The Effects of Source Cues and Issue Frames During COVID-19

Abstract The health and economic outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic will in part be determined by how effectively experts can communicate information to the public and the degree to which people follow expert recommendation. Using a survey experiment conducted in May 2020 with almost 5,000 respondents, this paper examines the effect of source cues and message frames on perceptions of information credibility in the context of COVID-19. Each health recommendation was framed by expert or nonexpert sources, was fact- or experience-based, and suggested potential gain or loss to test if either the source cue or framing of issues affected responses to the pandemic. We find no evidence that either source cue or message framing influence people’s responses – instead, respondents’ ideological predispositions, media consumption, and age explain much of the variation in survey responses, suggesting that public health messaging may face challenges from growing ideological cleavages in American politics.

Download Full-text

To shop or shelter? Issue framing effects and social-distancing preferences in the COVID-19 pandemic

Journal of Behavioral Public Administration ◽

10.30636/jbpa.31.158 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Aaron Deslatte

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Opposite Effect ◽

Federal State ◽

Issue Framing ◽

Survey Experiment ◽

Alternative Communication ◽

The Public ◽

Public Health Information ◽

State And Local ◽

Issue Frames

As a result of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease (COVID-19), U.S. federal, state, and local governmental officials have struggled to coordinate consistent, coherent messaging for citizens to social-distance. The pandemic presents an important context for examining alternative communication frames employed by governments. This study presents results from an artefactual survey experiment in which public-health information regarding COVID-19 was transmitted to a panel of U.S. adult respondents via alternative issue frames and messengers. The findings highlight the importance of delivering consistent messages to the public. Public-health frames positively influence citizen preferences for avoiding unnecessary travel. Conversely, economic frames appear to have the opposite effect, increasing the preference to make unnecessary trips to shop. However, federal messengers appear to strengthen the framing effect relative to expert messengers.

Download Full-text

More Than a Message: Framing Public Health Advocacy to Change Corporate Practices

Health Education & Behavior ◽

10.1177/1090198105275046 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 32 (3) ◽

pp. 320-336 ◽

Cited By ~ 146

Author(s):

Lori Dorfman ◽

Lawrence Wallack ◽

Katie Woodruff

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Social Justice ◽

Message Framing ◽

News Coverage ◽

Collective Responsibility ◽

Health Issues ◽

The Public ◽

The Social ◽

Values And Beliefs ◽

Public Health Advocacy

Framing battles in public health illustrate the tension in our society between individual freedom and collective responsibility. This article describes how two frames, market justice and social justice, first articulated in a public health context by Dan Beauchamp, influence public dialogue on the health consequences of corporate practices. The authors argue that public health advocates must articulate the social justice values motivating the changes they seek in specific policy battles that will be debated in the context of news coverage. The authors conclude with lessons for health education practitioners who need to frame public health issues in contentious and controversial policy contexts. Specific lessons include the importance of understanding the existing values and beliefs motivating the public health change being sought, the benefits of articulating core messages that correspond to shared values, and the necessity of developing media skills to compete effectively with adversaries in public debate.

Download Full-text

Clear consensus among international public for government action at COP26: Patriotic and public health frames produce marginal gains in support

10.21203/rs.3.rs-921718/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Tessa Buchanan ◽

James Ackland ◽

Sam Lloyd ◽

Sander van der Linden ◽

Lee de-Wit

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Climate Change ◽

Public Opinion ◽

Greenhouse Gases ◽

Message Framing ◽

Tree Planting ◽

Survey Experiment ◽

Government Action ◽

Percentage Points ◽

The Usa

Abstract This work surveys over 14,000 respondents in seven countries to assess support for government action to protect the environment, and for different policies at the 2021 UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow. Baseline results reveal overwhelming support for action. At least nine out of ten respondents in six countries, and 79% in the USA, agree that all governments should do more. In each country, at least 50% of respondents express support for four policies: protecting wildlife; planting trees; spending more on clean technologies; and reducing the production of greenhouse gases over thirty years. A survey-experiment tests whether support changes when respondents are exposed to short texts framed in different ways. On average, exposure to a patriotism or public health text significantly raises support for action, albeit by only 1.6 and 1.3 percentage points respectively. On policies, exposure to either a public health text or a text based on current UN messaging increases support for tree-planting by 2.3 and 2.9 percentage points respectively. These results suggest that international public opinion is overwhelmingly in favour of government action at COP26. They highlight policies that are likely to attract majority support, and suggest that message-framing can have a very small impact.

Download Full-text

Translating Legal Research on Mental and Behavioral Health during Emergencies for the Public Health Workforce

Public Health Reports ◽

10.1177/00333549141296s416 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 129 (6_suppl4) ◽

pp. 123-128 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lainie Rutkow ◽

Jon S. Vernick ◽

Natalie L. Semon ◽

Artensie Flowers ◽

Nicole A. Errett ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Behavioral Health ◽

Health Workforce ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Public Health Workforce ◽

Advisory Group ◽

Local Health ◽

Translation Strategies ◽

The Public ◽

Survey Responses

Translation strategies are critical for sharing research with public health practitioners. To disseminate our analyses of legal issues that arise relative to mental and behavioral health during emergencies, we created 10 brief translational tools for members of the public health workforce. In consultation with an interdisciplinary project advisory group (PAG), we identified each tool's topic and format. PAG members reviewed draft and final versions of the tools. We then worked with local health departments throughout the country to distribute the tools along with a brief survey to determine practitioners' perceived utility of the tools. Through survey responses, we learned that practitioners believed the tools provided information that would be useful during the planning, response, and recovery phases of an emergency. This article describes the creation of the PAG, the development of the tools, and lessons learned for those seeking to translate legal and ethical research findings for practitioner audiences.

Download Full-text

COVID-19 Vaccine's Gender Paradox

10.1101/2021.03.26.21254380 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Vincenzo Galasso ◽

Paola Profeta ◽

Martial Foucault ◽

Vincent Pons

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Gender Differences ◽

Information Provision ◽

Original Data ◽

Developed Countries ◽

Survey Experiment ◽

The Public ◽

Gender Paradox ◽

Seriously Ill

Women die less than men of COVID-19, but have been more concerned about its health consequences and more compliant with the public health rules imposed during the pandemic. Since return to normal life depends on vaccination, but delays in acceptance or outright refusals of vaccination are already evident, we investigate gender differences in attitudes and expected behaviors regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Using original data from a survey conducted in December 2020 in ten developed countries (N=13,326), we discover a COVID-19 Vaccine gender paradox. Being more concerned about COVID-19 and more likely to believe to be infected and consequently to become seriously ill, women could be expected to be more supportive of vaccination than men. Instead, our findings show that women agree less than men to be vaccinated and to make vaccination compulsory. Our evidence suggests that their vaccine hesitance is partly due skepticism, since women are less likely to believe that vaccination is the only solution to COVID-19 and more likely to believe that COVID-19 was created by large corporations. Using a survey experiment performed in these ten countries, we show that information provision on the role of vaccination to become immune to COVID-19 is effective in reducing vaccine hesitance.

Download Full-text

Owning Immigration: Messenger Ethnicity, Issue Ownership, and Support for Latino Candidates

The Journal of Race Ethnicity and Politics ◽

10.1017/rep.2017.7 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 233-259

Author(s):

Allyson Shortle ◽

Tyler Johnson

Keyword(s):

Public Opinion ◽

Survey Experiment ◽

Issue Ownership ◽

The Public ◽

Original Survey ◽

Source Cues ◽

Insight Into

AbstractThe public opinion literature stresses the importance of source cues in determining which types of messages affect attitudes and which types do not. Building upon such research, we seek to determine if messenger ethnicity influences how individuals evaluate candidates speaking on immigration in the context of a campaign. Do Americans (and Anglo Americans in particular) view Latino candidates as more experienced, stronger leaders, more trustworthy, and more qualified on immigration than Anglo candidates? Moreover, do such relationships hold regardless of the valence of the message itself? Through an original survey experiment presenting subjects with immigration talk on the campaign trail, we find Latino candidates are reviewed more positively than Anglo candidates when it comes to the immigration messages they speak (especially when it comes to pro-immigration messages). Such findings give us insight into whether or not Latino candidates have the potential to “own” the issue of immigration, as well as offering another path by which Latino candidates can gain a strong foothold with the public in the context of a campaign.

Download Full-text