Toeing the party line: Politically driven responses to the coronavirus pandemic in the USA

IF 1.8 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Social and Political Psychology Pub Date : 2022-07-22 DOI:10.5964/jspp.6089

Karen M. Douglas, Robbie M. Sutton

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Polling data indicate that in the USA, Republicans, compared to Democrats, have been less inclined to take preventive measures against coronavirus. In three studies (Ns = 380, 430, and 393), we sought to find evidence for partisan motivations and to illuminate how they translate into attitudes, behavioral intentions and actual behaviors. Results revealed a consensus that the Democratic party wants people take coronavirus seriously. Thus, while Democrats thought it was aligned with their political interests, Republicans thought it was in their opponents’ interests. Further analyses suggest that perceived party interests mediated the effect of party allegiance on attitudes about the seriousness of coronavirus, and both attitudes and intentions to preventive behaviors (Studies 1 and 2) and specifically attitudes and intentions to wear masks (Study 3). This relationship also held for mask-wearing behavior. Results suggest that people’s responses to coronavirus may reflect a conformity to the perceived wishes and interests of their political party.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

遵循党的路线：美国对冠状病毒大流行的政治驱动反应

民意调查数据显示，在美国，与民主党人相比，共和党人不太愿意采取预防措施来预防冠状病毒。在三项研究中(n = 380、430和393)，我们试图找到党派动机的证据，并阐明它们如何转化为态度、行为意图和实际行为。结果显示，民主党希望人们认真对待冠状病毒，这是一个共识。因此，虽然民主党人认为这符合他们的政治利益，但共和党人认为这符合他们对手的利益。进一步的分析表明，政党利益感知介导了政党忠诚对冠状病毒严重性态度的影响，以及对预防行为的态度和意图(研究1和2)，特别是对戴口罩的态度和意图(研究3)。这种关系也适用于戴口罩行为。结果表明，人们对冠状病毒的反应可能反映了与其政党的愿望和利益的一致性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Social and Political Psychology Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

4.80%

发文量

审稿时长

40 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Social and Political Psychology (JSPP) is a peer-reviewed open-access journal (without author fees), published online. It publishes articles at the intersection of social and political psychology that substantially advance the understanding of social problems, their reduction, and the promotion of social justice. It also welcomes work that focuses on socio-political issues from related fields of psychology (e.g., peace psychology, community psychology, cultural psychology, environmental psychology, media psychology, economic psychology) and encourages submissions with interdisciplinary perspectives. JSPP is comprehensive and integrative in its approach. It publishes high-quality work from different epistemological, methodological, theoretical, and cultural perspectives and from different regions across the globe. It provides a forum for innovation, questioning of assumptions, and controversy and debate. JSPP aims to give creative impetuses for academic scholarship and for applications in education, policymaking, professional practice, and advocacy and social action. It intends to transcend the methodological and meta-theoretical divisions and paradigm clashes that characterize the field of social and political psychology, and to counterbalance the current overreliance on the hypothetico-deductive model of science, quantitative methodology, and individualistic explanations by also publishing work following alternative traditions (e.g., qualitative and mixed-methods research, participatory action research, critical psychology, social representations, narrative, and discursive approaches). Because it is published online, JSPP can avoid a bias against research that requires more space to be presented adequately.