Partisan polarization and resistance to elite messages: Results from survey experiments on social distancing

COVID-19 compelled government officials in the U.S. and elsewhere to institute social distancing policies, shuttering much of the economy. At a time of low trust and high polarization, Americans may only support such disruptive policies when recommended by same-party politicians. A related concern is that some may resist advice from “elite” sources such as government officials or public health experts. We test these possibilities using novel data from two online surveys with embedded experiments conducted with approximately 2,000 Pennsylvania residents each, in spring 2020 (Study 1 in April and Study 2 in May-June). We uncover partisan differences in views on several coronavirus-related policies, which grew larger between surveys. Yet overall, Study 1 respondents report strong support for social distancing policies and high trust in medical experts. Moreover, an experiment in Study 1 finds no evidence of reduced support for social distancing policies when advocated by elites, broadly defined. A second experiment in Study 2 finds no backlash for a policy described as being backed by public health experts, but a cross-party decline in support for the same policy when backed by government officials. This suggests that, in polarized times, public health experts might be better advocates for collectively beneficial public policies during public health crises than government officials.

Download Full-text

Do COVID-19 Conspiracy Theory Beliefs Form a Monological Belief System?

Canadian Journal of Political Science ◽

10.1017/s0008423920000517 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 53 (2) ◽

pp. 319-326 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Joanne M. Miller

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Belief System ◽

Conspiracy Theory ◽

School Life ◽

Conspiracy Theories ◽

Social Distancing ◽

Home Work ◽

The U.S ◽

Health Experts

Along with criticisms of the U.S. government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the disruptions to home, work, and school life resulting from social distancing orders recommended by public health experts, as well as the uncertainty about how long the disruptions will be necessary and when (if ever) we will have a vaccine, have come COVID-19 conspiracy theories (CTs).

Download Full-text

A Healthy Buildings Guideline for the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

10.1101/2020.11.30.20241406 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Clifford Federspiel

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Northern Hemisphere ◽

Indoor Air ◽

Social Activity ◽

Hand Washing ◽

Risk Of Infection ◽

Airborne Transmission ◽

Social Distancing ◽

Health Experts

AbstractPublic health experts have confirmed that airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is one of the primary mechanisms of infection (CDC, 2020). In addition to social distancing, mask wearing and hand washing, experts now recommend increasing the ventilation and filtration of indoor air. While there is widespread consensus on this general approach, to date there are no published guidelines for the levels of ventilation, filtration, etc. that are required to control the pandemic. This is an urgent concern because colder weather in the Northern Hemisphere has moved social activity indoors where the risk of infection is higher.

Download Full-text

Public attitude towards quarantine during the COVID-19 outbreak

Epidemiology and Infection ◽

10.1017/s0950268820002204 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 148 ◽

Author(s):

W. Song ◽

F. J. Sawafta ◽

B. M. Ebrahem ◽

M. A. Jebril

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

State Government ◽

Online Survey ◽

Health Workers ◽

Psychosocial Support ◽

Strong Support ◽

Government Officials ◽

The Public ◽

Outbreak Period ◽

Legal Sanctions

Abstract Due to the outbreak of the deadly coronavirus disease in 2019 (COVID-19), Wuhan was on lockdown for more than 60 days by the state government. This study investigated the perceptions and attitudes of the public on quarantine as a practical approach to halting the spread of COVID-19. An online survey was conducted via WeChat between 10 January 2020 and 10 March 2020 on the general population in Hubei province at the height of the COVID-19 outbreak. In total, 549 respondents participated in the survey. Results revealed that the public displayed significantly strong support towards quarantine throughout the outbreak period, apart from locking people up and using imprisonment legal sanctions against those who failed to comply with the stringent regulations. The support exerted by the public stemmed from the execution of authorised officers to protect the public interest and provision of psychosocial support for those affected. In situations where quarantine could not be imposed, public health policy-makers and government officials should implement an extensive system of psychosocial support to safeguard, instruct and inform frontline public health workers. The public should also be enlisted in an open conversation concerning the ethical utility of restrictive values during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Download Full-text

Flaws In Medicine Must Be Corrected: An Open Report to National Governments amid the COVID-19 Catastrophe

10.31219/osf.io/6wy9j ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Jianqing Wu

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Business Model ◽

Strong Support ◽

Public Health Intervention ◽

Medical Evidence ◽

Editorial Policies ◽

Societal Needs ◽

Peer Reviewers ◽

National Governments ◽

The U.S

It is a common question why society is hopeless in the war against COVID-19. Based on well documented evidence, the business model of traditional medical publishers is like a covert extortion against involuntary parties; researchers, academics, libraries, societies, editors, and peer reviewers. Each article is produced by the collective efforts of all involved parties. The publishers make profits by charging access fees and subscription fees. The unique position of the publishers arise from its power to decide article merit and societal needs to access articles. By examining their editorial policies, review practices, rejection reasons, etc., I found that their editorial policies are formulated to improve their financial positions but not medical merit. Strong support is found from analyzing several selected articles published by three key publishers. I found that their practices have the effects of perpetuating medical flaws and mistakes and promoting only profitable but inferior treatments. By engaging those practices for long times, they have created a pool of incomplete evidence that does not reflect human real ability to fight the disease. By relying on such incomplete evidence, governments cannot formulate sound public health intervention policies and society could not use cheap and more powerful methods to fight the disease. Most of the deaths and most of the severe economic damages to the U.S. could have been avoided. The mankind is paying ultimate prices in human lives and economy because government and society blindly rely on the incomplete evidence. By continuing relying on the incomplete evidence, humans continue various activities that have the effect of brewing future civilization catastrophes. I urge all governments to take legal actions necessary to protect disruptive medical discoveries, encourage competing arts, and expand medical evidence without regarding its form and source.

Download Full-text

Public Health Guidance and Research Strategies to Combat the Next COVID Pandemic

Journal of Student Research ◽

10.47611/jsrhs.v10i3.2102 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Reed Cooper ◽

Mark Crowder

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Small Businesses ◽

Economic Security ◽

Prevention Measures ◽

Research Strategies ◽

Political Commentary ◽

Novel Virus ◽

Prevention Methods ◽

The U.S ◽

Health Experts

COVID-19 has severely disrupted the lives of many with respect to health, economic security, and social behaviors. By analyzing the U.S. response to COVID-19, strategies for dealing with the next pandemic can be established. Analyses on the politicization of science reveal the ineffectiveness of political commentary in overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic, as seen through heterogenous behavioral patterns throughout the U.S. in regard to pandemic prevention measures, such as social distancing. Economic data reveal the importance of financially prioritizing small businesses over large ones and how to ensure individuals are motivated to return to work. The mask mandate was not widely respected throughout the U.S. and was a primary reason for the pandemic's prolonged effects. Due to a lack of trust in the leading health experts, non-pharmaceutical prevention methods were not as effective as they could have been. By analyzing vaccine data, it is clear that pharmaceuticals can and should be developed prior to the next pandemic. Based on the principle of cross-immunity, vaccines that incorporate genomic similarities between virus groups can be researched and administered, which will theoretically reduce the immune system’s reaction to the next novel virus. Overall, the U.S. response to the COVID-19 pandemic had effective and ineffective components. By studying public health procedures and results from this pandemic, recommendations can be made to improve the response to the next pandemic.

Download Full-text

Effective Nasal Disinfection as an Overlooked Strategy in Our Fight against COVID-19

Ear Nose & Throat Journal ◽

10.1177/01455613211002929 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 014556132110029

Author(s):

Gustavo Ferrer ◽

Marcos A. Sanchez-Gonzalez

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Scientific Evidence ◽

Government Officials ◽

Social Distancing ◽

Public Health Officials

Although the recent advent of a vaccine and other therapeutic aids in our fight against COVID-19 has brought us a step closer to controlling the pandemic, our fight is far from over. Handwashing, masks, and social distancing practices are considered reasonable measures to control the spread of the disease have been well accepted by government officials and public health officials despite scarce and conflicting scientific evidence. Taking into consideration the aforementioned measures, there is an additional perhaps overlooked practice that warrants our attention—nasal disinfection and hygiene.

Download Full-text

Adherence to Social-Distancing and Personal Hygiene Behavior Guidelines and Risk of COVID-19 Diagnosis: Evidence From the Understanding America Study

American Journal of Public Health ◽

10.2105/ajph.2021.306565 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 112 (1) ◽

pp. 169-178

Author(s):

Theresa Andrasfay ◽

Qiao Wu ◽

Haena Lee ◽

Eileen M. Crimmins

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

The United States ◽

Personal Hygiene ◽

Cox Models ◽

Additional Risk ◽

Social Distancing ◽

Individual Level ◽

Hygiene Behavior ◽

The Relationship ◽

Health Experts

Objectives. To assess the association between individual-level adherence to social-distancing and personal hygiene behaviors recommended by public health experts and subsequent risk of COVID-19 diagnosis in the United States. Methods. Data are from waves 7 through 26 (June 10, 2020–April 26, 2021) of the Understanding America Study COVID-19 survey. We used Cox models to assess the relationship between engaging in behaviors considered high risk and risk of COVID-19 diagnosis. Results. Individuals engaging in behaviors indicating lack of adherence to social-distancing guidelines, especially those related to large gatherings or public interactions, had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 diagnosis than did those who did not engage in these behaviors. Each additional risk behavior was associated with a 9% higher risk of COVID-19 diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05, 1.13). Results were similar after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics and local infection rates. Conclusions. Personal mitigation behaviors appear to influence the risk of COVID-19, even in the presence of social factors related to infection risk. Public Health Implications. Our findings emphasize the importance of individual behaviors for preventing COVID-19, which may be relevant in contexts with low vaccination. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):169–178. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306565 )

Download Full-text

How Right-Leaning Media Coverage of COVID-19 Facilitated the Spread of Misinformation in the Early Stages of the Pandemic

10.31235/osf.io/a8r3p ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Matthew Motta ◽

Dominik Stecula ◽

Christina E. Farhart

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Media Coverage ◽

Health Consequences ◽

Fox News ◽

Early Stages ◽

Automated Content Analysis ◽

Pandemic Response ◽

Nationally Representative ◽

The U.S ◽

Health Experts

In recent weeks, several academic and journalistic outlets have documented widespread misinformation about the origins and potential treatment for COVID-19. This misinformation could have important public health consequences if misinformed people are less likely to heed the advice of public health experts. While some have anecdotally tied the prevalence of misinformation to misleading or inaccurate media coverage of the pandemic in its early stages, few have rigorously tested this claim empirically. In this paper, we report the results of an automated content analysis showing that right-leaning news outlets (e.g., Fox News, Breitbart) were more than 2.5 times more likely than mainstream outlets to discuss COVID-19 misinformation during the early stages of the U.S. pandemic response. In a nationally representative survey (N = 8,914) conducted from 3/10-3/16, we then show that people who consumed more right-leaning news during this timeframe were more than twice as likely to endorse COVID-related misinformation. Alarmingly, survey data further suggest that misinformation endorsement has negative public health consequences, as misinformed people are more likely to believe that the CDC is exaggerating COVID-related health risks.

Download Full-text