{"title":"新冠肺炎、安全威胁与舆论","authors":"V. Bove, Riccardo Di Leo","doi":"10.1515/peps-2020-0033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Throughout the coronavirus outbreak, politicians and commentators have often adopted a war-like rhetoric, invoking a language more often associated to terrorist violence, rather than epidemics. Although COVID-19 represents primarily a public health emergency, not inflicted by human agency, there are similarities in the type and scope of regulations governments have introduced to tackle the virus and to respond to terrorist attacks. In this article, we first ask what we can learn from the extant studies on the attitudinal and emotional consequences of terrorism, relating it to recent research on public opinions in the wake of COVID-19, in order to better understand and predict how the pandemic will influence public sentiments. We then analyze how attitudes can shift when a critical event not only threatens the population of a country as a whole, but directly affects its political leader. Leveraging recently released survey data, we show how the announcement of Angela Merkel’s quarantine significantly dampened the trust in and the credibility of her government, although this effect was short-lived.","PeriodicalId":44635,"journal":{"name":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/peps-2020-0033","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19, Security Threats and Public Opinions\",\"authors\":\"V. Bove, Riccardo Di Leo\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/peps-2020-0033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Throughout the coronavirus outbreak, politicians and commentators have often adopted a war-like rhetoric, invoking a language more often associated to terrorist violence, rather than epidemics. Although COVID-19 represents primarily a public health emergency, not inflicted by human agency, there are similarities in the type and scope of regulations governments have introduced to tackle the virus and to respond to terrorist attacks. In this article, we first ask what we can learn from the extant studies on the attitudinal and emotional consequences of terrorism, relating it to recent research on public opinions in the wake of COVID-19, in order to better understand and predict how the pandemic will influence public sentiments. We then analyze how attitudes can shift when a critical event not only threatens the population of a country as a whole, but directly affects its political leader. Leveraging recently released survey data, we show how the announcement of Angela Merkel’s quarantine significantly dampened the trust in and the credibility of her government, although this effect was short-lived.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44635,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/peps-2020-0033\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2020-0033\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Peace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2020-0033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Throughout the coronavirus outbreak, politicians and commentators have often adopted a war-like rhetoric, invoking a language more often associated to terrorist violence, rather than epidemics. Although COVID-19 represents primarily a public health emergency, not inflicted by human agency, there are similarities in the type and scope of regulations governments have introduced to tackle the virus and to respond to terrorist attacks. In this article, we first ask what we can learn from the extant studies on the attitudinal and emotional consequences of terrorism, relating it to recent research on public opinions in the wake of COVID-19, in order to better understand and predict how the pandemic will influence public sentiments. We then analyze how attitudes can shift when a critical event not only threatens the population of a country as a whole, but directly affects its political leader. Leveraging recently released survey data, we show how the announcement of Angela Merkel’s quarantine significantly dampened the trust in and the credibility of her government, although this effect was short-lived.
期刊介绍:
The journal accepts rigorous, non-technical papers especially in research methods in peace science, but also regular papers dealing with all aspects of the peace science field, from pure abstract theory to practical applied research. As a guide to topics: - Arms Control and International Security - Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Studies - Behavioral Studies - Conflict Analysis and Management - Cooperation, Alliances and Games - Crises and War Studies - Critical Economic Aspects of the Global Crises - Deterrence Theory - Empirical and Historical Studies on the Causes of War - Game, Prospect and Related Theory - Harmony and Conflict - Hierarchy Theory