No Cover Image

Journal article 827 views 104 downloads

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

Alexandra Flores, Jennifer C. Cole, Stephan Dickert, Kimin Eom, Gabriela Jiga-Boy Orcid Logo, Tehila Kogut Orcid Logo, Riley Loria, Marcus Mayorga Orcid Logo, Eric J. Pedersen, Beatriz Pereira Orcid Logo, Enrico Rubaltelli Orcid Logo, David K. Sherman, Paul Slovic Orcid Logo, Daniel Västfjäll, Leaf Van Boven Orcid Logo

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume: 119, Issue: 3

Swansea University Author: Gabriela Jiga-Boy Orcid Logo

  • 59646.pdf

    PDF | Version of Record

    This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND)

    Download (935.73KB)

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1073/pnas.2117543119

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 acr...

Full description

Published in: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
ISSN: 0027-8424 1091-6490
Published: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2022
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa59646
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2022-03-16T15:27:41Z
last_indexed 2023-01-11T14:41:04Z
id cronfa59646
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2022-10-25T15:45:55.4633547</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>59646</id><entry>2022-03-16</entry><title>Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>a608354fa16f9c5101ec79a6a7f1be6c</sid><ORCID>0000-0003-3163-8798</ORCID><firstname>Gabriela</firstname><surname>Jiga-Boy</surname><name>Gabriela Jiga-Boy</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2022-03-16</date><deptcode>HPS</deptcode><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.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</journal><volume>119</volume><journalNumber>3</journalNumber><paginationStart/><paginationEnd/><publisher>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>0027-8424</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1091-6490</issnElectronic><keywords>COVID-19; cross-country comparisons; political polarization; affectivepolarization; expertise</keywords><publishedDay>18</publishedDay><publishedMonth>1</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2022</publishedYear><publishedDate>2022-01-18</publishedDate><doi>10.1073/pnas.2117543119</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Psychology</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>HPS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><funders>National Science Foundation Grant: 2029183</funders><projectreference/><lastEdited>2022-10-25T15:45:55.4633547</lastEdited><Created>2022-03-16T15:25:17.3587852</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Psychology</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Alexandra</firstname><surname>Flores</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Jennifer C.</firstname><surname>Cole</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Stephan</firstname><surname>Dickert</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Kimin</firstname><surname>Eom</surname><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Gabriela</firstname><surname>Jiga-Boy</surname><orcid>0000-0003-3163-8798</orcid><order>5</order></author><author><firstname>Tehila</firstname><surname>Kogut</surname><orcid>0000-0001-8652-5112</orcid><order>6</order></author><author><firstname>Riley</firstname><surname>Loria</surname><order>7</order></author><author><firstname>Marcus</firstname><surname>Mayorga</surname><orcid>0000-0001-5471-0655</orcid><order>8</order></author><author><firstname>Eric J.</firstname><surname>Pedersen</surname><order>9</order></author><author><firstname>Beatriz</firstname><surname>Pereira</surname><orcid>0000-0002-1091-0943</orcid><order>10</order></author><author><firstname>Enrico</firstname><surname>Rubaltelli</surname><orcid>0000-0002-7521-755X</orcid><order>11</order></author><author><firstname>David K.</firstname><surname>Sherman</surname><order>12</order></author><author><firstname>Paul</firstname><surname>Slovic</surname><orcid>0000-0002-7473-6403</orcid><order>13</order></author><author><firstname>Daniel</firstname><surname>V&#xE4;stfj&#xE4;ll</surname><order>14</order></author><author><firstname>Leaf Van</firstname><surname>Boven</surname><orcid>0000-0003-4187-8779</orcid><order>15</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>59646__22617__e80b24d5326f437d8dff2272fae3eef2.pdf</filename><originalFilename>59646.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2022-03-16T15:28:20.3120132</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>958185</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Version of Record</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><documentNotes>This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND)</documentNotes><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language><licence>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/</licence></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2022-10-25T15:45:55.4633547 v2 59646 2022-03-16 Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries a608354fa16f9c5101ec79a6a7f1be6c 0000-0003-3163-8798 Gabriela Jiga-Boy Gabriela Jiga-Boy true false 2022-03-16 HPS 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. Journal Article Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119 3 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 0027-8424 1091-6490 COVID-19; cross-country comparisons; political polarization; affectivepolarization; expertise 18 1 2022 2022-01-18 10.1073/pnas.2117543119 COLLEGE NANME Psychology COLLEGE CODE HPS Swansea University National Science Foundation Grant: 2029183 2022-10-25T15:45:55.4633547 2022-03-16T15:25:17.3587852 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences School of Psychology Alexandra Flores 1 Jennifer C. Cole 2 Stephan Dickert 3 Kimin Eom 4 Gabriela Jiga-Boy 0000-0003-3163-8798 5 Tehila Kogut 0000-0001-8652-5112 6 Riley Loria 7 Marcus Mayorga 0000-0001-5471-0655 8 Eric J. Pedersen 9 Beatriz Pereira 0000-0002-1091-0943 10 Enrico Rubaltelli 0000-0002-7521-755X 11 David K. Sherman 12 Paul Slovic 0000-0002-7473-6403 13 Daniel Västfjäll 14 Leaf Van Boven 0000-0003-4187-8779 15 59646__22617__e80b24d5326f437d8dff2272fae3eef2.pdf 59646.pdf 2022-03-16T15:28:20.3120132 Output 958185 application/pdf Version of Record true This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) true eng https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
title Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries
spellingShingle Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries
Gabriela Jiga-Boy
title_short Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries
title_full Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries
title_fullStr Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries
title_full_unstemmed Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries
title_sort Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries
author_id_str_mv a608354fa16f9c5101ec79a6a7f1be6c
author_id_fullname_str_mv a608354fa16f9c5101ec79a6a7f1be6c_***_Gabriela Jiga-Boy
author Gabriela Jiga-Boy
author2 Alexandra Flores
Jennifer C. Cole
Stephan Dickert
Kimin Eom
Gabriela Jiga-Boy
Tehila Kogut
Riley Loria
Marcus Mayorga
Eric J. Pedersen
Beatriz Pereira
Enrico Rubaltelli
David K. Sherman
Paul Slovic
Daniel Västfjäll
Leaf Van Boven
format Journal article
container_title Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
container_volume 119
container_issue 3
publishDate 2022
institution Swansea University
issn 0027-8424
1091-6490
doi_str_mv 10.1073/pnas.2117543119
publisher Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str School of Psychology{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Psychology
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description 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.
published_date 2022-01-18T04:17:07Z
_version_ 1763754144082952192
score 11.037581

Similar Items