Exploring the role ofculture and cognitive heuristics in assessing the credibility of cancer (mis)information on Facebook among U.S. Latinos/as

As health misinformation continues to permeate social media, it is of utmost importance to understand how credibility assessments are made among those most vulnerable to health inequities. Dual-processing models suggest that online credibility assessments are largely made through the use of cognitive heuristics. However, little is known about the role cultural identity plays in these assessments, particularly in light of health (mis)information exposure among communities of color. This mixed-methods study explores the role of culture and cognitive heuristics in how a sample of Latinos/as assessed the credibility of cancer prevention and screening information on Facebook, and the quality of cancer information they were exposed to on their accounts. Participants (N = 20) logged onto their Facebook account, entered the search term "cancer," and walked-through 12 months of cancer-related posts that appeared on their News Feed. When cancer screening and prevention information engagement was recalled, participants were asked if/how they assessed information credibility. Computer screen and audio were recorded. Interviews were analyzed thematically, and the content and scientific credibility of claims in posts were assessed. Despite the majority of posts being coded as having low/very low scientific credibility, credibility assessments were not always accurate. Most participants only verified the accuracy of content when they deemed it important/relevant, instead relying on cognitive heuristics interpreted through a cultural lens to assess (mis)information. Findings highlight the instrumental role of culture in the heuristic interpretation of source and content credibility among Latinos/as, emphasizing the importance of explicitly including culture in theoretical models that explore how individuals assess credibility on social media.