IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v102y2021i6p2459-2471.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of COVID‐19 and political identification on framing bias in an infectious disease experiment: The frame reigns supreme

Author

Listed:
  • Amy M. Wolaver
  • John A. Doces

Abstract

Background Behavioral responses to the COVID‐19 pandemic have become highly polarized, and public health initiatives often try to use different frames to influence behavior. If the polarization of behaviors is related to differences in responses to frames, then different health messages could be targeted to different groups to influence behavior. Objective To determine whether risk preferences and susceptibility to gain/loss frames have been affected by COVID‐19 and whether they differ along partisan lines. Methods Using repeated cross‐sectional data from a nationally representative dataset in the United States replicating the disease outbreak scenario collected before and after the onset of COVID‐19, we test whether responsiveness to the gain/loss frames has changed over time and whether the responsiveness varies by political affiliation. Results The experimental results show that the risk preferences of the U.S. population is very susceptible to the framing of choices, consistent with the literature finding risk loving preferences under the loss frame and risk aversion under the gain frame. However, the experience of COVID‐19 does not appear to have changed the responsiveness, nor are there significant differences between conservatives/Republicans and liberals/Democrats. Conclusion Targeting different partisan groups with different risk‐related message frames is unlikely to be effective at altering behaviors.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy M. Wolaver & John A. Doces, 2021. "The impact of COVID‐19 and political identification on framing bias in an infectious disease experiment: The frame reigns supreme," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2459-2471, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:6:p:2459-2471
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13095
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13095?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. Ying Fan & A. Yeşim Orhun & Dana Turjeman, 2020. "Heterogeneous Actions, Beliefs, Constraints and Risk Tolerance During the COVID-19 Pandemic," NBER Working Papers 27211, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Allcott, Hunt & Boxell, Levi & Conway, Jacob & Gentzkow, Matthew & Thaler, Michael & Yang, David, 2020. "Polarization and public health: Partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Joseph Henrich & Steve J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan, 2010. "The Weirdest People in the World?," RatSWD Working Papers 139, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    5. Sanders, Michael & Stockdale, Emma & Hume, Susannah & John, Peter, 2021. "Loss aversion fails to replicate in the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from an online experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    6. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    7. James N. Druckman & Mary C. McGrath, 2019. "The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 111-119, February.
    8. Anton Gollwitzer & Cameron Martel & William J. Brady & Philip Pärnamets & Isaac G. Freedman & Eric D. Knowles & Jay J. Van Bavel, 2020. "Partisan differences in physical distancing are linked to health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(11), pages 1186-1197, November.
    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. Sandra H. Goff & John Ifcher & Homa Zarghamee & Alex Reents & Patrick Wade, 2023. "Support for bigger government: The principle‐implementation gap and COVID‐19," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(2), pages 243-261, April.
    2. Anindya Ghose & Beibei Li & Meghanath Macha & Chenshuo Sun & Natasha Ying Zhang Foutz, 2020. "Trading Privacy for the Greater Social Good: How Did America React During COVID-19?," Papers 2006.05859, arXiv.org.
    3. Abel Brodeur & David Gray & Anik Islam & Suraiya Bhuiyan, 2021. "A literature review of the economics of COVID‐19," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1007-1044, September.
    4. Maxim Ananyev & Michael Poyker & Yuan Tian, 2021. "The safest time to fly: pandemic response in the era of Fox News," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(3), pages 775-802, July.
    5. Paul Bokern & Jona Linde & Arno Riedl & Peter Werner, 2023. "The Robustness of Preferences during a Crisis: The Case of Covid-19," CESifo Working Paper Series 10595, CESifo.
    6. Janssen, Aljoscha & Shapiro, Matthew H., 2021. "Does precise case disclosure limit precautionary behavior? Evidence from COVID-19 in Singapore," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 700-714.
    7. Mellacher, Patrick, 2023. "The impact of corona populism: Empirical evidence from Austria and theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 113-140.
    8. Michael Bayerlein & Vanessa A. Boese & Scott Gates & Katrin Kamin & Syed Mansoob Murshed, 2021. "Populism and COVID-19: How Populist Governments (Mis)Handle the Pandemic," Journal of Political Institutions and Political Economy, now publishers, vol. 2(3), pages 389-428, December.
    9. Ori Heffetz & Guy Ishai, 2021. "Which Beliefs? Behavior-Predictive Beliefs are Inconsistent with Information-Based Beliefs: Evidence from COVID-19," NBER Working Papers 29452, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Janssen, Aljoscha & Shapiro, Matthew, 2020. "Does Precise Case Information Limit Precautionary Behavior? Evidence from COVID-19 in Singapore," Working Paper Series 1344, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    11. Gallo, Edoardo & Barak, Darija & Langtry, Alastair, 2023. "Social distancing in networks: A web-based interactive experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    12. Fuest, Clemens & Immel, Lea & Neumeier, Florian & Peichl, Andreas, 2023. "Does expert information affect citizens’ attitudes toward Corona policies? Evidence from Germany," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    13. Etienne Farvaque & Hira Iqbal & Nicolas Ooghe, 2020. "Health politics? Determinants of US states’ reactions to COVID-19," Post-Print hal-03128875, HAL.
    14. Block, Ray & Burnham, Michael & Kahn, Kayla & Peng, Rachel & Seeman, Jeremy & Seto, Christopher, 2022. "Perceived risk, political polarization, and the willingness to follow COVID-19 mitigation guidelines," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    15. Nicholas W. Papageorge & Matthew V. Zahn & Michèle Belot & Eline Broek-Altenburg & Syngjoo Choi & Julian C. Jamison & Egon Tripodi, 2021. "Socio-demographic factors associated with self-protecting behavior during the Covid-19 pandemic," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(2), pages 691-738, April.
    16. Shanike J. Smart & Solomon W. Polachek, 2024. "COVID-19 vaccine and risk-taking," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 25-49, February.
    17. Ester Faia & Andreas Fuster & Vincenzo Pezone & Basit Zafar, 2024. "Biases in Information Selection and Processing: Survey Evidence from the Pandemic," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(3), pages 829-847, May.
    18. Lucia Freira & Marco Sartorio & Cynthia Boruchowicz & Florencia Lopez Boo & Joaquin Navajas, 2021. "The interplay between partisanship, forecasted COVID-19 deaths, and support for preventive policies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    19. Bradley J. Larsen & Timothy J. Ryan & Steven Greene & Marc J. Hetherington & Rahsaan Maxwell & Steven Tadelis, 2022. "Using Donald Trump's COVID-19 Vaccine Endorsement to Give Public Health a Shot in the Arm: A Large-Scale Ad Experiment," Papers 2203.02625, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
    20. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.

    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:6:p:2459-2471. 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.