to them, especially
during times of disaster and emergency. We also observed that the content of the COVID-19 rumors was
similar to rumors spread about other diseases.
Another theme we identified in our study is the frequent use of the name of an institution or expert from
Israel or abroad in the body of the rumor. While this topic was not specifically examined in the context of
rumors, similar studies on the credibility of the source of health-related messages on social networks indicate
that information containing the name of an authoritative body is perceived as more reliable. Using the
processing plausibility model, we explained that due to the ambiguity surrounding the epidemic at the
beginning of the outbreak, people relied on external cues, such as the credibility of the source, to process the
information. This, in our opinion, is the reason why the information was perceived as true and therefore
shared. The possible reason for the prevalence of rumors using the name of an institution or expert from
abroad is the global nature of the epidemic.
A third theme focused on the distortion of the epidemic’s scope. Contrary to existing literature that
suggests negative information is more powerful and spreads more widely, our research found the opposite:

Avikasis et al.
12 / 15 Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352
there were more rumors of a positive nature that reduced the scope of the epidemic than rumors that
increased it.
Further studies are needed to examine the content of rumors related to COVID-19 that are spread through
the media and social media. These studies should explore the characteristics of these rumors, as well as the
variables that affect how people perceive their reliability and their willingness to spread them to others. Given
the central role that rumors, and misinformation have played during the pandemic, such studies are crucial
for understanding how to mitigate their negative impact and promote accurate information dissemination.
Author contributions: All authors were involved in concept, design, collection of data, interpretation, writing, and
critically revising the article. All authors approved the final version of the article.
Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
Ethics declaration: the authors declare that ethical approval is not necessary as the study did not involve clinical or
other experiments with human subjects. The one exception is two background interviews with social media managers,
for which an ethical approval is not required as well.
Declaration of interest: The authors declare no competing interest.
Data availability: Data generated or analyzed during this study are available from the authors on request.
REFERENCES
Abbasi, A., Hossain, L., Hamra, J., & Owen, C. (2010). Social networks perspective of firefighters’ adaptive behavior
and coordination among them [Paper presentation]. IEEE/ACM International Conference on Green
Computing and Communications & International Conference on Cyber, Physical and Social Computing.
https://doi.org/10.1109/GreenCom-CPSCom.2010.57
Aghababaeian, H., Hamdanieh, L., & Ostadtaghizadeh, A. (2020). Alcohol intake in an attempt to fight COVID-
19: A medical myth in Iran. Alcohol, 88, 29-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcohol.2020.07.006
Allport, G. W., & Postman, L. J. (1945). Section of psychology: The basic psychology of rumor. Transactions of
the New York Academy of Sciences, 8(2), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2164-0947.1945.tb00216.x
Allport, G. W., & Postman, L. J. (1947). The psychology of rumor. Holt.
Anthony, S. (1973). Anxiety and rumor. The Journal of Social Psychology, 89(1), 91-98.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1973.9922572
Averbach, L. (2016). It happened that WhatsApp messages reached the bereaved mother before the official
announcement. Globes. https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1001121304
Bates, L., & Callison, C. (2008). Effect of company affiliation on credibility in the blogosphere [Paper presentation].
The Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Conference.
Bezeq Report. (2020). Bezeq internet report, 2019-2020. https://media.bezeq.co.il/pdf/internetreport_2020.pdf
Bordia, P., & DiFonzo, N. (2004). Problem solving in social interactions on the Internet: Rumor as social
cognition. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(1), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250406700105
Bordia, P., & DiFonzo, N. (2007). Rumor psychology: Social and organizational approaches. American
Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11503-000
Boyle, E. I., Weng, S., Gollub, J., Jin, H., Botstein, D., Cherry, J. M., & Sherlock, G. (2004). GO:: TermFinder–Open
source software for accessing gene ontology information and finding significantly enriched gene
ontology terms associated with a list of genes. Bioinformatics, 20(18), 3710-3715.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bth456
Bruns, A., Harrington, S., & Hurcombe, E. (2020). ‘Corona? 5G? or both?’: The dynamics of COVID-19/5G
conspiracy theories on Facebook. Media International Australia, 177(1), 12-29.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X20946113
Buckner, H. T. (1965). A theory of rumor transmission. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29(1), 54-70.
https://doi.org/10.1086/267297
Chary, M. A., Overbeek, D. L., Papadimoulis, A., Sheroff, A., & Burns, M. M. (2020). Geospatial correlation
between COVID-19 health misinformation and poisoning with household cleaners in the greater Boston
area. Clinical Toxicology, 59(4), 320-325. https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2020.1811297
Comfort, L. K., Ko, K., & Zagorecki, A. (2004). Coordination in rapidly evolving disaster response systems: The
role of information. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(3), 295-313. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276420426
8987

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352 13 / 15
Crano, W. D. (1970). Effect of sex, response order, and expertise in conformity: A dispositional approach.
Sociometry, 33, 239-252. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786155
Crisci, R., & Kassinove, H. (1973). Effect of perceived expertise, strength of advice, and environmental setting
on parental compliance. Journal of Social Psychology, 89, 245-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.
1973.9922597
Depoux, A., Martin, S., Karafillakis, E., Preet, R., Wilder-Smith, A., & Larson, H. (2020). The pandemic of social
media panic travels faster than the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of Travel Medicine, 27(3), 1-2.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/taaa031
Diviani, N., van Den Putte, B., Giani, S., & van Weert, J. C. (2015). Low health literacy and evaluation of online
health information: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 17(5), 112.
https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4018
Doerr, B., Fouz, M., & Friedrich, T. (2012). Why rumors spread so quickly in social networks. Communications
of the ACM, 55(6), 70-75. https://doi.org/10.1145/2184319.2184338
Esposito, J. L., & Rosnow, R. L. (1984). Cognitive set and message processing: Implications of prose memory
research for rumor theory. Language & Communication, 4, 301-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309
(84)90014-4
Fumento, M. (1990). The myth of heterosexual AIDS. Basic Books.
Gangloff, B. (1981). Credibilite de l’emetteur, credibilitd du message, et dissuasion: Experimentation en milieu
suburbain [Communicator credibility, message credibility, and dissuasion: Experiments in a suburban
setting]. Bulletin de Psychologie [Bulletin de Psychology], 34, 748-753.
Garfin, D. R., Silver, R. C., & Holman, E. A. (2020). The novel coronavirus (COVID-2019) outbreak: Amplification
of public health consequences by media exposure. Health Psychology, 39, 355-357.
https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000875
Garrett, R. K. (2011). Troubling consequences of online political rumoring. Human Communication Research,
37(2), 255-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01401.x
Hagar, C. (2013). Crisis informatics: Perspectives of trust–Is social media a mixed blessing? School of
Information Student Research Journal, 2(2), 2. https://doi.org/10.31979/2575-2499.020202
He, L., Yang, H., Xiong, X., & Lai, K. (2019). Online rumor transmission among younger and older adults. SAGE
Open, 9(3), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019876273
Heller, J. (2015). Rumors and realities: Making sense of HIV/AIDS conspiracy narratives and contemporary
legends. American Journal of Public Health, 105(1), 43-50. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.302284
Hovland, C., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. Yale University Press.
Hu, Y., & Sundar, S. S. (2010). Effects of online health sources on credibility and behavioral intentions.
Communication Research, 37, 105-132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209351512
Jaeger, M. E., Anthony, S., & Rosnow, R. L. (1980). Who hears what from whom and with what effect: A study
of rumor. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(3), 473-478. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616728063
024
Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2014). The effects of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories on vaccination intentions.
PloS ONE, 9(2), 89177. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089177
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). On the interpretation of intuitive probability: A reply to Jonathan Cohen.
Cognition, 7, 409-411. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(79)90024-6
Kimmel, A. J., & Keefer, R. (1991). Psychological correlates of the transmission and acceptance of rumors about
AIDS 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(19), 1608-1628. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.
tb00490.x
Kwon, S., Cha, M., Jung, K., Chen, W., & Wang, Y. (2013). Aspects of rumor spreading on a microblog network
[Paper presentation]. The International Conference on Social Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-319-03260-3_26
Lee, H., & Oh, H. J. (2017). Normative mechanism of rumor dissemination on Twitter. Cyberpsychology, Behavior,
and Social Networking, 20(3), 164-171. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0447
Lev-On, A. (2012). Communication, community, crisis: Mapping uses and Gratifications in the contemporary
media environment. New Media and Society, 14(1), 98-116. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811410401
Lev-On, A., & Uziel, V. (2018). Live, visual, social, and mobile: Media ecology in emergencies and ordinary times.
Online Information Review, 42(4), 545-558. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-04-2016-0117

Avikasis et al.
14 / 15 Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352
Lin, X., Spence, P. R., & Lachlan, K. A. (2016). Social media and credibility indicators: The effect of influence
cues. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 264-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.002
Liu, F., Burton-jones, A., & Xu, D. (2014). Rumors on social media in disasters: Extending transmission to
retransmission. In Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems.
https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2014.13529abstract
Manfredo, M. J., & Bright, A. D. (1991). A model for assessing the effects of communication on recreationists.
Journal of Leisure Research, 23, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1991.11969840
McCroskey, J. C. (1966). Scales for the measurement of ethos. Speech Monographs, 33, 65-72.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637756609375482
Merchant, R. M., & Lurie, N. (2020). Social media and emergency preparedness in response to novel
coronavirus. JAMA, 323, 2011-2012. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.4469
Mian, A., & Khan, S. (2020). Coronavirus: The spread of misinformation. BMC Medicine, 18(1), 1-2.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01556-3
Navrátil, V., & Navrátil, L. (2015). Preparedness of health system in Israel for mass emergencies. Casopis Lekaru
Ceskych [Lekaru Ceskych Magazine], 154(3), 132-136.
Ni, Q., Guo, J., Huang, C., & Wu, W. (2020). Community-based rumor blocking maximization in social networks
[Paper presentation]. The International Conference on Algorithmic Applications in Management.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57602-8_7
Oh, H. J., & Lee, H. (2019). When do people verify and share health rumors on social media? The effects of
message importance, health anxiety, and health literacy. Journal of Health Communication, 24(11), 837-
847. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2019.1677824
Osmond, D. H. (2003): Epidemiology of HIV/AIDS in the United States. http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu
Palen, L., & Liu, S. B. (2007). Citizen communications in crisis: Anticipating a future of ICT-supported public
participation [Paper presentation]. The SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240736
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),
Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 123-203). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-
2601(08)60214-2
Pezzo, M. V., & Beckstead, J. W. (2006). A multilevel analysis of rumor transmission: Effects of anxiety and belief
in two field experiments. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28(1), 91-100.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2801_8
Pluviano, S., Watt, C., & Della Sala, S. (2017). Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination
strategies. PLoS ONE, 12(7), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181640
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades’ evidence.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x
Rosnow, R. L. (1974). Communications as cultural science. Journal of Communication, 24(3), 26-38.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00386.x
Rosnow, R. L. (1980). Psychology of rumor reconsidered. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 578-591.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.87.3.578
Rosnow, R. L., Esposito, J. L., & Gibney, L. (1988). Factors influencing rumor spreading: Replication and
extension. Language & Communication, 2, 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(88)90004-3
Rosnow, R., & Fine, G. (1976). Rumor and gossip: The social psychology of hearsay. Elsevier.
Silverman, C. (2015). Lies, damn lies and viral content: How news websites spread (and debunk) online rumors,
unverified claims, and misinformation. http://towcenter.org/research/lies-damn-lies-and-viral-content/
Simon, T., Goldberg, A., Leykin, D., & Adini, B. (2016). Kidnapping WhatsApp: Rumors during the search and
rescue operation of three kidnapped youth . Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 183-190.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.058
Spence, P. S., Lachlan, K., Westerman, D., & Spates, S. A. (2013). Where the gates matter less: Ethnicity and
perceived source credibility in social media health messages. The Howard Journal of Communication, 24,
1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646175.2013.748593

Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2023
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202352 15 / 15
Starbird, K., Palen, L., B. Liu, S., Vieweg, S., Hughes, A., Schram, A., Anderson, K. M., Bagdouri, M., White J.,
McTaggart, C., & Schenk, C. (2012). Promoting structured data in citizen communications during disaster
response: An account of strategies for diffusion of the ‘tweak the tweet’ syntax. In C. Hagar (Ed.), Crisis
information management: Communication and technologies (pp. 43-62). Chandos Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-84334-647-0.50003-5
Stephens, K. K., & Malone, P. C. (2009). If the organizations won’t give us information …: The use of multiple
new media for crisis technical translation and dialogue. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21(2), 229-
239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627260802557605
Stiegler, R., Tilley, S., & Parveen, T. (2011). Finding family and friends in the aftermath of a disaster using federated
queries on social networks and websites [Paper presentation]. The 2011 13th IEEE International Symposium
on Web Systems Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSE.2011.6081815
Suarez-Lledo, V., & Alvarez-Galvez, J. (2021). Prevalence of health misinformation on social media: Systematic
review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(1), e17187. https://doi.org/10.2196/17187
Sundar, S. S., & Nass, C. (2001). Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication, 51(1), 52-
72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02872.x
Sweetser, K. D., & Metzgar, E. (2007). Communicating during crisis: Use of blogs as a relationship management
tool. Public Relations Review, 33(3), 340-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2007.05.016
Swindell, J. S., McGuire, A. L., & Halpern, S. D. (2010). Beneficent persuasion: Techniques and ethical guidelines
to improve patients’ decisions. Annals of Family Medicine, 8, 260-264. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1118
Tasnim, S., Hossain, M. M., & Mazumder, H. (2020). Impact of rumors and misinformation on COVID-19 in
social media. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 53(3), 171-174. https://doi.org/10.3961/
jpmph.20.094
Tierney, K., Bevc, C., & Kuligowski, E. (2006). Metaphors matter: Disaster myths, media frames, and their
consequences in Hurricane Katrina. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science,
604(1), 57-81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716205285589
Turner, P. A. (1993). I heard it through the grapevine: Rumor in African-American culture. University of California
Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520915572
Van Der Linden, S. (2022). Misinformation: Susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public.
Nature Medicine, 28(3), 460-467. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01713-6
Von Wagner, C., Semmler, C., Good, A., & Wardle, J. (2009). Health literacy and self-efficacy for participating in
colorectal cancer screening: The role of information processing. Patient Education and Counseling, 75(3),
352-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.03.015
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
Wang, Z., Walther, J. B., Pingree, S., & Hawkins, R. P. (2008). Health information, credibility, homophily, and
influence via the Internet: Web sites versus discussion groups. Health Communication, 23, 358-368.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10410230802229738
Wong, J. (2003). China’s failure. http://mail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030404.wSARSchina0404/BNStory/
Front
Zhang, E., & Fleming, K. (2005). Examination of characteristics of news media under censorship: A content
analysis of selected Chinese newspapers’ SARS coverage. Asian Journal of Communication, 15(3), 319-339.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01292980500261639
Zook, M., Graham, M., Shelton, T., & Gorman, S. (2010). Volunteered geographic information and
crowdsourcing disaster relief: A case study of the Haitian earthquake. World Medical & Health Policy, 2(2),
7-33. https://doi.org/10.2202/1948-4682.1069
