Moral Foundations, Ideological Divide, and Public Engagement with U.S. Government Agencies’ COVID-19 Vaccine Communication on Social Media

IF 2.7 2区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Mass Communication and Society Pub Date : 2022-12-19 DOI:10.1080/15205436.2022.2151919
Alvin Zhou, Wenlin Liu, H. Kim, Eugene Lee, Jieun Shin, Yafei Zhang, Ke M. Huang-Isherwood, Chuqing Dong, A. Yang
{"title":"Moral Foundations, Ideological Divide, and Public Engagement with U.S. Government Agencies’ COVID-19 Vaccine Communication on Social Media","authors":"Alvin Zhou, Wenlin Liu, H. Kim, Eugene Lee, Jieun Shin, Yafei Zhang, Ke M. Huang-Isherwood, Chuqing Dong, A. Yang","doi":"10.1080/15205436.2022.2151919","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Guided by moral foundation theory, this study examined how moral framing interacted with local constituents' ideological leaning to affect public engagement outcomes of government agencies' COVID-19 vaccine communication on Facebook. We analyzed a dataset of over 5,000 U.S. government agencies' Facebook posts on COVID-19 vaccines in 2021 (N = 70,671), assessed their use of moral language using a newly developed computational method, and examined how political divide manifests itself at the collective level. Findings from both fixed and random effects models suggest that: 1) the use of moral language is positively associated with public engagement outcomes on government agencies' social media accounts;2) five types of moral foundations have distinct effects on three types of public engagement (affective, cognitive, and retransmission);3) moral foundations and local politics interact to affect public engagement, in that followers of government agencies in liberal states/counties prefer messages emphasizing the care/harm and fairness/cheating dimensions while those in conservative states/counties prefer the loyalty/betrayal dimension. The study demonstrates how a strategic employment of moral language can contribute to public engagement of government agencies' mass communication campaigns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)","PeriodicalId":47869,"journal":{"name":"Mass Communication and Society","volume":"224 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mass Communication and Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2022.2151919","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Guided by moral foundation theory, this study examined how moral framing interacted with local constituents' ideological leaning to affect public engagement outcomes of government agencies' COVID-19 vaccine communication on Facebook. We analyzed a dataset of over 5,000 U.S. government agencies' Facebook posts on COVID-19 vaccines in 2021 (N = 70,671), assessed their use of moral language using a newly developed computational method, and examined how political divide manifests itself at the collective level. Findings from both fixed and random effects models suggest that: 1) the use of moral language is positively associated with public engagement outcomes on government agencies' social media accounts;2) five types of moral foundations have distinct effects on three types of public engagement (affective, cognitive, and retransmission);3) moral foundations and local politics interact to affect public engagement, in that followers of government agencies in liberal states/counties prefer messages emphasizing the care/harm and fairness/cheating dimensions while those in conservative states/counties prefer the loyalty/betrayal dimension. The study demonstrates how a strategic employment of moral language can contribute to public engagement of government agencies' mass communication campaigns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
道德基础、意识形态分歧和公众参与与美国政府机构在社交媒体上的COVID-19疫苗沟通
在道德基础理论的指导下,本研究考察了道德框架如何与当地选民的意识形态倾向相互作用,从而影响政府机构在Facebook上进行COVID-19疫苗宣传的公众参与结果。我们分析了5000多个美国政府机构在2021年关于COVID-19疫苗的Facebook帖子的数据集(N = 70,671),使用新开发的计算方法评估了他们对道德语言的使用,并研究了政治分歧如何在集体层面上表现出来。固定效应和随机效应模型的研究结果表明:1)道德语言的使用与政府机构社交媒体账户的公众参与结果正相关;2)五种类型的道德基础对三种类型的公众参与(情感、认知和再传播)有显著影响;3)道德基础和地方政治相互作用影响公众参与。在自由主义的州/县,政府机构的追随者更喜欢强调关心/伤害和公平/欺骗维度的信息,而在保守主义的州/县,他们更喜欢忠诚/背叛维度的信息。本研究展示了策略性地使用道德语言如何有助于公众参与政府机构的大众传播活动。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2022 APA,版权所有)
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
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.30%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: Mass Communication and Society" mission is to publish articles from a wide variety of perspectives and approaches that advance mass communication theory, especially at the societal or macrosocial level. It draws heavily from many other disciplines, including sociology, psychology, anthropology, philosophy, law, and history. Methodologically, journal articles employ qualitative and quantitative methods, survey research, ethnography, laboratory experiments, historical methods, and legal analysis.
期刊最新文献
Multiple Identities as Buffer or Catalyst? An Investigation of Psycho-Behavioral Effects of Sports Fans’ Exposure to Abusive Social Media Content Norm Setting in Times of Crisis: A Time-Series Analysis of the Dynamics Between Media Reporting and Perceived Norms in the Context of the COVID-19 Vaccination Roll-Out Life in Media. A Global Introduction to Media Studies Exposure to Higher Rates of False News Erodes Media Trust and Fuels Overconfidence News Literacy and Critical Thinking in the Pacific: Evidence from Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1