2.1. Information Needs During Crises

A crisis is considered to occur when people of a society, an institution, a city, or a country experience a sudden threat to fundamental values or activities based on leading lives. Therefore, the situation might deal with uncertainty (Rosenthal et al., 2001). A variety of threats may arise from a crisis. The crisis may be both man-made and natural: for example, SARS, MERS, tsunamis, and cyclones, which are considered to be natural crises. On the other hand, the missile crisis in Cuba, Chernobyl, and 9/11 are known as man-made crises.

In the time of pandemics like the H1N1 virus in 2009, bioterrorism threats, or natural calamities, most people want to know information on how the threats behave and how to react in these crisis moments. Over the last two decades, people’s interest in the necessity of the reliability of sources of information about how to minimize the effects of such risks have increased, especially in the case of the emergence of Anthrax attack, West Nile virus, and the outbreak of SARS in the early 2000s. Diseases like Escherichia coli and Salmonella also increased the intention to get the right sources of information during a crisis (Zach, 2011).

The output obtained from the cases of communication regarding health risks reflects the fact that people search for solid, appropriate, and competent information that may be taken to protect themselves and their families (Wray et al., 2008).

2.2. Information Dissemination During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Information dissemination is defined as the distribution of information to intended users while meeting specific conditions such as timeliness, dependability, and so on. Information dissemination can be accomplished in a variety of ways (Wu et al., 2016). Although in a simple sense, information dissemination is regarded as the exchange of information, in a comprehensive sense it is not just a one-way activity. There has to be a sender to deliver the message and a recipient to decide how the rest of the exchange should proceed. These involved people exchange thoughts, facts, opinions, perceptions, and ideologies (Ifukor, 2013).

During the COVID-19 pandemic, disseminating information has been the most significant aspect of the twenty-first century. There has never been a time when the requirement for rapid information dissemination was more essential than it is during the COVID-19 outbreak. Social media is a legitimate and fast communication tool that is utilized for the dissemination and gathering of information specially related to health (Kudchadkar & Carroll, 2020).

People from urban and rural areas can barely access authentic information and materials. They often receive and disseminate information via various platforms (e.g., social media), in which the circulated information can be unreliable. Since librarians and information workers have access to credible sources of information, they should disseminate that information as far as possible. They must reach user groups and satisfy their desire for the most up-to-date information that is relevant to them (Okike, 2020).

In the time of global public health crises like the pandemic, dissemination of reliable and authentic information plays a significant role regarding strategies to control the outbreak. Timely and proper information of the pandemic can help to take precautionary steps and other measures for responding in that critical situation, which may in turn contribute to the betterment of health outcomes (Voeten et al., 2009). It has been observed that appropriate dissemination of information to the general public can help to minimize reactions generated by a negative mentality (Hall et al., 2003).

It has been reported that the selection of information sources can shape people’s knowledge, which in turn influences health beliefs and preventative steps. Studies have found that choice of information sources and way of disseminating information may vary due to people’s place of living (e.g., urban and rural), educational qualifications, and ethnicity (Ifukor, 2013; Voeten et al., 2009).

Awa (1998) and Fayose and Dike (2002) stated that the attendance of family members during various familial programs helps to disseminate information in the rural community. Oral literature is composed of three major categories: discussion, music, and drama. All of these transfer information that are essential to a society’s welfare.

Different social gatherings are an essential part of rural people’s lives. Yazidu (1975) highlighted social gatherings, traditional meetings like wedding ceremonies, celebrating birthday functions and burial arrangements, and agricultural festivals as means for disseminating information interpersonally. Likewise, Aboyade (1987) stated that announcers using loudspeaker instruments, gatherings of rural people, churches, and mosques are a medium of acquiring and disseminating information among rural people.

The advancement of infrastructure and technology has enhanced urban people to avail Internet facilities. People from urban areas seek more information, including about health, on the Internet than do people living in rural areas (Flynn et al., 2006; Licciardone, 2001). Use of the Internet may be useful for people to make important decisions including about health care through linking people to local and broader social networking sites to avail information and suggestions if it is used properly (Boase et al., 2006). Researchers state that there is some interlinked connectivity so that distinct usage of the Internet can influence social welfare. For instance, people can search for information regarding health to help others to take significant health-care decisions; improve accessibility to and acquirement of health-care resources, including information exchange with healthcare personnel and the ability to participate in support groups; buy medical and health-related resources online; and enhance interaction with their social networks, both near and far away in geographical location (Boase et al., 2006; Cotten, 2001).

2.3. Misinformation and COVID-19

Misinformation occurs when individuals firmly adopt false beliefs, differentiating between illiteracy (or lack of knowledge) and confident but faulty knowledge (Kuklinski et al., 2000). More than a pandemic has occurred since the introduction of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). The virus is generating a variety of other problems as it spreads over the world. One of these concerns is a storm of misinformation (Krause et al., 2020). Along with the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been seen a parallel ‘infodemic’ or fake news, with bizarre ideas spreading across the globe via social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, and WhatsApp. Even leading politicians also claimed that the virus was nothing but a hoax. Others suggested that if it was not, there was nothing to worry about because even pushing hot hairdryer air up one’s nose might destroy it. Gun-toting mobs have formed in the western United States to turn back fanciful busloads of ‘Antifa’ gangs that persist mostly on their Twitter feeds (Buchanan, 2020).

It can be noticed that several types of misinformation are being circulated through social media platforms during this pandemic. Some of the most common ones are summarized in the following:

When research demonstrates that lies are now spreading quicker than truths it is threatening to notice that human psychology is severely flawed (Vosoughi et al., 2018). Experts, however, feel that the true problem is a series of subtle practices that, by altering human interactions and the way they make decisions, have transformed social media into a source of misinformation (Buchanan, 2020).

According to Chakravorti (2020) and Taylor (2020), misleading information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is fast spreading and often these misleading materials include references to ostensible remedies such as gargling with salty water, eating oregano, and even drinking bleach. Further spreading of misconceptions is aided by other sorts of incorrect information, such as pointing to “bat soup” eating as the source of the illness, or conspiracy theories, such as the virus being manufactured by the United States. Aguilera (2020) stated that these types of news not only support the development of racist ideas and actions but also jeopardize public health and the ability of governments to successfully execute prevention measures. In this outbreak of the coronavirus the spread of misinformation, fake news, and conspiracy theories has emerged as an additional concern. This is why the World Health Organization also considered this scenario as an ‘infodemic’ (The Lancet Infectious Disease, 2020). Many studies have found that the majority of COVID-19 YouTube videos that are watched contain misleading information (Nguyen & Catalan-Matamoros, 2020). Searches including “COVID-19” and “coronavirus” indicated around 27.5% of content on YouTube that was not authentic; on top of that such material was also viewed over 60 million times (Li et al., 2020). Therefore, the detection and eradication of various COVID-19 misinformation is required (West et al., 2020).

2.4. Social Media and COVID-19 Misinformation

Social media platforms are Internet-based apps that allow communities of users to produce, interact with, and share material with others. There are various platforms for different content categories, and each platform has its own set of features. Real-time communication among users is enabled by them, allowing users to actively participate in a public conversation. In contrast to traditional media, social media enables users to easily create and share content globally without the need for editorial oversight or approval (Puri et al., 2020). Even though social media has provided great tools for individuals to engage with one another, it has also played a significant role in the spread of false information that is potentially hazardous to public health (Wilson & Wiysonge, 2020).

In moments of crisis, social media may have both direct and indirect effects on the public (Austin et al., 2012). During times of crisis, people’s use of social media increases (Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2006), and in some cases they regard social media as more credible sources of information than traditional forms of media (Procopio & Procopio, 2007). COVID-19’s quick spread and resulting global pandemic have recently become a subject of intensive social media discourse, with Twitter reporting a COVID-19-related post every 45 milliseconds; the hashtag #coronavirus quickly became the second most used in 2020 (Cinelli et al., 2020). Sadly, inaccurate and misleading information concerning COVID-19, and possibly harmful treatments, continues to spread via social media platforms (Brennen et al., 2020; Kouzy et al., 2020). Cinelli et al. (2020) investigated the “infodemic” in the initial phases of COVID-19, utilizing epidemic modeling to information dissemination on different social media platforms to measure basic reproduction numbers for the “transmissibility” of posts on each platform. Regardless of platform, there were no significant differences in the dissemination patterns of doubtful versus reliable information.

Various misinformation and conspiracy theories regarding the COVID-19 vaccine are also being spread throughout the world via social media, such as claims that the vaccine contains a microchip, the vaccine causes infertility, the vaccine changes DNA, and the vaccine controls human brains (Nuzhath et al., 2020). COVID-19-related health behavior is being negatively affected by the propagation of misinformation and conspiracy theories on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter (Tasnim et al., 2020). A significant portion of general people in Bangladesh are hesitant to take COVID-19 vaccines due to dissemination of such various misinformation and conspiracy theories (Mahmud et al., 2021).

Pennycook et al. (2020) noted that members of the general public spread inaccurate and misleading information about COVID-19 through social media because they fail to consider whether or not the content they were about to share is accurate before they do so. This phenomenon could be countered by reminding people to check their facts before they confirm their social media post, which would result in a more than twofold increase in participants’ willingness to share the truth. Although spreading misinformation through social media is a phenomenon that is not recently observed, the emergence of COVID-19 related misinformation via social networking sites during this outbreak has created a sense of need for tackling the circumstance and deploying necessary steps.

2.5. Countering COVID-19 Misinformation

Alongside with the COVID-19 pandemic, people are also going through a condition called infodemic. Fake news, misinformation, and conspiracy theories have become commonplace in the age of social media, and their prevalence has increased significantly since the outbreak of the coronavirus. This scenario is particularly concerning because it undermines public confidence in health-care organizations and initiatives (The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2020). A number of individuals are propagating a wide range of misinformation through the Internet and social media by disseminating unscientific, false, or misleading statements or distributing false news, both intentionally and unintentionally. The broad dissemination of erroneous COVID-19-related misinformation has the potential to spread the disease rapidly (Mejova & Kalimeri, 2020; Shimizu, 2020; Thomas, 2020). Misconceptions regarding COVID-19 may have negative effects on the fight against COVID-19 and control of the pandemic, as previous SARS and Ebola outbreaks were noticeable instances (Cheung, 2015; Maunder et al., 2003; Person et al., 2004).

In light of the fact that misleading information spreads quickly and extensively via a variety of channels, providing reliable information that expresses accurate scientific perspectives on COVID-19 is the most effective strategy for reducing fear and panic associated with misconceptions about scientific facts and epidemiology of the coronavirus (Garrett, 2020). Local community and health organizations, non-governmental organizations, the print and electronic media, and other support groups should make every effort to convey accurate information regarding COVID-19 to their constituents and the general public. In order to achieve this goal, collaboration at the local and global levels is necessary, as well as the integration of physical and digital resources via collaborative endeavors to ensure that authoritative information is disseminated throughout many media forms (Tasnim et al., 2020).

Technical corporations can be assigned, in collaboration with health institutes, for developing a centralized system for identifying YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter offenders. Advertisements, including video messages, should be intercepted and deleted from media sharing platforms that make fictitious and/or unrealistic (i.e., deceptive) medical claims in order to project COVID-19-related information for monetary advantage. These objectives can also be fulfilled through the application of modern technology, such as natural language processing or text mining, to detect online information that lacks empirical support. Data mining algorithms have been helpful in identifying distinguishing characteristics of fake news or misinformation that has been eliminated from various platforms (Shu et al., 2017).

Existing fact-checking structures should be integrated into new strategies to promote accurate COVID-19-related information on practical preventive measures (e.g., washing hands with soap frequently, using hand sanitizers, using facemask, receiving vaccines, and maintaining social distancing), which should be implemented immediately. Local authorities and media workers should engage with public health specialists, particularly those who are experts in infectious disease, in order to clearly deliver accurate and timely information to the public and reduce anxiety among the population (Mian & Khan, 2020). Another rigorous step might include charging those responsible for the creation and dissemination of COVID-19 misinformation or false news on online news portals and forcing them to appear in court in order to serve as a deterrence to other possible perpetrators of the crime. Notification of these issues should be made to the appropriate local and national governing bodies as well as law enforcement agencies so that the required procedures can be taken to carefully handle them in different regions (Ahinkorah et al., 2020). Dib et al. (2022) noted that digital health literacy, such as capability to search, access, and comprehend information related to health from online resources, is also necessary to counter misconceptions regarding COVID-19. Widespread literacy, which integrates both informative and scientific literacy, is essential to gain knowledge and the ability to use information efficiently in the pandemic situation (Gu & Feng, 2021).

Although identifying authentic information is a tough task, there is a check list which can be helpful to detect it. The check list according to the Pledgetopause (2021) has been outlined in the following:

Since the dissemination of misinformation regarding COVID-19 is being spread quickly, especially via Internet and social media, which ultimately has negative effects on the fight against this deadly disease and control of this pandemic, the necessity of countering this issue by taking essential steps and ensuring the proper dissemination of reliable information has increased.

There are a few reported studies regarding the role of information dissemination on ordinary citizens during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Asian sub-continent, but no reported study has been found in Bangladesh so far. Without these kinds of studies, government agencies are at a loss; hence, the current study has been conducted to explore the role of information dissemination on general citizens in this pandemic situation and how misinformation belief influences them.

5.1. Reliability Statistics

The reliability of the questionnaire has been tested by using the SPSS program. Table 1 shows the reliability coefficient of the questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha score is 0.872, which can be called as reliable as the alpha value is greater than 0.05.

6.1. Demographic Profile of Respondents

A total of 406 respondents participated in this study. Among them, 281 (69.2%) were male and 125 (30.8%) were female. A vast majority of the respondents (278, 68.5%) were between the ages of 18 and 30 years. The greater portion of respondents had bachelor’s or similar degrees, followed by those who had higher secondary certificate (HSC) or equivalent degrees. In case of place of living, a vast majority of the participants belong to urban areas, whereas the number of respondents from rural areas was low. The largest group of participants considered social media as sources of getting information, followed by those who considered print and electronic media. All the demographic details of the participants are demonstrated in Table 2.

6.2. Misinformation and COVID-19

The result, illustrated in Table 3, revealed the frequency and percentage of COVID-19 related misinformation on a five-point Likert scale. The majority of respondents strongly disagreed with statements like “Drinking alcohol may prevent COVID-19” (176, 43.3%), “COVID-19 is a deception” (171, 42.1%), and “COVID-19 does not affect religious people” (167, 41.1%), respectively. A vast majority of the participants neither agreed nor disagreed with the misinformation, suggesting that they were uncertain about its reliability. Table 3 highlights that the highest mean score of 3.12 was gained for the statement “COVID-19 affects urban people more than rural,” with a standard deviation of 1.36. Other items were negatively rated in term of mean score (<3.00). The mean scores for all the items indicated an overall negative rating that means low levels of misinformation belief, although the high SD values suggested that the participants had differences in their ratings for the statements among themselves as they showed wide variability in their responses.

The results of Mann–Whitney U test found no significant difference between respondents’ residency and misinformation except for “Facemasks don’t work” (Mann–Whitney U=17,178.500, p<0.05) and “COVID-19 does not spread in the hot and humid weather” (Mann–Whitney U=16,695, p<0.05). No significant difference was found between respondents’ previous infection with COVID-19 and misinformation regarding COVID-19. No significant difference was noted between the deaths of family members of respondents due to COVID and misinformation related to COVID. There is no significant difference between respondents’ vaccine uptake and COVID-19 misinformation except for “Facemasks don’t work” (Mann–Whitney U=2,800.500, p<0.05), “5G towers may spread COVID-19” (Mann–Whitney U=2,171, p<0.05), “COVID-19 was created in the lab” (Mann–Whitney U=2,443.500, p<0.05), and “COVID-19 affects urban people more than rural” (Mann–Whitney U=2,869, p<0.05).

Mann–Whitney U testing found significant difference between respondents’ sex and certain COVID-19 related information such as “Facemasks don’t work” (Mann–Whitney U=13,491.500, p<0.05), “COVID-19 is a deception” (Mann–Whitney U=14,071, p<0.05), “5G towers may spread COVID-19” (Mann–Whitney U=15,074, p<0.05), “COVID-19 does not affect religious people” (Mann–Whitney U=13,511, p<0.05), “COVID-19 vaccine does not work” (Mann–Whitney U=12,796, p<0.05), “COVID-19 does not affect poor people” (Mann–Whitney U=13,788, p<0.05), “Thankuni leaves may prevent COVID-19” (Mann–Whitney U=14,852, p<0.05), and “COVID-19 affects urban people more than rural” (Mann–Whitney U=1,308, p<0.05).

Kruskal–Wallis testing revealed no significant difference was noted between ages of the respondents and COVID-19 related misinformation. Significant difference was also not found among respondents’ maintenance of COVID related guidelines and misinformation regarding COVID-19, except for “Vaccine doesn’t work against COVID-19” (p=0.018). There is no significant difference among respondents’ frequency of Internet or social media usage and misinformation regarding COVID-19 except for “Facemasks don’t work” (p=0.016) and “Bill Gates is behind the COVID-19 pandemic” (p=0.031).

Significant difference was found among level of education and all misinformation except for “COVID-19 was created in a lab” (p=0.86). Significant difference was also noted among respondents’ level of information literacy and COVID-19 related misinformation except for “COVID-19 was created in a lab” (p=0.707) and “COVID-19 affects urban people more than rural” (p=0.655). Significant difference was noted among respondents’ sources of getting information and certain misinformation like “COVID-19 is a deception” (p=0.09), “Drinking alcohol may prevent COVID-19” (p=0.014), “COVID-19 does not affect poor people” (p=0.044), “Thankuni leaves may prevent COVID-19” (p=0.028), and “COVID-19 affects urban people more than rural” (p=0.024). Significant difference was noted among respondents’ evaluative steps after getting information and certain COVID-19 related misinformation such as “Facemasks don’t work” (p=0.016), “Vaccine doesn’t work” (p=0.031), and “COVID-19 doesn’t affect poor people” (p=0.045).

6.3. Strategies to Counter COVID-19 Related Misinformation

Data presented in Table 4 indicate that respondents have shown their support in the case of most of the strategies to counter COVID-19 related misinformation. They strongly supported steps like removal of false social media contents (207, 51.0%), easy and straightforward representations of information regarding COVID-19 (192, 47.3%), awareness campaigns or workshops (178, 43.8%), developing tools and guidance to promote and disseminate trusted information regarding COVID-19 (177, 43.6%), only sharing scientific facts will be helpful (173, 42.6%), religious scholars can play an important role to eradicate COVID-19 related misinformation (171, 42.1%), and print and electronic media can provide right information regarding COVID-19 (164, 40.4%). Respondents provided some support for steps like the role of local information centers and libraries in disseminating right and accurate information regarding COVID-19 (201, 49.5%), the role of information professionals in providing accurate information (200, 49.3%), and the role of interactions with health officials that are polite, nonjudgmental, and factual (198, 48.8%).

6.4. Hypotheses Testing

H01: There is no relationship between current residency and sources of getting information.

Chi-square test for current residency and sources of getting information found that there is no significant relationship between current residency and sources of getting information (χ²=7.422; Df=4; p=0.115). So, the null hypothesis can be retained.

H02: There is no relationship between current residency and importance of information dissemination.

Chi-square test for current residency and sources of getting information found that there is significant relationship between current residency and importance of information dissemination (χ²=17.533; Df=4; p=0.002). So, the null hypothesis can be rejected.

H03: There is no relationship between current residency and reaction after getting COVID related information.

Chi-square test for current residency and reaction after getting COVID related information found that there is significant relationship between current residency and reaction after getting COVID related information (χ²=7.101; Df=2; p=0.029). So, the null hypothesis can be rejected.

H04: There is no relationship between current residency and evaluative steps after getting information and before disseminating it.

Chi-square test for current residency and evaluative steps after getting information and before disseminating it found that there is no significant relationship between current residency and sources of getting information (χ²=4.957; Df=6; p=0.549). So, the null hypothesis can be retained.