IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v102y2021i1p7-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Interactive Effects of Scientific Knowledge and Gender on COVID‐19 Social Distancing Compliance

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Algara
  • Sam Fuller
  • Christopher Hare
  • Sara Kazemian

Abstract

Objective In this research note, we examine the role scientific knowledge and gender plays in citizen responses to governmental social distancing recommendations. Methods Using two waves of the American Trends Panel Survey and a measure of latent scientific knowledge, we test whether scientific knowledge is associated with comfort in participating in social activities during the COVID‐19 pandemic within both the full U.S. population and the two major political parties. Results In both the general population and within the Democratic Party, we find that women are generally more likely to use their scientific knowledge to inform their level of comfort with social activities during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Conclusion These findings shed light on how knowledge and gender intersect to drive compliance with government recommendations and policies during a public health crisis in a deeply partisan America.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Algara & Sam Fuller & Christopher Hare & Sara Kazemian, 2021. "The Interactive Effects of Scientific Knowledge and Gender on COVID‐19 Social Distancing Compliance," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 7-16, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:1:p:7-16
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12894
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12894
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12894?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marra, Michele & Pannell, David J. & Abadi Ghadim, Amir, 2003. "The economics of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning curve?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 75(2-3), pages 215-234.
    2. Troy Gibson & Christopher Hare, 2016. "Moral Epistemology and Ideological Conflict in American Political Behavior," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1157-1173, November.
    3. Dan M. Kahan & Ellen Peters & Maggie Wittlin & Paul Slovic & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette & Donald Braman & Gregory Mandel, 2012. "The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(10), pages 732-735, October.
    4. Cochran, John K. & Sanders, Beth A., 2009. "The gender gap in death penalty support: An exploratory study," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 525-533, November.
    5. Pollock, Philip H. & Lilie, Stuart A. & Vittes, M. Elliot, 1993. "Hard Issues, Core Values and Vertical Constraint: The Case of Nuclear Power," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 29-50, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mónica Ferrín, 2022. "Reassessing Gender Differences in COVID‐19 Risk Perception and Behavior," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(1), pages 31-41, January.
    2. Thomas G. Safford & Emily H. Whitmore & Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2021. "Scientists, presidents, and pandemics—comparing the science–politics nexus during the Zika virus and COVID‐19 outbreaks," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2482-2498, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adrienne R. Brown & Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2021. "Interaction effects on support for climate‐change mitigation," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2649-2660, November.
    2. Giuseppe Maggio & Marina Mastrorillo & Nicholas J. Sitko, 2022. "Adapting to High Temperatures: Effect of Farm Practices and Their Adoption Duration on Total Value of Crop Production in Uganda," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(1), pages 385-403, January.
    3. Greiner, Romy & Miller, Owen & Patterson, Louisa, 2008. "The role of grazier motivations and risk attitudes in the adoption of grazing best management practices," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6002, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    4. Casey A. Klofstad & Joseph E. Uscinski & Jennifer M. Connolly & Jonathan P. West, 2019. "What drives people to believe in Zika conspiracy theories?," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    5. Michel, Hanno, 2020. "From local to global: The role of knowledge, transfer, and capacity building for successful energy transitions," Discussion Papers, Research Group Digital Mobility and Social Differentiation SP III 2020-603, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    6. Bensch, Gunther & Grimm, Michael, 2024. "Behavioural constraints in energy technology uptake: Evidence from real-purchase offers in rural Rwanda and Senegal," Ruhr Economic Papers 1081, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    7. Branden B. Johnson, 2017. "Explaining Americans’ responses to dread epidemics: an illustration with Ebola in late 2014," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(10), pages 1338-1357, October.
    8. Aude Ridier & Caroline Roussy & Karim Chaib, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 265-283, September.
    9. Morrison, Mark & Duncan, Roderick & Parton, Kevin A., 2013. "Targeting segments in the Australian community to increase support for climate change policy," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 212-217.
    10. Anthony Evans & Willem Sleegers & Žan Mlakar, 2020. "Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 401-412, May.
    11. Nasca, J.A. & Feldkamp, C.R. & Arroquy, J.I. & Colombatto, D., 2015. "Efficiency and stability in subtropical beef cattle grazing systems in the northwest of Argentina," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 85-96.
    12. Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent & Shannon Hagerman & Robert Kozak, 2018. "What risks matter? Public views about assisted migration and other climate-adaptive reforestation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 573-587, December.
    13. Jackson, T.M. & Hanjra, Munir A. & Khan, S. & Hafeez, M.M., 2011. "Building a climate resilient farm: A risk based approach for understanding water, energy and emissions in irrigated agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 729-745.
    14. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    15. Morais, G. & Braga, J.M., 2018. "Irrigation and farm efficiency in Brazil," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275987, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Frisch, L.C. & Mathis, J.T. & Kettle, N.P. & Trainor, S.F., 2015. "Gauging perceptions of ocean acidification in Alaska," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 101-110.
    17. Micheels, Eric T. & Nolan, James F., 2016. "Examining the effects of absorptive capacity and social capital on the adoption of agricultural innovations: A Canadian Prairie case study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 127-138.
    18. Leung, Benson Tsz Kin, 2020. "Limited cognitive ability and selective information processing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 345-369.
    19. Oscar Montes de Oca Munguia & Rick Llewellyn, 2020. "The Adopters versus the Technology: Which Matters More when Predicting or Explaining Adoption?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 80-91, March.
    20. Fosso, Prisca Koncy & Tsafack Nanfosso, Roger, 2016. "Adoption of agricultural innovations in risky environment: the case of corn producers in the west of Cameroon," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 97(01), April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:1:p:7-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.