Everyday trust repair: how immigrants in the Nordic region navigate and correct health misinformation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31361419Keywords:
Health misinformation, Verification behaviour, Trust and credibility, Immigrant information practices, Mixed-methods research, Information resilienceAbstract
Introduction. This study uses the stimulus–organism–response framework to examine how immigrants in the Nordic region encounter and respond to health misinformation in multilingual and transnational information environments.
Method. The study draws on seventy-two semi-structured interviews conducted in Finland, Norway, and Sweden between 2021 and 2023. Eighteen interviews were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and fifty-four after the acute phase.
Analysis. Rule-guided qualitative content analysis transformed interview material into six case-level ordinal indicators. These indicators were then examined quantitatively through exploratory partial least squares structural equation modelling.
Results. Checking with trusted sources was positively associated with perceived media reliability and correction engagement. Perceived misinformation harm was positively associated with information-sharing behaviour, whereas greater exposure was associated with lower perceived media reliability and less checking. Exploratory subgroup analyses indicated possible variation by country, education, age, length of residence, and interview period, but these patterns require caution because the groups were small and unequal.
Conclusion. The framework clarifies how exposure, internal appraisal, and behavioural response are related in this sample. The findings suggest the value of multilingual communication through trusted institutional and interpersonal channels; however, the analysis remains exploratory because the indicators were interpretively derived from interviews.
References
Agley, J., Xiao, Y., Thompson, E. E., Chen, X., & Golzarri-Arroyo, L. (2021). Intervening on trust in science to reduce belief in COVID-19 misinformation and increase COVID-19 preventive behavioral intentions: Randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(10), e32425. https://doi.org/10.2196/32425
Ahmed, S., & Rasul, M. E. (2022). Social media news use and COVID-19 misinformation engagement: Survey study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(9), e38944. https://doi.org/10.2196/38944
Bakker, C. J., Reardon, E. E., Brown, S. J., Theis-Mahon, N., Schroter, S., Bouter, L., & Zeegers, M. P. (2024). Identification of retracted publications and completeness of retraction notices in public health. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 173, 111427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111427
Bode, L., & Vraga, E. K. (2021). Correction experiences on social media during COVID-19. Social Media + Society, 7(2), 20563051211008829. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211008829
Brady, W. J., Wills, J. A., Jost, J. T., Tucker, J. A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2017). Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(28), 7313–7318. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1618923114
Czapka, E. A., Herrero-Arias, R., Haj-Younes, J., Hasha, W., Madar, A. A., Møen, K. A., Ortiz-Barreda, G., & Diaz, E. (2023). ‘Who is telling the truth?’ Migrants’ experiences with COVID-19-related information in Norway: A qualitative study. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 51(3), 454–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/14034948221135237
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Feng, B. (2024). Gaming with health misinformation: A social capital-based study of corrective information sharing factors in social media. Frontiers in Public Health, 12, 1351820. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1351820
Fetters, M. D., & Freshwater, D. (2015). Publishing a methodological mixed methods research article. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(3), 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815594687
Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK. (2019). The ethical principles of research with human participants and ethical review in the human sciences in Finland (Publications of the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK 3/2019). https://tenk.fi/sites/default/files/2021-01/Ethical_review_in_human_sciences_2020.pdf (Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20250201000000/https://tenk.fi/sites/default/files/2021-01/Ethical_review_in_human_sciences_2020.pdf)
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Jiang, S., Zhang, L., & Wu, Q. (2025). How does misinformation affect health behavior? Examining the roles of information source, information processing, and health belief in the context of COVID-19. Mass Communication and Society, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2025.2569457
Kaihlanen, A.-M., Virtanen, L., Buchert, U., Safarov, N., Valkonen, P., Hietapakka, L., Hörhammer, I., Kujala, S., Kouvonen, A., & Heponiemi, T. (2022). Towards digital health equity—A qualitative study of the challenges experienced by vulnerable groups in using digital health services in the COVID-19 era. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1), 188. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07584-4
Kisa, S., & Kisa, A. (2024). A comprehensive analysis of COVID-19 misinformation, public health impacts, and communication strategies: Scoping review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 26, e56931. https://doi.org/10.2196/56931
Laato, S., Islam, A. K. M. N., Islam, M. N., & Whelan, E. (2020). What drives unverified information sharing and cyberchondria during the COVID-19 pandemic? European Journal of Information Systems, 29(3), 288–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1770632
Lloyd, A. (2017). Researching fractured (information) landscapes: Implications for library and information science researchers undertaking research with refugees and forced migration studies. Journal of Documentation, 73(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2016-0032
Lu, X., Vijaykumar, S., Jin, Y., & Rogerson, D. (2022). Think before you share: Beliefs and emotions that shaped COVID-19 (mis)information vetting and sharing intentions among WhatsApp users in the United Kingdom. Telematics and Informatics, 67, 101750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101750
Malik, A., Bashir, F., & Mahmood, K. (2023). Antecedents and consequences of misinformation sharing behavior among adults on social media during COVID-19. SAGE Open, 13(1), 21582440221147022. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221147022
Mayring, P. (2019). Qualitative content analysis: Demarcation, varieties, developments. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 20(3), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-20.3.3343
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. MIT Press.
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1609406919899220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019). Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(7), 2521–2526. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1806781116
Pennycook, G., McPhetres, J., Zhang, Y., Lu, J. G., & Rand, D. G. (2020). Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy-nudge intervention. Psychological Science, 31(7), 770–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620939054
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). (2016). Official Journal of the European Union, L 119, 1–88. https://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2024). SmartPLS 4 [Computer software]. SmartPLS. https://www.smartpls.com (Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20260201092022/https://www.smartpls.com/)
Roozenbeek, J., Schneider, C. R., Dryhurst, S., Kerr, J., Freeman, A. L. J., Recchia, G., van der Bles, A. M., & van der Linden, S. (2020). Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. Royal Society Open Science, 7(10), 201199. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199
Ruokolainen, H., & Widén, G. (2020). Conceptualising misinformation in the context of asylum seekers. Information Processing & Management, 57(3), 102127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102127
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In C. Homburg, M. Klarmann, & A. E. Vomberg (Eds.), Handbook of market research (pp. 1–47). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-2
Siani, A., & Green, I. (2023). Scientific misinformation and mistrust of COVID-19 preventive measures among the UK population: A pilot study. Vaccines, 11(2), 301. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11020301
Siebert, J., & Siebert, J. U. (2023). Effective mitigation of the belief perseverance bias after the retraction of misinformation: Awareness training and counter-speech. PLOS ONE, 18(3), e0282202. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282202
Song, H., So, J., Shim, M., Kim, J., Kim, E., & Lee, K. (2023). What message features influence the intention to share misinformation about COVID-19 on social media? The role of efficacy and novelty. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107439
Stiller, J., Terner, S., & Trkulja, V. (2023). Investigating scientific misinformation originating from retracted publications and their perception. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 1134–1136. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.969
Sundin, O., Haider, J., Andersson, C., Carlsson, H., & Kjellberg, S. (2017). The search-ification of everyday life and the mundane-ification of search. Journal of Documentation, 73(2), 224–243. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2016-0081
Vijaykumar, S., Rogerson, D. T., Jin, Y., & de Oliveira Costa, M. S. (2022). Dynamics of social corrections to peers sharing COVID-19 misinformation on WhatsApp in Brazil. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 29(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab219
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
Wu, M. (2022). What drives people to share misinformation on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic: A stimulus-organism-response perspective. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(18), 11752. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811752
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Hamed Ahmadinia, Kim Holmberg
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
