This survey study tested a two-level model of responses to conflicting advice about COVID-19 and examined the underlying emotional and cognitive mechanisms and the moderating role of advice source. Results showed that at the individual message level, advice evaluation was associated with advice outcomes. At the message group level, advice evaluation and outcomes were linked to perceived contradiction in content among the advice and the quantity of conflicting messages received, both directly and indirectly via recipients' emotions. Features of conflicting advice received primarily from impersonal sources had particularly strong associations with advice evaluation and outcomes. Implications for health communication were discussed.