How Media Credibility Shapes Risk Perception during Public Health Emergency: A Comparative Study Model and Research Propositions

Public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic are serious global concern and deserve urgent attention. Media, as one of the primary channels through which risk information reaches the public, has played a pivotal role in shaping how individuals perceive and respond to health threats, and scholars anticipate that the influence of media credibility on public risk perception is expanding, especially in the presence of widespread misinformation. Despite this alarming concern, less research attention has been paid to how media credibility interacts with belief in conspiracy theories to shape risk perception, particularly in non-Western, state-influenced media contexts. The present article aims to propose a conceptual model to depict the external and internal factors determining public risk perception during a health crisis. We propose a framework originated from the Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF) to delineate the role of traditional and social media credibility (i.e., the external informational factors as amplification stations) and belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories (i.e., the internal cognitive factor) in explaining public risk perception of COVID-19. By adopting SARF as a guide, this study develops a comparative conceptual model between China and Tanzania—two developing countries with contrasting pandemic communication strategies. The model posits that media credibility shapes belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories, which in turn attenuates risk perception. This article contributes to our understanding of risk communication in state-influenced media environments and suggests possible solutions to strengthen resilient health communication systems in society. Theoretical and practical implications are subsequently discussed in light of the conclusion.

media credibility; conspiracy theories; risk perception; Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF)

1. Angela, X., & Cozma, R. (2022). Risk sharing on Twitter : Social amplification and attenuation of risk in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Computers in Human Behavior, 126(July 2021), 106983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106983 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Basillioh, M. (2020). Tanzania President John Magufuli: The man who declared victory over coronavirus - BBC News. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-54603689 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. BBC. (2020). Coronavirus: John Magufuli declares Tanzania free of Covid-19 - BBC News. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-52966016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Beaunoyer, E., Dupéré, S., & Guitton, M. J. (2020). COVID-19 and digital inequalities: Reciprocal impacts and mitigation strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 111(May). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106424 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Becker, L. B., Martino, R. A., & Towers, W. M. (1976). Media Advertising Credibility. Journalism Quarterly, 53(2), 216–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769907605300204 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Boyd, A. D., & Jardine., C. G. (2011). Did Public Risk Perspectives of Mad Cow Disease Reflect Media Representations and Actual Outcomes? Journal of Risk Research, 14(5), 615–630. doi:10.1080/13669877.2010. 547258 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Brennen, A. J. S., Simon, F. M., Howard, P. N., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Types , Sources , and Claims of COVID-19 Misinformation (Issue April). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Busby, J., & Duckett, D. (2012). Social risk amplification as an attribution: The case of zoonotic disease outbreaks. Journal of Risk Research, 15(9), 1049–1074. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2012.670130 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Camaj, L. (2014). Need for Orientation , Selective Exposure , and Attribute Agenda-Setting Effects Need for Orientation , Selective Exposure , and Attribute Agenda-Setting Effects. Mass Communication and Society, 5436. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2013.835424 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L., Zola, P., Zollo, F., & Scala, A. (2020). The COVID ‑ 19 social media infodemic. Scientific Reports, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-73510-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Constantinou, M., Kagialis, A., & Karekla, M. (2020). COVID-19 Scientific Facts Vs. Conspiracy Theories: 0 – 1: Science Fails to Convince Even Highly Educated Individuals. Research Square (Preprint), 0–1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Craft, S., Ashley, S., & Maksl, A. (2017). News media literacy and conspiracy theory endorsement. Communication and the Public, 2(4), 388–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047317725539 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Craig, K., & Sadovykh, V. (2022). Perceived Social Media Bias, Social Identity Threat, and Conspiracy Theory Ideation During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. De Coninck, D., Frissen, T., Matthijs, K., D’Haenens, L., Lits, G., Champagne-Poirier, O., C., M.E., D., & M.D., Pignard-Cheynel, N., Salerno, S. and Généreux, M. (2021). Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation About COVID-19 : Comparative Perspectives on the Role of Anxiety , Depression and Exposure to and Trust in Information Sources. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(April), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646394 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Douglas, K.M.; Uscinski, J.E.; Sutton, R.M.; Cichocka, A.; Nefes, T.; Ang, C.S.; Deravi, F. (2019). Understanding Conspiracy Theories. Polit. Psychol, 40, 3–35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Earnshaw, V.A., Eaton, L.A., Kalichman, S.C., Brousseau, N.M., Hill, E.C., & Fox, A. B. (2020). COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, health behaviors, and policy support. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 10, 850–856. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Edrine Wanyama. (2020). Tanzania’s newly passed law entrenches digital rights repression - IFEX. Ifex. https://ifex.org/tanzanias-newly-passed-law-entrenches-digital-rights-repression/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Fjaeran, L., & Aven, T. (2021). Making visible the less visible–how the use of an uncertainty-based risk perspective affects risk attenuation and risk amplification. Journal of Risk Research, 24(6), 673–691. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2019.1687579 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Freeman, D., Waite, F., Rosebrock, L., Petit, A., Causier, C., East, A., ... & Lambe, S. (2022). Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance with government guidelines in England. Psychological Medicine, 52(2), 251–263. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Gogarty, K., & Hagle, C. o. (2020). A guide to right-wing media reactions and conspiracy theories surrounding coronavirus. Media Matters for America. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Guitton, M. J. (2020). Cyberpsychology research and COVID-19. Computers in Human Behavior, 111(March), 106357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106357 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Guo, L. (2020). China’s “Fake News” Problem: Exploring the Spread of Online Rumors in the Government-Controlled News Media. Digital Journalism, 8(8), 992–1010. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1766986 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. 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/https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Harff, D., Bollen, C., & Schmuck, D. (2022). Responses to Social Media Influencers’ Misinformation about COVID-19: A Pre-Registered Multiple-Exposure Experiment. Media Psychology, 25, 831–850. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Hasan, N. N. N. (2007). THE REPRESENTATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE MALAYSIAN AND NEW ZEALAND PRESS A. In Revista Brasileira de Ergonomia. https://www.infodesign.org.br/infodesign/article/ view/355%0 Ahttp://www.abergo.org.br/revista/index.php/ae/article/view/731%0Ahttp://www.abergo.org.br/revista/index.php/ae/article/view/269%0Ahttp://www.abergo.org.br/revista/index.php/ae/article/view/106 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Hellmueller, L., & Trilling, D. (2012). The Credibility of Credibility Measures: A Meta-Analysis in Leading Communication Journals: 1951 to 2011. WAPOR 65th Annual Conference in Hong Kong. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Hovland, C.I., Janis, I.L., Kelley, J. J. (1953). Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. Yale University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Hughes, J. P., Efstratiou, A., Komer, S. R., Baxter, L. A., Vasiljevic, M., & Leite, A. C. (2022). The impact of risk perceptions and belief in conspiracy theories on COVID-19 pandemic-related behaviours. PLoS ONE, 17(2 February), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263716 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Hung, L., & Lin, M. (2022). Clear, consistent and credible messages are needed for promoting compliance with COVID-19 public health measures. Evidence-Based Nursing, 25(1), 22–22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Investigação, N. De, & Educação, E. S. De. (2021). Conspiracy Theories in Times of the Covid-19 Pandemic : Populism , Social Media and Misinformation. 40, 129–148. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 8(2), 232–245. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849772549-16 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. La, J., & Katz, D. J. (2022). Linking COVID-19 vaccine and male infertility - not on fertile ground. BJU Int., 130(suppl 1), 20–21. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1111/bju.15712 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Lee, J. H., Meek, L. A., & Katumusiime, J. (2023). Contested Truths Over COVID-19 in East Africa: Examining Opposition to Public Health Measures in Tanzania and Uganda. African Studies Review, 66(4), 873–898. https://doi.org/10.1017/asr.2023.69 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Lewis, R. E., & Tyshenko, M. G. (2009). The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada. Risk Analysis, 29(5), 714–728. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01188.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Li, X., & Zhang, G. (2018). Perceived Credibility of Chinese Social Media: Toward an Integrated Approach. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(1), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw035 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Mari, S., Gil de Zúñiga, H., Suerdem, A., Hanke, K., Brown, G., Vilar, R., Boer, D., & Bilewicz, M. (2021). Conspiracy Theories and Institutional Trust: Examining the Role of Uncertainty Avoidance and Active Social Media Use. Political Psychology, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12754 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Marmura, S. (2014). Likely and Unlikely Stories: Conspiracy Theories in an Age of Propaganda. International Journal of Communication, 8(19). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Meadows, C. Z., Tang, L., & Zou, W. (2022). Managing government legitimacy during the COVID-19 pandemic in China: a semantic network analysis of state-run media Sina Weibo posts. Chinese Journal of Communication, 15(2), 156–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2021.2016876 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010). Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413–439. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01488.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Meyer, P. (1988). Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 567–574. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908806500301 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Mulukom, V. Van, Alper, S., Cavojova, V., & Farias, J. (2021). Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review. Psyarxiv, August. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Mwai, P., & Giles, C. (2021). The first confirmed case of COVID-19 in Tanzania: recommendations based on lesson learned from China | Tropical Medicine and Health | Full Text. https://tropmedhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41182-020-00214-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Nabil Mzoughi, M., & Garrouch, K. (2021). Does Social Risk Amplification Theory Explain the Resistance to COVID-19 Geo-Localization Applications? TEM Journal, 10(3), 1202–1208. https://doi.org/10.18421/tem103-26 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Ng, Y. J., Yang, Z. J., & Vishwanath, A. (2018). To fear or not to fear? Applying the social amplification of risk framework on two environmental health risks in Singapore. Journal of Risk Research, 21(12), 1487–1501. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2017.1313762 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Nyabuga, G. (2019). Media landscape and open contracting narrative in Kenya, Malawi and Tanzania. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3484360 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Oh, S. H., Paek, H. J., & Hove, T. (2015). Cognitive and emotional dimensions of perceived risk characteristics, genre-specific media effects, and risk perceptions: the case of H1N1 influenza in South Korea. Asian Journal of Communication, 25(1), 14–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2014.989240 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Pan, Z., & Lu, Y. (2003). Localizing Professionalism: Discursive Practices in China’s Media Reforms. In C. C. Lee (Ed.), Chinese Media, Global Context (pp. 215–36). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R. E., & Slovic, P. (2003). The social amplification of risk. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Radu, R., & Schultz, T. (2017). Conspiracy theories and ( the ) Media ( Studies ). Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories (COMPACT), 1–9. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3089178 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Renn, O., Burns, W. J., Kasperson, J. X., Kasperson, R. E., & Slovic, P. (1992). The Social Amplification of Risk : Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Applications. Journal of Social Issues, 48(4), 137–160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Renn, O. (1991). Risk communication and the social amplification of risk. Springer Netherlands. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Renn, Ortwin. (2011). The social amplification / attenuation of risk framework : Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2(2), 154–169. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1002/wcc.99 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Romer, D., & Jamieson, K. H. (2021). Conspiratorial thinking, selective exposure to conservative media, and response to COVID-19 in the US. Social Science and Medicine, 291, 114480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114480 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Rosi, A., van Vugt, F. T., Lecce, S., Ceccato, I., Vallarino, M., Rapisarda, F., Vecchi, T., & Cavallini, E. (2021). Risk Perception in a Real-World Situation (COVID-19): How It Changes From 18 to 87 Years Old. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(March), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646558 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Rutjens, B. T., Linden, S. Van Der, & Lee, R. Van Der. (2021). Science skepticism in times of COVID-19. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 24(2), 276–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220981415 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Sanders, L. (2020). The Difference between What Republicans and Democrats Believe to be True about COVID-19. YouGov. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Sellnow-Richmond, D.D., George, A.M., Lukacovic, M.N., Salazar, S., & Sellnow, D. D. (2023). A comparative analysis of U.S. state government communication and resident compliance to CDC COVID-19 guidelines. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 51, 380–403. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Shin, J., Jian, L., Driscoll, K., & Bar, F. (2017). Political rumoring on Twitter during the 2012 US presidential election : Rumor Political rumoring on Twitter during the 2012 US presidential election : Rumor diffusion and correction. New Media & Society, 18(8), 1214–1235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816634054 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Shoemaker, P. J. & Vos, T. P. (2009). Media gatekeeping. In M. B. Salwen & D. W. Stacks (Eds.), An integrated approach to communication theory and research 2nd ed (pp. 75–89). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Soveri, A., Karlsson, L. C., Antfolk, J., Lindfelt, M., & Lewandowsky, S. (2021). Unwillingness to engage in behaviors that protect against COVID-19: the role of conspiracy beliefs, trust, and endorsement of complementary and alternative medicine. BMC Public Health, 21(684). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Su, Y., Lee, D. K. L., Xiao, X., Li, W., & Shu, W. (2021). Who endorses conspiracy theories? A moderated mediation model of Chinese and international social media use, media skepticism, need for cognition, and COVID-19 conspiracy theory endorsement in China. Computers in Human Behavior, 120(July 2020), 106760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106760 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Sunstein, C. R., & Vermeule, A. (2009). Conspiracy theories: Causes and cures. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 17(202–227). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Sunstein, C. R. (2014). Conspiracy theories and other dangerous ideas. NY: Simon & Schuster. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2020). Agreeing to disagree : reports of the popularity of Covid-19 conspiracy theories are greatly exaggerated. Psychological Medicine, 52, 791–793. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2018.1537428.Douglas [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Tonković, M., Dumančić, F., Jelić, M., & Čorkalo Biruški, D. (2021). Who Believes in COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories in Croatia? Prevalence and Predictors of Conspiracy Beliefs. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(June), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.643568 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Trumbo, C.W., & McComas, K. A. (2023). The Function of Credibility in Information Processing for Risk Perception. Risk Analysis, 23. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Tsfati, Y., & Cappella, J. N. (2003). Do people watch what they do not trust? Exploring the association between news media skepticism and exposure. Communication Research, 30(5), 504–529. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Tsfati, Y. (2003). Media Skepticism and Climate of Opinion Perception. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/15.1.65 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Uchechukwu L. Osuagwu, Chundung A. Miner, Dipesh Bhattarai, Khathutshelo Percy Mashige, Richard Oloruntoba, Emmanuel Kwasi Abu, Bernadine Ekpenyong, Timothy G. Chikasirimobi, Piwuna Christopher Goson, Godwin O. Ovenseri-Ogbomo, Raymond Langsi, Deborah Don, O. N., & Agho., K. E. (2021). Misinformation About COVID-19 in Sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from a Cross-Sectional Survey. Health Security, 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1089/HS.2020.0202 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Vraga, E. K., Tully, M., & Bode, L. (2020). Empowering users to respond to misinformation about covid-19. Media and Communication, 8(2), 475–479. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i2.3200 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. Wang, C., Chudzicka-Czupała, A., Grabowski, D., Pan, R., Adamus, K., Wan, X., Hetnał, M., Tan, Y., Olszewska-Guizzo, A., Xu, L., McIntyre, R. S., Quek, J., Ho, R., & Ho, C. (2020). The Association Between Physical and Mental Health and Face Mask Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparison of Two Countries With Different Views and Practices. In Frontiers in Psychiatry (Vol. 11). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.569981 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. White, D. M. (1950). The ‘“gate keeper”’: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 27, 383–390. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. Wirz, C. D., Xenos, M. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D., Chung, J. H., & Massarani, L. (2018). Rethinking Social Amplification of Risk : Social Media and Zika in Three Languages. 38(12). https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13228 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. Zhang, H., Du, J., & Wang, R. (2019). Media credibility The impact of privately-owned websites on state-owned televisions in the context of China. Journal of Asia Pacific Communication, 2, 188–210. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar