Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries

Author:

Flores Alexandra1,Cole Jennifer C.12,Dickert Stephan34,Eom Kimin5,Jiga-Boy Gabriela M.6ORCID,Kogut Tehila7ORCID,Loria Riley1,Mayorga Marcus8ORCID,Pedersen Eric J.1,Pereira Beatriz9ORCID,Rubaltelli Enrico10ORCID,Sherman David K.11,Slovic Paul812ORCID,Västfjäll Daniel813,Van Boven Leaf1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology & Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309

2. Climate Change Research Network, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203

3. School of Business and Management, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom

4. Department of Psychology, University of Klagenfurt 9020 Klagenfurt, Austria

5. School of Social Sciences, Singapore Management University, Singapore 188065

6. School of Psychology, Swansea University, Swansea SA2 8PP, United Kingdom

7. Department of Education, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be’er Sheva 8400711, Israel

8. Decision Research, Eugene, OR 97401

9. Department of Marketing, Ivy College of Business, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011

10. Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization, University of Padua 35131 Padua, Italy

11. Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106

12. Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403

13. Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Division of Psychology, Linköping University SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden

Abstract

Significance Political polarization impeded public support for policies to address the spread of COVID-19, much as polarization hinders responses to other societal challenges. The present cross-country study demonstrates how the cues from political elites and affective polarization are analogous across countries addressing COVID-19. Far from being an outlier, the United States faces polarization challenges similar to those of other countries. Importantly, the results demonstrate that policies to combat public health crises are more supported when proposed by nonpartisan experts and bipartisan coalitions of political leaders. These results provide clear guidance on depolarizing communication strategies to improve global responses to health crises.

Funder

National Science Foundation

Publisher

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Cited by 75 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3