“Make sure behavioral scientists are at the table from the start in the next pandemic”
On Friday, April 10, the Amsterdam Center for Health Communication (ACHC) celebrates its 10th anniversary. With a pandemic, health gurus on social media, and the rise of AI, the research institute has seen the health landscape change dramatically. What lessons have been learned?
Ten years ago, Professor of Health Communication Julia van Weert was one of the first to work tirelessly with her team to ensure that their research findings would actually be put into practice. With the establishment of her chair, she also founded the Amsterdam Center for Health Communication (ACHC). This research institute – part of the Department of Communication Science at the University of Amsterdam (UvA) – has a mission to promote health through scientific research on effective communication.
Meanwhile, “making an impact” has truly become a buzzword. On Friday, April 10, University Professor Robbert Dijkgraaf and Professor of Science Communication Ionica Smeets, among others, will discuss this topic during an anniversary symposium. A recap at ten years of the ACHC with symposium organizers Julia van Weert and Eline Smit.
Scientific knowledge about health is often complex. Take drinking wine, for example – is it good for your health or not? How do you address that in health communication?
Eline: “We don’t research whether wine is good for you or not. But we do research how to communicate such a message, to whom, and through which channel. Should a doctor spread that message, or someone who is similar to the person receiving the message?”
Julia: ‘Suppose you want people to drink less alcohol. Then you systematically analyze why people drink. You’ll discover that they hold certain beliefs. For example, many young people drink because they believe it’s important to fit in. You then tailor your message to that. Simply telling people to drink less usually doesn’t work.”
What has changed in health communication over the past ten years?
Julia: “A lot. Technology, for example, has developed at lightning speed.”
Eline: “In the past, we mainly researched the target group using questionnaires; now you can also gather a lot of detailed information through less invasive methods, such as smartwatches.”
How has the rise of influencers and health gurus influenced health communication?
Eline: “Over the past ten years, the rise of social media has made misinformation and disinformation more visible and allowed it to spread faster. We’re conducting research on this. For instance, we’re looking at how anti-obesity medication is discussed on social media, and we’re collaborating with the hospital to investigate which health-related myths are circulating online and how we can best debunk them. Is it better for a doctor to explain the facts in a video? Or is it better for someone with a smaller status gap with the audience to convey the message?”
Can you say anything about that yet?
Eline: “That research is still ongoing, so it’s hard to make definitive statements about this. But we do know that a high degree of identification can be important for the audience, and also that someone in a white coat has more authority than someone without one.”
Julia: “It also depends on what you want to achieve. It may be that people say they prefer a doctor in an explanatory video but nevertheless remember it better when a patient explains it.”
The ACHC also played an advisory role during the COVID-19 pandemic. Representing the ACHC, Julia van Weert and Professor Bas van den Putten served on the scientific advisory board of the RIVM COVID-19 Behavioral Unit, which provided guidance on how COVID-19 measures should be communicated. What lessons can you draw from that?
Julia: “My mantra has always been: communicate uncertainty. In the beginning, the government communicated with too much certainty about things that were actually very uncertain. That ends up backfiring on you later.”
Eline: “Behavioral scientists were also consulted by the government for advice rather late in the process. Yet, in a pandemic, it ultimately comes down to people changing their behavior.”
Julia: “And then just providing information isn’t enough. You have to make it easier for people and also give them tools on how to change their behavior. That’s why there were walking routes and circles marked on the grass in the park, so people would keep their distance.”
Eline: “Even now, we’re still doing a lot of research on pandemic preparedness. For example, we analyzed many recordings of the press conferences by Health Minister Hugo de Jonge and Jaap van Dissel of the RIVM to see if they were unconsciously using polarizing communication strategies.”
Julia: “If you literally say that people who don’t get vaccinated are antisocial or call them ‘wappies,’ then you’re not putting yourself in those people’s shoes – some of whom were simply concerned about whether a vaccine could be developed safely in such a short time.”
Eline: “That may have contributed to polarization.”
Are we better prepared for the next pandemic now?
Eline: “That’s certainly the plan.”
Julia: “Yes, but I actually don’t think so.”
Eline: “Let’s not end on a pessimistic note. We have learned a lot about what could be improved in communication.”
Julia: “True. And definitely about how to organize things. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Outbreak Management Team (OMT) consisted solely of virologists and other medical experts. Behavioral insights barely reached that group. That was better addressed with the Social Impact Team (MIT). But by then, the pandemic was essentially already over.”
Eline: “So you can only hope that if there’s another pandemic, the behavioral scientists will be at the table right away.”
Julia: “Yes, and ideally that behavioral scientists would also be part of the OMT, but that’s probably still a bridge too far.”
The theme of the ACHC anniversary symposium is making an impact. How do you ensure that research results actually translate into practice?
Julia: “Leonie Westerbeek’s PhD research is a great example of that. Every five minutes, someone in the Netherlands ends up in the emergency room as a result of a fall. Medications can be the cause of this, especially when people take multiple medications at the same time.”
“Using AI, it’s possible to predict a patient’s risk of falling based on their medical record with the push of a button – without anyone having to fill out a questionnaire. This provides insight on a patient-by-patient basis: if you stop this medication or use a different dosage, the risk of a fall decreases. Leonie has shown that this information can actually make a difference. That system is now being implemented in general practice.”
