预测支持按需分配救灾援助的信念

IF 4.2 1区 地球科学 Q1 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Shannon Callaham , Andrea Mah , Ezra Markowitz
{"title":"预测支持按需分配救灾援助的信念","authors":"Shannon Callaham ,&nbsp;Andrea Mah ,&nbsp;Ezra Markowitz","doi":"10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104967","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Disaster aid distribution in the U.S. worsens social inequities. Public demand to incorporate needs or social vulnerability into disaster aid policy could lead to more equitable disaster recovery. In two studies (<em>N</em> = 664) we examined what predicts preferences for needs-based disaster aid (Study 1) and then tested whether we could increase support for this kind of policy (Study 2). In Study 1, we asked participants to rate disaster aid distribution policies and report on beliefs that previous research suggests would relate to policy preferences. Social Dominance Orientation and Conservatism predicted less support for needs-based aid. People who did not endorse common disaster myths (e.g., that crime rates increase after a disaster), and who saw climate change or wealth distribution as causes of disaster harm supported needs-based aid. In Study 2, we developed messages targeting these three beliefs and compared them to a control message. While our intervention did not influence support for needs-based aid, it did shift the targeted beliefs, which were again positively associated with support for needs-based aid. Findings from Study 2 also shed light on participants’ own reasoning behind their preferences, which may prove useful for policy design and framing as well. Our studies highlight beliefs and other factors that relate to preferences for different types of disaster aid and provide an entry point for future equity efforts in disaster recovery.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13915,"journal":{"name":"International journal of disaster risk reduction","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 104967"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beliefs that predict support for needs-based disaster aid distribution\",\"authors\":\"Shannon Callaham ,&nbsp;Andrea Mah ,&nbsp;Ezra Markowitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104967\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Disaster aid distribution in the U.S. worsens social inequities. Public demand to incorporate needs or social vulnerability into disaster aid policy could lead to more equitable disaster recovery. In two studies (<em>N</em> = 664) we examined what predicts preferences for needs-based disaster aid (Study 1) and then tested whether we could increase support for this kind of policy (Study 2). In Study 1, we asked participants to rate disaster aid distribution policies and report on beliefs that previous research suggests would relate to policy preferences. Social Dominance Orientation and Conservatism predicted less support for needs-based aid. People who did not endorse common disaster myths (e.g., that crime rates increase after a disaster), and who saw climate change or wealth distribution as causes of disaster harm supported needs-based aid. In Study 2, we developed messages targeting these three beliefs and compared them to a control message. While our intervention did not influence support for needs-based aid, it did shift the targeted beliefs, which were again positively associated with support for needs-based aid. Findings from Study 2 also shed light on participants’ own reasoning behind their preferences, which may prove useful for policy design and framing as well. Our studies highlight beliefs and other factors that relate to preferences for different types of disaster aid and provide an entry point for future equity efforts in disaster recovery.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of disaster risk reduction\",\"volume\":\"114 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104967\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of disaster risk reduction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420924007295\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of disaster risk reduction","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420924007295","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国的灾害援助分配加剧了社会不平等。公众要求将需求或社会脆弱性纳入灾害援助政策,这可能会带来更加公平的灾后恢复。在两项研究(N = 664)中,我们考察了哪些因素会影响人们对基于需求的灾害援助的偏好(研究 1),然后测试了我们是否能增加对此类政策的支持(研究 2)。在研究 1 中,我们要求参与者对灾害援助分配政策进行评分,并报告以往研究表明与政策偏好相关的信念。社会主导取向和保守主义预示着对基于需求的援助的支持率较低。那些不赞成常见的灾难迷思(例如,灾难发生后犯罪率会上升)、认为气候变化或财富分配是造成灾难伤害的原因的人支持以需求为基础的援助。在研究 2 中,我们开发了针对这三种信念的信息,并将其与对照信息进行了比较。虽然我们的干预并没有影响对基于需求的援助的支持,但它确实改变了目标信念,这些信念再次与对基于需求的援助的支持呈正相关。研究 2 的结果还揭示了参与者自身偏好背后的原因,这可能对政策设计和框架制定也有帮助。我们的研究强调了与不同类型灾害援助偏好相关的信念和其他因素,并为未来灾后恢复的公平工作提供了一个切入点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beliefs that predict support for needs-based disaster aid distribution
Disaster aid distribution in the U.S. worsens social inequities. Public demand to incorporate needs or social vulnerability into disaster aid policy could lead to more equitable disaster recovery. In two studies (N = 664) we examined what predicts preferences for needs-based disaster aid (Study 1) and then tested whether we could increase support for this kind of policy (Study 2). In Study 1, we asked participants to rate disaster aid distribution policies and report on beliefs that previous research suggests would relate to policy preferences. Social Dominance Orientation and Conservatism predicted less support for needs-based aid. People who did not endorse common disaster myths (e.g., that crime rates increase after a disaster), and who saw climate change or wealth distribution as causes of disaster harm supported needs-based aid. In Study 2, we developed messages targeting these three beliefs and compared them to a control message. While our intervention did not influence support for needs-based aid, it did shift the targeted beliefs, which were again positively associated with support for needs-based aid. Findings from Study 2 also shed light on participants’ own reasoning behind their preferences, which may prove useful for policy design and framing as well. Our studies highlight beliefs and other factors that relate to preferences for different types of disaster aid and provide an entry point for future equity efforts in disaster recovery.
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
International journal of disaster risk reduction
International journal of disaster risk reduction GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARYMETEOROLOGY-METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
18.00%
发文量
688
审稿时长
79 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (IJDRR) is the journal for researchers, policymakers and practitioners across diverse disciplines: earth sciences and their implications; environmental sciences; engineering; urban studies; geography; and the social sciences. IJDRR publishes fundamental and applied research, critical reviews, policy papers and case studies with a particular focus on multi-disciplinary research that aims to reduce the impact of natural, technological, social and intentional disasters. IJDRR stimulates exchange of ideas and knowledge transfer on disaster research, mitigation, adaptation, prevention and risk reduction at all geographical scales: local, national and international. Key topics:- -multifaceted disaster and cascading disasters -the development of disaster risk reduction strategies and techniques -discussion and development of effective warning and educational systems for risk management at all levels -disasters associated with climate change -vulnerability analysis and vulnerability trends -emerging risks -resilience against disasters. The journal particularly encourages papers that approach risk from a multi-disciplinary perspective.
×
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