Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Aug 23, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Aug 28, 2018 - Oct 23, 2018
Date Accepted: Feb 17, 2019
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Effects of Mock Facebook Workday Comments on Public Perception of Professional Credibility: A Field Study in Canada

Weijs C, Coe J, Desmarais S, Majowicz S, Jones-Bitton A

Effects of Mock Facebook Workday Comments on Public Perception of Professional Credibility: A Field Study in Canada

J Med Internet Res 2019;21(4):e12024

DOI: 10.2196/12024

PMID: 30998223

PMCID: 6495291

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Effects of Mock Facebook Workday Comments on Public Perception of Professional Credibility: A Field Study in Canada

  • Cynthia Weijs; 
  • Jason Coe; 
  • Serge Desmarais; 
  • Shannon Majowicz; 
  • Andria Jones-Bitton

Background:

There is considerable discussion of risks to health professionals’ reputations and employment from personal social media use, though its impacts on professional credibility and the health professional-client relationship are unknown.

Objective:

The aim of this study was to test the extent to which workday comments posted to health professionals’ personal Facebook profiles influence their credibility and affect the professional-client relationship.

Methods:

In a controlled field study, participants (members of the public) reviewed randomly assigned mock Facebook profiles of health professionals. The 2×2×2 factorial design of mock profiles included gender (female/male), health profession (physician/veterinarian), and workday comment type (evident frustration/ambiguous). Participants then rated the profile owner’s credibility on a visual analog scale. An analysis of variance test compared ratings. Mediation analyses tested the importance of credibility ratings on participants’ willingness to become a client of the mock health professional.

Results:

Participants (N=357) rated health professionals whose personal Facebook profile showed a comment with evident frustration rather than an ambiguous workday comment as less credible (P<.001; mean difference 11.18 [SE 1.28]; 95% CI 8.66 to 13.70). Furthermore, participants indicated they were less likely to become clients of the former when they considered credibility (standardized beta=.69; P<.001). Credibility explained 86% of the variation in the relationship between the type of workday comment and the participant’s willingness to become a client of the health professional.

Conclusions:

This study provides the first evidence of the impact of health professionals’ personal online disclosures on credibility and the health relationship. Public perceptions about professionalism and credibility are integral to developing the evidence base for e-professionalism guidelines and encouraging best practices in social media use.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Weijs C, Coe J, Desmarais S, Majowicz S, Jones-Bitton A

Effects of Mock Facebook Workday Comments on Public Perception of Professional Credibility: A Field Study in Canada

J Med Internet Res 2019;21(4):e12024

DOI: 10.2196/12024

PMID: 30998223

PMCID: 6495291

Per the author's request the PDF is not available.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.