PONE-D-20-23677

Countering misinformation via WhatsApp: Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic in Zimbabwe

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Larreguy,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.<please by="" manuscript="" revised="" submit="" your="">

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:</please>

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Khin Thet Wai, MBBS, MPH, MA (Population & Family Planning Resear

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Your ethics statement must appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please also ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics section of your online submission will not be published alongside your manuscript.

3. Please upload a copy of Supporting Information Tables S1-S5 which you refer to in your text.

4. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Tables 1-5 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

This research provides the sound evidence critical to improve countermeasures for the infodemic of COVID-19 and to impede with correct information through social media platforms. It covered the demographically representative sample.

Specifically, authors could improve the integrity of this research by expanding/adding/clarifying the following issues apart from responding to reviewers.

(1) To expand the abstract by adding the concrete results with relevant statistics;

(2) LINE 83-84: Survey response rates were compared between Whatsapp and Qualtrics. As such, the authors needed to add the total number of subscribers to Qualtrics.

(3) LINE 103-104: To clarify 'short experimental list'; 'long experimental list'.

(4) LINE 116-118: To clarify "initially blocked broader list into groups of four" and cite a reference for this method.

(5) LINE 121-124: To add the software used for regressing the treatment effects.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Methodology thoroughly explained. It is necessary to include what proportion of internet/social media users are regularly use Whatapps, in comparison to other social media app, to judge the generalization of findings of study. If the author describes It is good if more explicit data for comparison between arms of study can be described.

Reviewer #2: The paper experiments on how to combat misinformation by disseminating truthful information about COVID-19 in Zimbabwe. The author examined how exposure to these messages can affect individual belief in preventing behavior. To assess that effect, the authors experimented with the timing when the messages were sent.

The methodology sounds solid, but I missed some numbers in the paper: the number of users in each group (treatment and control) in the Whatsapp and the percentage of people in the lists who respond to the surveys. It is not clear with there is an overlap of respondents between the two surveys (first and second weeks)? If so, how much the first survey influenced the second study in the second week?

I am not sure if the number of individuals is enough to conclude the findings. But,

I am not a statistician and only can trust the reported results.

Finally, the authors did not mention demand bias. How many respondents change their behavior or opinions as a result of being part of a study? The authors identified themselves in the surveys as being part of Harvard University. What would happen with the results of the survey if the survey was not identified or identified as being from Kubatana organization?

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Countering misinformation via WhatsApp: Preliminary Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic in Zimbabwe

PONE-D-20-23677R1

Dear Dr. Larreguy,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Khin Thet Wai, MBBS, MPH, MA (Population & Family Planning Resear

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

All comments are addressed satisfactorily.

Reviewers' comments: