Effect of international organizations’ direct engagement with the public: information source credibility and the public’s attitudes towards COVID-19-related measures

Can international organizations (IOs) effectively shape attitudes held by individuals? Under what conditions does the public perceive information supplied by IOs as more trustworthy than information provided by other authorities? With the exponential growth of social network platforms, many IOs utilize them to engage individuals directly. Building on the growing literature on IOs’ engagement with the public, we examine if and under what conditions such effort is effective. We adopt insights from the literature on information source effect to theorize that the information disseminated by IOs is more effective than that by domestic health officials in shaping individuals’ attitudes when the IOs are portrayed as impartial and equipped with expertise in the relevant issue area. We test the hypotheses in the context of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the COVID-19-related measures. Our analysis of the survey experiment with a sample of 2865 Americans shows that political independents trust COVID-19-related information provided by the WHO more than information supplied by domestic public health officials, especially when the professional expertise the WHO staff commands is highlighted. In comparison, our analysis indicates that the information source effect is muted when information is delivered to individuals with strongly held existing attitudes, Democrats and Republicans in the case of COVID-19-related information in the United States.