Iris M. Wang, Mallory K. Roman, Gabrielle Goldstein, Joshua M. Ackerman
{"title":"Crowding at the ballot box: Germ aversion and voting methods in the 2020 U.S. general election","authors":"Iris M. Wang, Mallory K. Roman, Gabrielle Goldstein, Joshua M. Ackerman","doi":"10.1111/pops.12976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2020, the growing COVID‐19 pandemic threatened engagement with the U.S. presidential election. Did this threat affect how people perceived the voting process and the means by which they voted? Four months before the election, 564 participants in several states viewed slideshows framing the pandemic primarily as a health or economic threat, then rated their impressions of voting environments and their attitudes about various voting methods. Following the general election, these data were matched to records indicating if and how participants voted. Exposure to the health consequences of COVID‐19 led people to judge socially dense polling places more negatively but had few effects on other voter outcomes. Instead, chronic aversion to germs predicted more negative responses to dense polling places as well as support for, and use of, socially distanced voting methods, even when accounting for other relevant factors such as partisanship and local COVID‐19 rates.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12976","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In 2020, the growing COVID‐19 pandemic threatened engagement with the U.S. presidential election. Did this threat affect how people perceived the voting process and the means by which they voted? Four months before the election, 564 participants in several states viewed slideshows framing the pandemic primarily as a health or economic threat, then rated their impressions of voting environments and their attitudes about various voting methods. Following the general election, these data were matched to records indicating if and how participants voted. Exposure to the health consequences of COVID‐19 led people to judge socially dense polling places more negatively but had few effects on other voter outcomes. Instead, chronic aversion to germs predicted more negative responses to dense polling places as well as support for, and use of, socially distanced voting methods, even when accounting for other relevant factors such as partisanship and local COVID‐19 rates.
期刊介绍:
Understanding the psychological aspects of national and international political developments is increasingly important in this age of international tension and sweeping political change. Political Psychology, the journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, is dedicated to the analysis of the interrelationships between psychological and political processes. International contributors draw on a diverse range of sources, including clinical and cognitive psychology, economics, history, international relations, philosophy, political science, political theory, sociology, personality and social psychology.