IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v261y2020ics0277953620304548.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Confidence in political leaders can slant risk perceptions of COVID–19 in a highly polarized environment

Author

Listed:
  • Shao, Wanyun
  • Hao, Feng

Abstract

•Conservatives show lower risk perceptions of COVID-19 than liberals and moderates.•Confidence in political leaders can reduce risk perceptions of COVID-19.•It also can mediate the effects of political ideology on risk perceptions.•Attention to news about the outbreak of COVID-19 is positively correlated with risk perceptions.•Perceived quality of media coverage can lead to heightened risk perceptions of COVID-19.

Suggested Citation

  • Shao, Wanyun & Hao, Feng, 2020. "Confidence in political leaders can slant risk perceptions of COVID–19 in a highly polarized environment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:261:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620304548
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620304548
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113235?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Manuel Barrios & Yael V. Hochberg, 2020. "Risk Perception Through the Lens of Politics in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic," Working Papers 2020-32, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    2. Druckman, James N. & Peterson, Erik & Slothuus, Rune, 2013. "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 57-79, February.
    3. Alan C. Acock, 2013. "Discovering Structural Equation Modeling Using Stata," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number dsemus, March.
    4. Raude, Jocelyn & MCColl, Kathleen & Flamand, Claude & Apostolidis, Themis, 2019. "Understanding health behaviour changes in response to outbreaks: Findings from a longitudinal study of a large epidemic of mosquito-borne disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 230(C), pages 184-193.
    5. Michael Siegrist & Heinz Gutscher & Timothy C. Earle, 2005. "Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 145-156, March.
    6. Paul Slovic, 1999. "Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk‐Assessment Battlefield," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 689-701, August.
    7. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    8. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    9. Wanyun Shao & Feng Hao, 2020. "Approval of political leaders can slant evaluation of political issues: evidence from public concern for climate change in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 201-212, January.
    10. Hussey, Lucia Kafui & Arku, Godwin, 2019. "Conceptualizations of climate-related health risks among health experts and the public in Ghana," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 223(C), pages 40-50.
    11. Scott R. Baker & Nicholas Bloom & Steven J. Davis & Kyle J. Kost & Marco C. Sammon & Tasaneeya Viratyosin, 2020. "The Unprecedented Stock Market Impact of COVID-19," NBER Working Papers 26945, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Fazio, Andrea & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2022. "The political cost of sanctions: Evidence from COVID-19," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(9), pages 872-878.
    2. Panarello, Demetrio & Tassinari, Giorgio, 2022. "One year of COVID-19 in Italy: are containment policies enough to shape the pandemic pattern?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Juvalta, Sibylle & Speranza, Camilla & Robin, Dominik & El Maohub, Yassmeen & Krasselt, Julia & Dreesen, Philipp & Dratva, Julia & Suggs, L. Suzanne, 2023. "Young people's media use and adherence to preventive measures in the “infodemic”: Is it masked by political ideology?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 317(C).
    4. Nivette, Amy & Ribeaud, Denis & Murray, Aja & Steinhoff, Annekatrin & Bechtiger, Laura & Hepp, Urs & Shanahan, Lilly & Eisner, Manuel, 2021. "Non-compliance with COVID-19-related public health measures among young adults in Switzerland: Insights from a longitudinal cohort study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    5. Valentina Lorenzoni & Gianni Andreozzi & Andrea Bazzani & Virginia Casigliani & Salvatore Pirri & Lara Tavoschi & Giuseppe Turchetti, 2022. "How Italy Tweeted about COVID-19: Detecting Reactions to the Pandemic from Social Media," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-14, June.
    6. Storopoli, Jose & Braga da Silva Neto, Wilson Levy & Mesch, Gustavo S., 2020. "Confidence in social institutions, perceived vulnerability and the adoption of recommended protective behaviors in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    7. Aksoy, Ozan, 2022. "It runs in the family: parental influence on adolescents’ compliance with social distancing measures during Covid-19 lockdowns," SocArXiv y7wc6, Center for Open Science.
    8. Heinsalu, Sander, 2021. "Promotion of (interaction) abstinence increases infection prevalence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 94-112.
    9. O'Connor, Cliodhna & O'Connell, Nicola & Burke, Emma & Dempster, Martin & Graham, Christopher D. & Scally, Gabriel & Zgaga, Lina & Nolan, Ann & Nicolson, Gail & Mather, Luke & Barry, Joseph & Crowley,, 2021. "Bordering on crisis: A qualitative analysis of focus group, social media, and news media perspectives on the Republic of Ireland-Northern Ireland border during the ‘first wave’ of the COVID-19 pandemi," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    10. Ozan Aksoy, 2022. "Within-family influences on compliance with social-distancing measures during COVID-19 lockdowns in the United Kingdom," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(12), pages 1660-1668, December.

    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. Shoshana Shiloh & Gülbanu Güvenç & Dilek Önkal, 2007. "Cognitive and Emotional Representations of Terror Attacks: A Cross‐Cultural Exploration," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 397-409, April.
    2. Tim Slack & Vanessa Parks & Lynsay Ayer & Andrew M. Parker & Melissa L. Finucane & Rajeev Ramchand, 2020. "Natech or natural? An analysis of hazard perceptions, institutional trust, and future storm worry following Hurricane Harvey," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 102(3), pages 1207-1224, July.
    3. William J. Burns & Ellen Peters & Paul Slovic, 2012. "Risk Perception and the Economic Crisis: A Longitudinal Study of the Trajectory of Perceived Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 659-677, April.
    4. Violet Muringai & Ellen Goddard, 2018. "Trust and consumer risk perceptions regarding BSE and chronic wasting disease," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 240-265, March.
    5. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.
    6. Paul Slovic, 2020. "Risk Perception and Risk Analysis in a Hyperpartisan and Virtuously Violent World," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2231-2239, November.
    7. Henrik Merkelsen, 2011. "Institutionalized Ignorance as a Precondition for Rational Risk Expertise," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(7), pages 1083-1094, July.
    8. Roxanne E. Lewis & Michael G. Tyshenko, 2009. "The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 714-728, May.
    9. Pam A. Mueller & Lawrence M. Solan & John M. Darley, 2012. "When Does Knowledge Become Intent? Perceiving the Minds of Wrongdoers," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 859-892, December.
    10. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim F. Passchier & Nanne K. DeVries, 2007. "How Does the General Public Evaluate Risk Information? The Impact of Associations with Other Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 715-727, June.
    11. Agustin Robles Morua & Kathleen E. Halvorsen & Alex S. Mayer, 2011. "Waterborne Disease‐Related Risk Perceptions in the Sonora River Basin, Mexico," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 866-878, May.
    12. Hoti, Ferdiana & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter & Renn, Ortwin, 2021. "Who is willing to participate? Examining public participation intention concerning decommissioning of nuclear power plants in Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    13. John D. Graham & John A. Rupp & Olga Schenk, 2015. "Unconventional Gas Development in the USA: Exploring the Risk Perception Issues," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1770-1788, October.
    14. Liu, Peng & Xu, Zhigang & Zhao, Xiangmo, 2019. "Road tests of self-driving vehicles: Affective and cognitive pathways in acceptance formation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 354-369.
    15. Mei‐Chih Meg Tseng & Yi‐Ping Lin & Fu‐Chang Hu & Tsun‐Jen Cheng, 2013. "Risks Perception of Electromagnetic Fields in Taiwan: The Influence of Psychopathology and the Degree of Sensitivity to Electromagnetic Fields," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 2002-2012, November.
    16. Wanyun Shao & Feng Hao, 2020. "Approval of political leaders can slant evaluation of political issues: evidence from public concern for climate change in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 201-212, January.
    17. Shay-Wei Choon & Hway-Boon Ong & Siow-Hooi Tan, 2019. "Does risk perception limit the climate change mitigation behaviors?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1891-1917, August.
    18. Sara Jonsson & Inga-Lill Söderberg, 2018. "Investigating explanatory theories on laypeople’s risk perception of personal economic collapse in a bank crisis – the Cyprus case," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(6), pages 763-779, June.
    19. Yingying Sun & Ziqiang Han, 2018. "Climate Change Risk Perception in Taiwan: Correlation with Individual and Societal Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, January.
    20. Aven, Terje, 2018. "How the integration of System 1-System 2 thinking and recent risk perspectives can improve risk assessment and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 237-244.

    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:eee:socmed:v:261:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620304548. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.