25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Examining the Left‐Right Divide Through the Lens of a Global Crisis: Ideological Differences and Their Implications for Responses to the COVID‐19 Pandemic

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The COVID‐19 disease pandemic is one of the most pressing global health issues of our time. Nevertheless, responses to the pandemic exhibit a stark ideological divide, with political conservatives (versus liberals/progressives) expressing less concern about the virus and less behavioral compliance with efforts to combat it. Drawing from decades of research on the psychological underpinnings of ideology, in four studies (total N = 4441) we examine the factors that contribute to the ideological gap in pandemic response—across domains including personality (e.g., empathic concern), attitudes (e.g., trust in science), information (e.g., COVID‐19 knowledge), vulnerability (e.g., preexisting medical conditions), demographics (e.g., education, income) and environment (e.g., local COVID‐19 infection rates). This work provides insight into the most proximal drivers of this ideological divide and also helps fill a long‐standing theoretical and empirical gap regarding how these various ideological differences shape responses to complex real‐world sociopolitical events. Among our key findings are the central role of attitude‐ and belief‐related factors (e.g., trust in science and trust in Trump)—and the relatively weaker influence of several domain‐general personality factors (empathic concern, disgust sensitivity, conspiratorial ideation). We conclude by considering possible explanations for these findings and their broader implications for our understanding of political ideology.

          Evidence for Practice

          • Stark ideological differences exist across a wide range of attitudinal and behavioral indices of pandemic response, with more conservative individuals reliably exhibiting less concern about the virus. These findings illustrate the extent to which the pandemic has become politicized.

          • A range of factors contribute to this ideological gap in pandemic response, but some are substantially more important than others.

          • Several factors that have received attention in public and academic discourse about the pandemic appear to contribute little, if at all, to the ideological divide. These include news following, scientific literacy, perceived social norms, and knowledge about the virus.

          • The most critical factors appear to be trust in scientists and trust in Trump, which further highlights the politicization of COVID‐19 and, importantly, the antagonistic nature of these two beliefs. Efforts to change and, especially, disentangle these two attitudes have the potential to be effective interventions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references68

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?

          Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) is a relatively new website that contains the major elements required to conduct research: an integrated participant compensation system; a large participant pool; and a streamlined process of study design, participant recruitment, and data collection. In this article, we describe and evaluate the potential contributions of MTurk to psychology and other social sciences. Findings indicate that (a) MTurk participants are slightly more demographically diverse than are standard Internet samples and are significantly more diverse than typical American college samples; (b) participation is affected by compensation rate and task length, but participants can still be recruited rapidly and inexpensively; (c) realistic compensation rates do not affect data quality; and (d) the data obtained are at least as reliable as those obtained via traditional methods. Overall, MTurk can be used to obtain high-quality data inexpensively and rapidly.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Social influence: compliance and conformity.

            This review covers recent developments in the social influence literature, focusing primarily on compliance and conformity research published between 1997 and 2002. The principles and processes underlying a target's susceptibility to outside influences are considered in light of three goals fundamental to rewarding human functioning. Specifically, targets are motivated to form accurate perceptions of reality and react accordingly, to develop and preserve meaningful social relationships, and to maintain a favorable self-concept. Consistent with the current movement in compliance and conformity research, this review emphasizes the ways in which these goals interact with external forces to engender social influence processes that are subtle, indirect, and outside of awareness.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                b.c.ruisch@fsw.leidenuniv.nl
                Journal
                Polit Psychol
                Polit Psychol
                10.1111/(ISSN)1467-9221
                POPS
                Political Psychology
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0162-895X
                1467-9221
                05 May 2021
                : 10.1111/pops.12740
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] The Ohio State University
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Benjamin Coe Ruisch, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, 2300 RB Leiden, The Netherlands.

                E‐mail: b.c.ruisch@ 123456fsw.leidenuniv.nl

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4087-1834
                Article
                POPS12740
                10.1111/pops.12740
                8242330
                34226775
                5527b6ba-cac4-4a65-bc22-4af9a500216b
                © 2021 The Authors. Political Psychology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society of Political Psychology

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 15 December 2020
                : 01 September 2020
                : 18 February 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 3, Pages: 22, Words: 21018
                Funding
                Funded by: National Science Foundation , open-funder-registry 10.13039/100000001;
                Award ID: Grant #2031097
                Categories
                Special Issue Articles
                Special Issue Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                corrected-proof
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.0.2 mode:remove_FC converted:30.06.2021

                covid‐19,ideology,individual differences,politics
                covid‐19, ideology, individual differences, politics

                Comments

                Comment on this article