IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i5p4459-d1085625.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Political Ideology and Trust in Government to Ensure Vaccine Safety: Using a U.S. Survey to Explore the Role of Political Trust

Author

Listed:
  • Jaeyoung Lim

    (Department of Public Administration and Social Welfare, Chosun University, Gwangju 61452, Republic of Korea)

  • Kuk-Kyoung Moon

    (Department of Public Administration, Inha University, Incheon 22212, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

Since early 2020, the rapid expansion of COVID-19 has raised concerns about vaccine safety and the government’s handling of it. Particularly notable and concerning has been a growing number of people who oppose vaccines, as this opposition poses a threat to public health. Those for and against vaccination have become polarized along a political divide. Within this context, this study focuses on the role of political trust, exploring whether political ideology is associated with the perception that the government can ensure the safety of vaccines and whether there is a moderator that can alleviate the concerns of those who oppose the government’s handling of vaccine safety on ideological grounds. This study relies on the 2021 U.S. General Social Survey (GSS) and employs an ordered probit method because the dependent variable is an ordered category. The ordered probit model includes a weight provided by the U.S. GSS to account for the population. The sample size was 473 because of the inclusion of all the variables relevant to this study. The results obtained are as follows: First, conservatives associate negatively with support for the government’s handling of vaccine safety. Second, more importantly, conservatives exhibit a higher trust level toward the government to ensure vaccine safety if their level of political trust increases. The results point to important implications. Political ideology matters in how individuals view the government’s handling of vaccine safety. Political trust plays a key role in helping individuals alter their views toward the government’s handling of vaccine safety. This points to a need for the government to take political trust seriously and work hard to improve the public’s trust in the government.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2023. "Political Ideology and Trust in Government to Ensure Vaccine Safety: Using a U.S. Survey to Explore the Role of Political Trust," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-15, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4459-:d:1085625
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4459/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4459/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Citrin, Jack, 1974. "Comment: The Political Relevance of Trust in Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(3), pages 973-988, September.
    2. Thomas J. Rudolph & Jillian Evans, 2005. "Political Trust, Ideology, and Public Support for Government Spending," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(3), pages 660-671, July.
    3. Luke Keele, 2007. "Social Capital and the Dynamics of Trust in Government," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(2), pages 241-254, April.
    4. Sears, David O. & Lau, Richard R. & Tyler, Tom R. & Allen, Harris M., 1980. "Self-Interest vs. Symbolic Politics in Policy Attitudes and Presidential Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 670-684, September.
    5. Marc Debus & Jale Tosun, 2021. "Political ideology and vaccination willingness: implications for policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(3), pages 477-491, September.
    6. Louise Rawlings & Jeffrey C. L. Looi & Stephen J. Robson, 2022. "Economic Considerations in COVID‐19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Refusal: A Survey of the Literature," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 98(321), pages 214-229, June.
    7. Manoj Sharma & Robert E. Davis & Amanda H. Wilkerson, 2021. "COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance among College Students: A Theory-Based Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-12, April.
    8. Daryl Pregibon, 1980. "Goodness of Link Tests for Generalized Linear Models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 29(1), pages 15-24, March.
    9. Marc J. Hetherington & Jason A. Husser, 2012. "How Trust Matters: The Changing Political Relevance of Political Trust," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 312-325, April.
    10. Yeon-Jun Choi & Julak Lee & Seung Yeop Paek, 2022. "Public Awareness and Sentiment toward COVID-19 Vaccination in South Korea: Findings from Big Data Analytics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-14, August.
    11. Hetherington, Marc J., 1998. "The Political Relevance of Political Trust," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(4), pages 791-808, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jae Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2020. "Examining the Moderation Effect of Political Trust on the Linkage between Civic Morality and Support for Environmental Taxation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Nunkoo, Robin & Smith, Stephen L.J., 2013. "Political economy of tourism: Trust in government actors, political support, and their determinants," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 120-132.
    4. Jae-Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2022. "Political Trust and Support for a Tax Increase for Social Welfare: The Role of Perceived Tax Burden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-12, June.
    5. Peggy Schyns & Christel Koop, 2010. "Political Distrust and Social Capital in Europe and the USA," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 145-167, March.
    6. Fischer, Justina, 2011. "Living under the ‘right’ government: does political ideology matter to trust in political institutions? An analysis for OECD countries," MPRA Paper 33344, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Guanghua Han & Simin Yan, 2019. "Does Food Safety Risk Perception Affect the Public’s Trust in Their Government? An Empirical Study on a National Survey in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-15, May.
    8. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2022. "Does Political Participation Strengthen the Relationship between Civic Morality and Environmentally Friendly Attitudes? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-13, February.
    9. Jae Hyun Lee & Jaekwon Suh, 2021. "Decentralisation and government trust in South Korea: Distinguishing local government trust from national government trust," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 68-93, January.
    10. Marija Džunić & Nataša Golubović & Srđan Marinković, 2020. "Determinants Of Institutional Trust In Transition Economies: Lessons From Serbia," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 65(225), pages 135-162, April – J.
    11. Luis Guirola & Gonzalo Rivero, 2022. "Polarization contaminates the link with partisan and independent institutions: evidence from 138 cabinet shifts," Working Papers 2237, Banco de España.
    12. Stéfanie André, 2014. "Does Trust Mean the Same for Migrants and Natives? Testing Measurement Models of Political Trust with Multi-group Confirmatory Factor Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 963-982, February.
    13. Nicholas Charron & Niklas Harring & Victor Lapuente, 2021. "Trust, regulation, and redistribution why some governments overregulate and under‐redistribute," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 3-16, January.
    14. Louis Fucilla, 2021. "Does the Bureaucracy Affect Trust in Government? Evidence from Aggregate Public Opinion," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 69-82, January.
    15. Busemeyer, Marius R., 2021. "Health care attitudes and institutional trust during the COVID-19 crisis: Evidence from the case of Germany," Working Papers 01, University of Konstanz, Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality. Perceptions, Participation and Policies".
    16. Thomas Clark Durant & Michael Weintraub & Daniel Houser & Shuwen Li, 2018. "Trust in the executive," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(5), pages 609-624, September.
    17. Ayse Kaya & James T. Walker, 2009. "Individual Attitudes towards the Impact of Multinational Enterprises on Local Businesses," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2009-02, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    18. Soo Tan & Siok Tambyah, 2011. "Generalized Trust and Trust in Institutions in Confucian Asia," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 357-377, September.
    19. Fischer, Justina A.V., 2012. "Globalization and Political Trust," Papers 285, World Trade Institute.
    20. Eri Bertsou, 2019. "Political Distrust and its Discontents: Exploring the Meaning, Expression and Significance of Political Distrust," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, October.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4459-:d:1085625. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.