Credibility Judgment Against Online Health Misinformation Among Older Adults: Integrated View of Psychological Distance and Health Literacy

Exposure to online health misinformation can be dangerous as it may lead to incorrect health decisions. This study aimed to investigate the predictors of credibility judgments against online health misinformation among older Chinese adults. We used an online experimental approach and adapted four stimuli containing misinformation from cancer and non-cancer articles. Sixty participants aged between 50 to 75 years completed the study. We measured objective health literacy (using the Newest Vital Sign) and subjective health literacy (using the eHEALS instrument) prior to the experiment. Participants then read the stimuli and rated each article's credibility, as well as two types of psychological distances (i.e., social and hypothetical distance) to the health-related claims in the stimuli. Multiple linear regressions showed that older adults who had a closer psychological distance to the health issues had a decreased ability to judge the credibility of online health misinformation. Additionally, higher objective health literacy predicted more accuracy in credibility judgments, while higher subjective health literacy negatively influenced older adults' credibility appraisal of misinformation.