Information: a missing component in understanding and mitigating social epidemics

The paper investigates whether information can function as a harmful, contagious causal factor in social epidemics (behaviorally based non-communicable diseases such as suicide, violence, opioid addiction, and obesity). Against a backdrop of rising prevalence of these problems in developed countries, the authors highlight debates over whether such phenomena are truly contagious or lack a causal agent. They propose that harmful information—conceptualized through the meme framework—can be infectious and pathogenic (an infopathogen), and that modern information technologies (internet, media, social media) act as vectors. To analyze and manage these dynamics, they extend the classic epidemiological triad into an epidemiological quad that explicitly includes information agents and vectors, alongside host, physical agents, and environment, and use disease life-cycle analogies to suggest interventions.

The paper reviews scholarship on memes and information diffusion: memes as culturally replicating units (Dawkins, Blackmore) and critiques of memetics (Armitage; Fracchia & Lewontin). With the rise of digital media, meme reproduction and diffusion have become measurable (Adar & Adamic; Gruhl et al.; Weng et al.). Information contagion models (susceptible–infected frameworks) have been applied to behaviors (Christakis & Fowler) and misinformation/fake news (Jin et al.; Kucharski; Tambuscio et al.). Evidence that media exposure can influence aggression and violent behavior (Huesmann et al.; Anderson et al.) and that suicide may spread by imitation (Cheng et al.; Mercy et al.; Swanson & Colman) supports the vector role of media. The literature on treating violence as a contagious disease (Slutkin and colleagues) is contrasted with critiques (Greene; Loeffler & Flaxman). Additional contexts include advertising effects (Saffer & Chaloupka), cross-cultural media impacts on body image/eating disorders (Williams et al.), and social contagion/network effects in various behaviors.

This is a conceptual/theoretical study. The authors: (1) Define harmful information as a causal agent—an infopathogen—building on meme theory. (2) Extend the epidemiological triad to an epidemiological quad that comprises information agents and vectors, physical agents and vectors, hosts, and the social environment. (3) Map social epidemic processes onto biological disease life-cycle and SEIR analogies, comparing a fictitious mosquito-vectored pathogen to an infopathogen example (Neo-Nazi content), illustrating stages of exposure, latent/incubation periods, infection, expression, and transmission (including vector amplification via information technologies). (4) Use the quad to categorize and propose potential interventions: information-focused (filtering, tagging, corrective content), social environment (surveillance, forecasting, policy/legislation, structural change), physical/engineering controls, and host-centered approaches (education, counseling, inoculation/infovaccination, behavior modification). (5) Discuss falsifiability and boundary conditions by comparing information spread with biological analogs and considering behavioral and ethical constraints.

- Information can be infectious and pathogenic (infopathogenic), acting as a causal agent in social epidemics, with modern media and social media serving as efficient vectors. - The epidemiological triad is usefully expanded to a quad by explicitly adding information agents/vectors to host, physical agents/vectors, and social environment, clarifying roles and enabling targeted mitigations. - Life-cycle analogies (SEIR-like stages) apply to infopathogens: assimilation, retention, expression, and transmission, with latent/incubation periods and potential for mutation/adaptation under selection pressures. - Empirical patterns consistent with contagion and media effects are summarized: US adult obesity rose from 30.5% (2000) to 42.4% (2017–2018); oxycodone overconsumption increased ~500% (1999–2011); suicide rates increased from 10.7 to 14 (2001–2017). Studies show media violence can increase aggression, suicide can spread via imitation, and fake news spreads widely online. - A portfolio of interventions mapped to the quad is proposed: information filtering/tagging, corrective content, and incentive changes; social environment surveillance/forecasting and policy/legislation; physical/engineering controls; and host-level infovaccination/inoculation, education, counseling, and behavior-change strategies. - Treating perpetrators within social epidemics (e.g., violent offenders) as infected individuals supports rehabilitation-focused interventions to interrupt transmission, without negating criminal justice roles.

The authors argue the biological epidemic analogy provides testable, explanatory power for information spread: heterogeneity in cognitive limits parallels host resistance; super-spreaders and high transmission by poorly connected nodes can be mapped to network and epidemiological phenomena. They address the role of human agency, noting behavioral choices shape both biological and social epidemics, and that choices are themselves influenced by information exposure and social environments (e.g., echo chambers, algorithmic personalization). They acknowledge challenges: classifying harmful information is subjective and context-dependent; the marketplace-of-ideas assumption may fail under attention- and click-driven incentives; and free speech concerns make outright censorship both impractical and counterproductive due to mutation and re-emergence of content. Instead, they advocate multi-pronged mitigations aligned with the quad. A key implication is to treat individuals driving social epidemics as infected for the purposes of rehabilitation and interruption of transmission cycles, supported by evidence of contagion and successful rehabilitative models (e.g., Norway).

The paper contributes: (1) A precise definition of infopathogens—harmful, contagious information as a causal agent in social epidemics—helping resolve debates over causality (e.g., in violence). (2) The epidemiological quad, adding information agents/vectors to the classic model to better analyze spread and guide interventions. (3) An infopathogenic life-cycle analogy, enabling use of familiar epidemic diagrams and SEIR-like thinking for social epidemics. The authors call for further research on: developing info-vaccines/inoculation strategies and leveraging insights from vaccinology; modeling spread and immunization in complex networks; and testing the quad as an education/outreach/management tool, potentially integrating it with the Public Health Approach (surveillance, risk factor identification, intervention evaluation, program implementation). They anticipate infopathogens will be increasingly consequential for social stability as digital systems scale and mediate behavior, underscoring the need for cross-disciplinary collaboration.

The work is theoretical and conceptual, with no new empirical data collected. Reliance on biological analogies may not capture all complexities of human behavior and social systems (e.g., complex contagion, agency). Determining harmfulness of information is subjective and culturally contingent, raising ethical and legal (free speech) concerns. The framework’s effectiveness requires empirical validation, including measurement of infopathogens, vectors, and intervention impacts. Additionally, the approach does not diminish the necessity of addressing hosts, physical agents, and social environments; focusing solely on information would be insufficient.