Partisanship and the Pandemic: How and Why Americans Followed Party Cues on COVID-19.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Isaac D Mehlhaff, Matías C Tarillo, Ayelén Vanegas, Marc J Hetherington
{"title":"Partisanship and the Pandemic: How and Why Americans Followed Party Cues on COVID-19.","authors":"Isaac D Mehlhaff, Matías C Tarillo, Ayelén Vanegas, Marc J Hetherington","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11066336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The United States underperformed its potential in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors use original survey data from April 2020 to March 2022 to show that political partisanship may have contributed to this inconsistent response by distinguishing elites and citizens who took the crisis seriously from those who did not. This division was not inevitable; when the crisis began, Democrats and Republicans differed little in their viewpoints and actions relative to COVID-19. However, partisans increasingly diverged when their preferred political leaders provided them with opposing cues. The authors outline developments in party politics over the last half century that contributed to partisan division on COVID-19, most centrally an anti-expertise bias among Republicans. Accordingly, Republicans' support for mitigation measures, perception of severity of COVID-19, and support for vaccines gradually decreased after the initial outbreak. Partisan differences also showed up at the state level; Trump's vote share in 2016 was negatively associated with mask use and positively associated with COVID-19 infections. Diverging elite cues provided fertile ground for the partisan pandemic, underscoring the importance of political accountability even in an era of polarization.</p>","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"351-374"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-11066336","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The United States underperformed its potential in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors use original survey data from April 2020 to March 2022 to show that political partisanship may have contributed to this inconsistent response by distinguishing elites and citizens who took the crisis seriously from those who did not. This division was not inevitable; when the crisis began, Democrats and Republicans differed little in their viewpoints and actions relative to COVID-19. However, partisans increasingly diverged when their preferred political leaders provided them with opposing cues. The authors outline developments in party politics over the last half century that contributed to partisan division on COVID-19, most centrally an anti-expertise bias among Republicans. Accordingly, Republicans' support for mitigation measures, perception of severity of COVID-19, and support for vaccines gradually decreased after the initial outbreak. Partisan differences also showed up at the state level; Trump's vote share in 2016 was negatively associated with mask use and positively associated with COVID-19 infections. Diverging elite cues provided fertile ground for the partisan pandemic, underscoring the importance of political accountability even in an era of polarization.

党派关系和大流行:美国人如何以及为什么在COVID-19上遵循政党线索。
美国在应对COVID-19大流行方面没有发挥出应有的潜力。利用2020年4月至2022年3月的原始调查数据,我们发现政治党派关系可能导致了这种不一致的反应,因为它区分了那些认真对待危机的精英和公民。这种分裂并非不可避免;当危机开始时,民主党人和共和党人在观点和行动上几乎没有什么不同。然而,当他们喜欢的政治领导人向他们提供相反的暗示时,党派分歧越来越大。我们概述了过去半个世纪政党政治的发展,这些发展导致了对COVID-19的党派分歧,最主要的是共和党人的反专家偏见。因此,共和党人对缓解措施的支持度、对COVID-19严重性的认识、对疫苗的支持度在疫情爆发后逐渐下降。党派分歧也出现在州一级;特朗普在2016年的选票份额与口罩使用呈负相关,与COVID-19感染呈正相关。精英阶层的分歧为党派大流行提供了肥沃的土壤,凸显了政治问责的重要性,即使是在一个两极分化的时代。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
46
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: A leading journal in its field, and the primary source of communication across the many disciplines it serves, the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law focuses on the initiation, formulation, and implementation of health policy and analyzes the relations between government and health—past, present, and future.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信