Why do U.S. conservatives take fewer COVID‐19 precautions? The role of worry, perceived risk, and governmental trust

Author:

Helweg‐Larsen Marie1ORCID,Peterson Laurel M.2ORCID,DiMuccio Sarah H.3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Dickinson College Carlisle Pennsylvania USA

2. Bryn Mawr College Bryn Mawr Pennsylvania USA

3. New York University New York New York USA

Abstract

AbstractResearch suggests a U.S. political ideology gap for taking COVID‐19 precautions, but we do not know the role of cognitive risk (assessed here as perceived risk) and affective risk (assessed here as worry) in explaining why conservative Americans participated in fewer recommended precautions (e.g., mask wearing) and whether governmental trust attenuates the effect. We predicted that conservatives (compared with liberals) would take fewer precautions because they thought they were less at risk and were less worried about COVID‐19, but that this would be more pronounced for those with low governmental trust. In this study, U.S. adults (representative sample: N = 738; Mage = 46.8; 52% women; 78% white) who had not had COVID‐19 took two online surveys 2 weeks apart during the first wave of the pandemic (April 2020). Participants reported ideology, perceived risk of getting or dying of COVID‐19, worry about COVID‐19, and trust in the CDC and state officials at baseline. At follow‐up, participants reported on COVID‐19 precautions: (1) prevention behavior participation (e.g., mask wearing) and (2) behavioral willingness for future behaviors (e.g., vaccination). Results showed that, politically conservative Americans took fewer precautions due to lower worry (but unexpectedly not due to lower perceived risk). As predicted, when trust was high, the ideology gap was muted for predicting precautions as well as for predicting perceived risk and worry. In sum, conservatives worried less about COVID‐19 which predicted fewer precautions, but trust in governmental institutions reduced this ideological gap. Improving governmental trust could be one fruitful path to increasing COVID‐19 precautions.

Funder

Dickinson College

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Social Psychology

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