投票箱前的拥挤:2020 年美国大选中的德国厌恶情绪和投票方式

IF 4 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Iris M. Wang, Mallory K. Roman, Gabrielle Goldstein, Joshua M. Ackerman
{"title":"投票箱前的拥挤:2020 年美国大选中的德国厌恶情绪和投票方式","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

2020 年,COVID-19 大流行的不断扩大威胁到了美国总统选举。这种威胁是否影响了人们对投票过程和投票方式的看法?在大选前四个月,美国多个州的 564 名参与者观看了幻灯片,这些幻灯片主要将大流行病描述为一种健康或经济威胁,然后对他们对投票环境的印象以及对各种投票方式的态度进行了评分。大选结束后,这些数据与表明参与者是否投票以及如何投票的记录进行了比对。接触 COVID-19 对健康的影响会使人们对社会密集的投票站做出更负面的评价,但对其他投票结果的影响却很小。相反,即使考虑到其他相关因素,如党派和当地的 COVID-19 感染率,长期厌恶病菌也会预示着人们对密集投票站的负面反应,以及对社会距离投票方法的支持和使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Crowding at the ballot box: Germ aversion and voting methods in the 2020 U.S. general election
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
70
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.
×
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