Document Type: Original Articles


Faculty Member at IAU-Shiraz Branch


Background: In the present era, Digital Media Content has played an effective role in the formation of socio-economic and social behaviors. The aim of this research was to investigate the views of media experts in different levels of this filed on factors that affect user-media relationship in the following domains: non-verbal communication, interaction with media audience, effect of media on various domains, attitudes of the audience toward electronic media, and audience’s priorities- economic aspects in Iran.Methods: A questionnaire was designed and validated by a pilot study and distributed to a sample of 40 experts and users of digital media on July, 2017. The collected data was analyzed using SPSS Version 22; the significance level was set to 5% in hypotheses testing.Results: The results show that the participants generally agreed on all statements regarding the study domains. However, the level of agreement to all domains was different among different groups of the respondents (mean=14.03 among media strategists as the lowest and mean=35.13 among media managers as the highest levels of agreement, P<0.001) and the domains of the study (mean=28.50 for the higher impact of traditional media and mean=22.50 for the effect of communication technology on increase of interaction between media and audience). Conclusion: The highest rate of agreement was reported for the domain “Traditional media have a higher impact on their audience than the new media, suggesting the importance of traditional media in public knowledge and behavior. However, there was significant difference in the experts’ opinions regarding each domain.     


  1. -Sharifi, S. Barati, M, & Ebrahimi, M. Characteristics of modern digital media and their advantage over conventional media. Khomain University Public Relations, 2013.
  2. -Pourkarimi, J. Media promotion and changes in audience attitudes. Research and Assessment Journal, 2002; (9) 29.
  3. - Lupton, D. Editorial: Health, illness and medicine in the media. Health, 1999; 3(3): 259-262.
  4. - Kline, K. A decade of research on health content in the media: The focus on health challenges and sociocultural context and attendant informational and ideological problems. Journal of Health Communication, 2006; 11: 43-59.
  5. -Khanian, D., Farhangi, A & Hadavinia, A. A proposed interactive model for media management anw new information and communication technologies. Quarterly of Research in Communication, 2009; 11-36.
  6. - Hardey, M. Doctor in the house: The Internet as a source of lay health knowledge and the challenge to expertise. Sociology of Health and Illness, 1999; 21(6): 820-835.
  7. - Global Health Survey. Experience & Perception in 28 countries. International Research Institutes, 2011; Retrieved October 18, 2012 from
  8. - Eng, T. R. Emerging technologies for cancer prevention and other population health challenges. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2005; 7(3), Retrieved October 10, 2012 from
  9. - Cotton, Shelia R., & Gupta, Sipi S. Characteristics of online and offline health information seekers and factors that discriminate between them. Social Science & Medicine, 2004; 59: 1795-1806.
  10. - Wathen, C. N. & Burkell, J. Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002; 53: 134-144.
  11. - Cline, R. J., & Haynes, K. M. Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: The state of the art. Health Education Research, 2012; 16(6), 671.
  12. - Adelhard, K., Obst, O. Evaluation of medical Internet sites. Methods of Information in Medicine, 1999; 39: 75-79.
  13. Bergsma LJ, Carney ME. Effectiveness of health-promoting media literacy education: a systematic review. Health education research. 2008 Jan 17; 23(3):522-42.
  14. Andrus MR, Roth MT. Health literacy: A review. Pharmacotherapy. 2002; 22:282–302. [PubMed]
  15. Nutbeam, D. The evolving concept of health literacy. Social science & medicine, 2008; 67(12), 2072-2078.
  16. Hayryan A. The ability to apply information about public health. Iran Health. 2008. [Last accessed on 2013 Jul 07]. Available from: = 11532 .
  17. Tehrani Banihashemi SA, Amirkhani MA, Alavian SM, Asgharifard M, Baradaran H, Parsian S, et al. Health literacy and the inffluensing factors: A study in five provinces of Iran. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2007; 4:1–9.
  18. O’Mara B., Social media, digital video and health promotion in a culturally and linguistically diverse Australia. Health Promot Int 2013; 28(3):466–476. Doi: 10.1093/heapro/das014.
  19. Roberts M., Callahan L., O'Leary C., Social Media: A Path to Health Literacy. , Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017; 240:464-475 PMID: 28972534
  20. Kreps GL., The Relevance of Health Literacy to mHealth., Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017; 240:347-355 PMID: 28972527
  21. Kreps GL., Evaluating new health information technologies: expanding the frontiers of health care delivery and health promotion., Kreps GL.Stud Health Technol Inform. 2002; 80:205-12.PMID:12026130