Vaccine Nationalism Counterintuitively Erodes Public Trust in Leaders.

IF 4.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychological Science Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-13 DOI:10.1177/09567976231204699
Clara Colombatto, Jim A C Everett, Julien Senn, Michel André Maréchal, M J Crockett
{"title":"Vaccine Nationalism Counterintuitively Erodes Public Trust in Leaders.","authors":"Clara Colombatto, Jim A C Everett, Julien Senn, Michel André Maréchal, M J Crockett","doi":"10.1177/09567976231204699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Global access to resources like vaccines is key for containing the spread of infectious diseases. However, wealthy countries often pursue nationalistic policies, stockpiling doses rather than redistributing them globally. One possible motivation behind vaccine nationalism is a belief among policymakers that citizens will mistrust leaders who prioritize global needs over domestic protection. In seven experiments (total <i>N</i> = 4,215 adults), we demonstrate that such concerns are misplaced: Nationally representative samples across multiple countries with large vaccine surpluses (Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, and United States) trusted redistributive leaders more than nationalistic leaders-even the more nationalistic participants. This preference generalized across different diseases and manifested in both self-reported and behavioral measures of trust. Professional civil servants, however, had the opposite intuition and predicted higher trust in nationalistic leaders, and a nonexpert sample also failed to predict higher trust in redistributive leaders. We discuss how policymakers' inaccurate intuitions might originate from overestimating others' self-interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":20745,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"1309-1321"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976231204699","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Global access to resources like vaccines is key for containing the spread of infectious diseases. However, wealthy countries often pursue nationalistic policies, stockpiling doses rather than redistributing them globally. One possible motivation behind vaccine nationalism is a belief among policymakers that citizens will mistrust leaders who prioritize global needs over domestic protection. In seven experiments (total N = 4,215 adults), we demonstrate that such concerns are misplaced: Nationally representative samples across multiple countries with large vaccine surpluses (Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, and United States) trusted redistributive leaders more than nationalistic leaders-even the more nationalistic participants. This preference generalized across different diseases and manifested in both self-reported and behavioral measures of trust. Professional civil servants, however, had the opposite intuition and predicted higher trust in nationalistic leaders, and a nonexpert sample also failed to predict higher trust in redistributive leaders. We discuss how policymakers' inaccurate intuitions might originate from overestimating others' self-interest.

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
与直觉相反,疫苗民族主义侵蚀了公众对领导人的信任。
在全球获得疫苗等资源是遏制传染病传播的关键。然而,富裕国家往往奉行民族主义政策,囤积药物,而不是在全球范围内重新分配。疫苗民族主义背后的一个可能动机是,政策制定者相信,公民会不信任那些将全球需求置于国内保护之上的领导人。在七个实验中(总共N = 4,215名成年人),我们证明了这种担忧是错位的:来自多个疫苗大量盈余国家(澳大利亚、加拿大、英国和美国)的全国代表性样本更信任再分配领导人,而不是民族主义领导人——甚至是更民族主义的参与者。这种偏好在不同的疾病中普遍存在,并表现在自我报告和信任的行为测量中。然而,专业公务员却有相反的直觉,他们预测对民族主义领导人的信任度更高,而非专家样本也未能预测对再分配领导人的信任度更高。我们讨论了决策者不准确的直觉可能源于高估他人的自身利益。
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
Psychological Science
Psychological Science PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Psychological Science, the flagship journal of The Association for Psychological Science (previously the American Psychological Society), is a leading publication in the field with a citation ranking/impact factor among the top ten worldwide. It publishes authoritative articles covering various domains of psychological science, including brain and behavior, clinical science, cognition, learning and memory, social psychology, and developmental psychology. In addition to full-length articles, the journal features summaries of new research developments and discussions on psychological issues in government and public affairs. "Psychological Science" is published twelve times annually.
期刊最新文献
Rethinking the Role of Teams and Training in Geopolitical Forecasting: The Effect of Uncontrolled Method Variance on Statistical Conclusions. Gaze Behavior Reveals Expectations of Potential Scene Changes. Why Do Children Think Words Are Mutually Exclusive? The Affect Misattribution Procedure Revisited: An Informational Account. Narrative Identity, Traits, and Trajectories of Depression and Well-Being: A 9-Year Longitudinal Study.
×
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