12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Beliefs About COVID-19 in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States: A Novel Test of Political Polarization and Motivated Reasoning

      research-article

      Read this article at

      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

          What are the psychological consequences of the increasingly politicized nature of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States relative to similar Western countries? In a two-wave study completed early (March) and later (December) in the pandemic, we found that polarization was greater in the United States ( N = 1,339) than in Canada ( N = 644) and the United Kingdom. ( N = 1,283). Political conservatism in the United States was strongly associated with engaging in weaker mitigation behaviors, lower COVID-19 risk perceptions, greater misperceptions, and stronger vaccination hesitancy. Although there was some evidence that cognitive sophistication was associated with increased polarization in the United States in December (but not March), cognitive sophistication was nonetheless consistently negatively correlated with misperceptions and vaccination hesitancy across time, countries, and party lines. Furthermore, COVID-19 skepticism in the United States was strongly correlated with distrust in liberal-leaning mainstream news outlets and trust in conservative-leaning news outlets, suggesting that polarization may be driven by differences in information environments.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

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

          Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA

          Widespread acceptance of a vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will be the next major step in fighting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but achieving high uptake will be a challenge and may be impeded by online misinformation. To inform successful vaccination campaigns, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in the UK and the USA to quantify how exposure to online misinformation around COVID-19 vaccines affects intent to vaccinate to protect oneself or others. Here we show that in both countries-as of September 2020-fewer people would 'definitely' take a vaccine than is likely required for herd immunity, and that, relative to factual information, recent misinformation induced a decline in intent of 6.2 percentage points (95th percentile interval 3.9 to 8.5) in the UK and 6.4 percentage points (95th percentile interval 4.0 to 8.8) in the USA among those who stated that they would definitely accept a vaccine. We also find that some sociodemographic groups are differentially impacted by exposure to misinformation. Finally, we show that scientific-sounding misinformation is more strongly associated with declines in vaccination intent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making

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

              Group-level self-definition and self-investment: a hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification.

              Recent research shows individuals' identification with in-groups to be psychologically important and socially consequential. However, there is little agreement about how identification should be conceptualized or measured. On the basis of previous work, the authors identified 5 specific components of in-group identification and offered a hierarchical 2-dimensional model within which these components are organized. Studies 1 and 2 used confirmatory factor analysis to validate the proposed model of self-definition (individual self-stereotyping, in-group homogeneity) and self-investment (solidarity, satisfaction, and centrality) dimensions, across 3 different group identities. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated the construct validity of the 5 components by examining their (concurrent) correlations with established measures of in-group identification. Studies 5-7 demonstrated the predictive and discriminant validity of the 5 components by examining their (prospective) prediction of individuals' orientation to, and emotions about, real intergroup relations. Together, these studies illustrate the conceptual and empirical value of a hierarchical multicomponent model of in-group identification.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Pers Soc Psychol Bull
                Pers Soc Psychol Bull
                PSP
                sppsp
                Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin
                SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                0146-1672
                1552-7433
                28 June 2021
                May 2022
                : 48
                : 5
                : 750-765
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
                [2 ]Durham University, Durham, UK
                [3 ]University of Toulouse Capitole, France
                [4 ]Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
                Author notes
                [*]Gordon Pennycook, Hill/Levene Schools of Business, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Pkwy, Regina, Saskatchewan S4S 0A2, Canada. Email: gordon.pennycook@ 123456uregina.ca
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1344-6143
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6370-7789
                Article
                10.1177_01461672211023652
                10.1177/01461672211023652
                9066691
                34180276
                b6c97105-f401-4aac-9c63-053c6508c3fb
                © 2021 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 17 September 2020
                : 12 May 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: Reset (a project of Luminate), ;
                Funded by: Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence Initiative of the Miami Foundation, ;
                Funded by: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/501100000024;
                Funded by: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/501100000155;
                Categories
                Articles
                Custom metadata
                ts1

                covid-19,motivated reasoning,political polarization,cognitive reflection,attitudes

                Comments

                Comment on this article