COVID-19传播中的信使效应:政府级别重要吗?

IF 1.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Nathen Favero , Sebastian Jilke , Julia A. Wolfson , Chengxin Xu , Matthew M. Young
{"title":"COVID-19传播中的信使效应:政府级别重要吗?","authors":"Nathen Favero ,&nbsp;Sebastian Jilke ,&nbsp;Julia A. Wolfson ,&nbsp;Chengxin Xu ,&nbsp;Matthew M. Young","doi":"10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Public efforts to limit the spread of the coronavirus rely on motivating people to cooperate with the government. We test the effectiveness of different governmental messengers to encourage preventive health actions. We administered a survey experiment among a sample (n = 1,545) of respondents across the United States, presenting them with the same social media message, but experimentally varying the government sender (i.e., Federal, State, County, a combination of Federal + County, and a control condition) to test whether local relevance influences messaging efficacy. We find that in an information saturated environment the messenger does not matter. There is, however, variation in treatment response by partisanship, education, income, and the degree to which respondents are affected by the pandemic. While the main effect of the level of government on intended behavior is null, public health organizations are universally perceived as more trustworthy, relevant, and competent than anonymous messengers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34527,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy Open","volume":"2 ","pages":"Article 100027"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100027","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Messenger effects in COVID-19 communication: Does the level of government matter?\",\"authors\":\"Nathen Favero ,&nbsp;Sebastian Jilke ,&nbsp;Julia A. Wolfson ,&nbsp;Chengxin Xu ,&nbsp;Matthew M. Young\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Public efforts to limit the spread of the coronavirus rely on motivating people to cooperate with the government. We test the effectiveness of different governmental messengers to encourage preventive health actions. We administered a survey experiment among a sample (n = 1,545) of respondents across the United States, presenting them with the same social media message, but experimentally varying the government sender (i.e., Federal, State, County, a combination of Federal + County, and a control condition) to test whether local relevance influences messaging efficacy. We find that in an information saturated environment the messenger does not matter. There is, however, variation in treatment response by partisanship, education, income, and the degree to which respondents are affected by the pandemic. While the main effect of the level of government on intended behavior is null, public health organizations are universally perceived as more trustworthy, relevant, and competent than anonymous messengers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Policy Open\",\"volume\":\"2 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100027\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100027\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Policy Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590229620300253\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590229620300253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

公众限制冠状病毒传播的努力依赖于激励人们与政府合作。我们测试了不同政府信使鼓励预防性卫生行动的有效性。我们对美国各地的受访者样本(n = 1545)进行了一项调查实验,向他们提供相同的社交媒体信息,但实验上改变了政府发送者(即联邦、州、县、联邦+县的组合以及控制条件),以测试当地相关性是否会影响消息传递效果。我们发现,在信息饱和的环境中,信使并不重要。然而,根据党派、教育、收入和应答者受大流行影响的程度,治疗反应存在差异。虽然政府级别对预期行为的主要影响是无效的,但公共卫生组织普遍被认为比匿名信使更值得信赖、更相关、更有能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Messenger effects in COVID-19 communication: Does the level of government matter?

Messenger effects in COVID-19 communication: Does the level of government matter?

Messenger effects in COVID-19 communication: Does the level of government matter?

Public efforts to limit the spread of the coronavirus rely on motivating people to cooperate with the government. We test the effectiveness of different governmental messengers to encourage preventive health actions. We administered a survey experiment among a sample (n = 1,545) of respondents across the United States, presenting them with the same social media message, but experimentally varying the government sender (i.e., Federal, State, County, a combination of Federal + County, and a control condition) to test whether local relevance influences messaging efficacy. We find that in an information saturated environment the messenger does not matter. There is, however, variation in treatment response by partisanship, education, income, and the degree to which respondents are affected by the pandemic. While the main effect of the level of government on intended behavior is null, public health organizations are universally perceived as more trustworthy, relevant, and competent than anonymous messengers.

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
Health Policy Open
Health Policy Open Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
40 weeks
×
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