The politics of mask-wearing: Political preferences, reactance, and conflict aversion during COVID

Political party affiliation, social identity cues, and attitudes about protective mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

This cross-sectional study aimed to determine 1) whether German citizens' adherence to health professionals' recommendations and mandates regarding protective masks during the COVID-19 pandemic varied according to their political party affiliations, and 2) how behavioral cues provided by members of shared social groups, such as family and friends, influenced individual mask-wearing behavior. A quota-based sample of German voters (n = 330) consisting of 55 citizens whose voting intentions aligned with each of the country's six main political parties responded to an online questionnaire consisting of multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Univariate descriptive statistical analyses of quantitative data were conducted, and multiple regressions were performed to determine log odds and significant variations among group-based responses. A pragmatic inductive coding process was used to conduct a thematic analysis of qualitative data. Results indicated that those participants who expressed an intention to vote for the populist radical right party were the least likely to follow health experts' recommendations and the most likely to express anger and dissatisfaction over mask mandates. Prospective Left Party voters were the most likely to adhere to the advice of their doctors, while those associated with the Green Party were the most likely to adhere to the advice of public health experts. Most survey participants reported aligning their mask-wearing behavior with that of family and friends, with prospective CDU/CSU voters particularly likely to consider the mask-wearing behavior of family members. The results indicate that public health officials should consider how group-related factors influence public health compliance in order to encourage protective mask-wearing in the future.

Local public health under threat: Harassment faced by local health department leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, local health departments (LHDs) faced several challenges including underfunding and understaffing. COVID-19 exacerbated these challenges and introduced new ones, including harassment of the agency, staff, and leadership. The objective of this study was to qualitatively understand the experiences and impact of harassment faced by LHDs during the pandemic and provide recommendations to prevent future harassment.

Study design

A qualitative study was conducted utilizing focus groups for data collection.

Methods

LHDs were sampled from the 2022 National Profile of Local Health Departments (Profile) study to ensure diversity in LHD size. Four virtual focus groups were conducted in Fall 2022 with a total of 16 LHD leaders surveyed in Profile, who were still in their positions. Focus group transcripts were then coded by two independent coders and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Findings

Four common domains arose from the data: aggravating factors of harassment, content and formats of harassment, protective factors, and effects on individuals and on the workforce.

Conclusion

Findings suggest that harassment was pervasive with many forms and impacts on the LHD leaders and workforce overall. Recommendations are proposed for the local as well as federal partners because the public health system is threatened without immediate, substantial, and coordinated solutions to address harassment and offer protection.

Make No Apologies: Fear of Negative Evaluation, Depressive Symptoms, and the Mediating Role of Accounting for COVID-Safe Behavior Amongst People at High-Risk for Severe Illness

With the goal of understanding unique and important threats to the mental health of people who are especially vulnerable to severe illness as a result of COVID-19, this study investigated associations between such individuals' fear of negative evaluation, tendency to "account for" practicing COVID-safe behaviors, and depressive symptoms. Grounded in perspectives on self-presentation, normative influence, and cognitive dissonance, we hypothesized that fear of negative evaluation would relate positively to accounting for COVID-safe behaviors, which, in turn, would associate positively with increased depressive symptoms. The results showed that increased fear of negative evaluation predicted an increased use of apologies and excuses, which in turn were positively related to depressive symptoms. Justifications for COVID-safe behaviors were not significantly associated with either fear of evaluation or depressive symptoms. The practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Meaningful Media Experiences and Vaccination Message Communication: An Experimental Study with Vaccine-Hesitant Individuals

Guided by the eudaimonic media and the health persuasion literature, the current study explores how meaningful emotions elicited from entertainment media exposure decreases anti-vaccination attitudes among vaccine-hesitant individuals. Results of a between-subjects experiment (N = 409) showed that participants who viewed meaningful music videos (vs. neutral videos) and vaccination messages embedded in the user-generated comments reported more empathy, less reactance, and less anti-vaccination attitudes. Multigroup analysis revealed that this association was held for participants who were hesitant about whether they would get fully vaccinated, but not for participants who were determined to not get vaccinated. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Hurt on Both Sides: Political Differences in Health and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Republicans and conservatives report better self-rated health and well-being compared to Democrats and liberals, yet they are more likely to reside in geographic areas with heavy COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. This harmed health on "both sides" of political divides, occurring in a time of rapid sociopolitical upheaval, warrants the revisiting of psychosocial mechanisms linked to political health differences. Drawing on national Gallup data (early 2021), we find that predicted differences in health or well-being vary substantially by ideology, party, voting behavior, and policy beliefs, with model fit depending on how politics are measured. Differences in self-rated health, psychological distress, happiness, trouble sleeping, and delayed health care tend to reveal worse outcomes for Democrats or liberals. Such differences often are reduced to insignificance by some combination of mastery, meritocratic beliefs, perceived social support, and COVID-19-related exposures and attitudes. Policy beliefs predict health differences most robustly across outcomes and mechanism adjustments.

Associations Between Psychopathological Symptom Severity Amid the Pandemic and the Childhood Sociodemographic Environment

It is well-documented that childhood socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with various health conditions in adulthood. Here, we examine the extent to which childhood SES is associated with COVID-19 pandemic anxiety and depression. Participants (n = 212), recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk, were assessed for depression and anxiety in February 2022 for both the current context and retrospective self-perceived early pandemic depression and anxiety (April 2020). Participants also reported childhood SES and current demographics. Consistent with predated findings, we show a strong, positive correlation between depression and anxiety under both conditions. Paternal unemployment in childhood was associated with increased anxiety, while maternal occupation was not. High household education in childhood was generally associated with greater anxiety and depression, similar to past studies examining education levels and depression. However, the shift from high school to post-secondary degrees (trade school and associate's) was associated with decreased anxiety and depression, which may reflect "essential work" careers, therefore indicating a dualism. Growing up in crowded, de-individualized spaces was associated with lower anxiety and depression, suggesting better conditioning for the imposition of COVID-19 quarantines. Pandemic-related unemployment was associated with an increase in anxiety and depression. Strong political views, regardless of ideology, were associated with increased anxiety. Finally, participants in our cohort perceived their mental health to be worse in the early pandemic for anxiety and depression, up 6.6% and 7.9%, respectively. Our work suggests a complex relationship between SES, demographics, and anxiety and depression during the pandemic. These findings emphasize the importance of exploring the dynamics between early SES and mental health in adulthood, particularly during extended societal stressors.

Deconstructing COVID Time

This essay explores the problem of trust and truth in states of emergency. Drawing on Giorgio Agamben's theory of biopolitics and his objections to political managerialism I argue that the real problem exposed by the pandemic was not a lack of trust in authority but an unscientific and uncritical attachment to expertise.

Characteristics associated with attitudes and behaviors towards mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic: The Trojan Pandemic Response Initiative

BACKGROUND

Attitudes and behaviors towards mask wearing may influence the ability to reduce transmission of COVID-19 and other diseases.

METHODS

University students, staff, and faculty (N = 9653) responded to an email invitation to complete electronic surveys (November 2021 and April 2022). Surveys included 19 items measuring attitudes and behaviors towards mask wearing from the Understanding America Study. Linear mixed models including variables for sex, age group, division, race and ethnicity, political affiliation, and history of COVID-19, were used to estimate the mean difference of the mean score for attitudes and behavior between Time 1 (November 2021) and Time 2 (April 2022).

RESULTS

Participants were mostly female (62.1%), students (70.6%), White (39.5%) and Asian (34.7%). More than half identified their political affiliation as Democrat (65.5%). Characteristic variable-by-time interactions for difference in mean mask attitude scores difference were significant at Time 1 (T1) and Time 2 (T2) between Black and White participants (B = 0.18 (0.05), 95% CI: 0.07, 0.28, p = 0.001), Asian and White participants (B = 0.07 (0.02), 95% CI: 0.03-0.12, p = 0.001), participants with self-reported history of COVID-19 and no history of COVID-19 (B= -0.13 (0.02), 95% CI: -0.07, -0.18, p < 0.0001), females and males (B = 0.07 (0.02), 95% CI: 0.03, 0.11, p = 0.001), Republicans and Democrats (B= -0.18 (0.04), 95%CI: -0.26, -0.10, p < 0.0001) and Independents and Democrats (B= -0.10 (0.03), 95%CI: -0.15, -0.05, p < 0.0001). Mean difference in mean scores for mask behaviors at Time and Time 2 were significant between participants with COVID-19 and participants who did not have COVID-19 (B= -0.12 (0.04), 95% CI: -0.19, -0.04, p = 0.004), students compared to faculty and staff (B=-0.22 (0.05), -0.32, -0.12, p < 0.0001), between Republicans and Democrats (B-= -0.16 (0.07), 95% CI: -0.28, -0.03, p = 0.020, and between Independents and Democrats (B=-0.08 (0.04), 95% CI: -0.16, -0.002, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Race and ethnicity, political affiliation, and division may affect attitudes and behaviors in mask wearing. Further investigation into how characteristics influence public health measures such as mask wearing is needed to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus, other infectious diseases, and future pandemics.

Experienced Racism and Discrimination and Psychological Distress amid Different Phases of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Wisconsin

The SARS-COV-2 pandemic created an unprecedented crisis and raised concerns about racial discrimination and psychological distress. We assessed trends in COVID-19-related racism and discrimination irrespective of infection status and changes in emotional health and mental well-being outcomes due to experienced racism and discrimination. Using three waves of the Wisconsin COVID-19 Community Impact Survey (2020-2021), we compared demographics of respondents categorized by two mutually exclusive groups: reporting vs. not reporting COVID-19-related racism and discrimination. Using longitudinal logistic-multivariable regressions, we modeled changes in racism and discrimination-induced stress and 4-item patient health questionnaire screening for anxiety and depression (PHQ-4) associated with experiencing racism and discrimination. Prevalence of reported experiencing COVID-19-related racism and discrimination increased among adult Wisconsinites between 2020 and 2021: 6.28% in Wave 1, 11.13% in Wave 2 (Pearson's chi-square Wave 1 vs 2=16.96, p<.001) vs. 10.87% in Wave 3 (chi-square, Wave 1 vs 3=14.99, p<.001). Experiencing COVID-19-related racism and discrimination was associated with a higher likelihood stress (OR=3.15, 95% CI 2.32-4.29) and a higher PHQ-4 score (coeff=0.63, 95% CI 0.32-0.94). Relative to White respondents, racial/ethnic minorities had a higher likelihood of feeling stress: Black OR=7.13, 95% CI 4.68-10.85; Hispanics OR=3.81, 95% CI 2.11-6.89; and other races OR=2.61, 95% CI 1.51-4.53. Estimated associations varied across racial/ethnic groups, age groups, and survey waves. Our study showed that experienced COVID-19-related racism and discrimination increased during the first 2 years of the pandemic and was associated with greater psychological distress among Wisconsinites of all racial/ethnic groups. Public health policies promoting inclusiveness should be implemented to reduce (COVID-19-related) racism and discrimination and its long-term effects on mental health and well-being.

The Role of Political Belief in COVID-19 Vaccine Resistance, Virus Transmission, and Closure Policy Response

We employ unique panel data on the universe of COVID-19 vaccination and infection cases in Israel to examine the role of political belief in COVID-19 vaccine uptake, virus transmission, and closure policy response. The paper identifies political beliefs based on statistical area votes in national elections held in Israel on the eve of the COVID-19 outbreak in March 2020. Unlike the U.S. and elsewhere, pandemic policy intervention in Israel was broadly supported by politicians across the belief spectrum. As such, household response to virus risk was not biased by contemporaneous partisan disagreement and debate among political leaders. Findings show, all things equal, that in the wake of emergent and localized virus risk, voters in politically right-of-center and religious areas displayed substantially higher odds of both vaccine resistance and virus transmission as compared to their left-center counterparts. Moreover, political belief is highly salient to aggregate pandemic outcomes. Model simulation shows that had all areas responded to virus risk with the more risk-averse behaviors of left-of-center areas, the number of vaccinations nationwide would have increased by 15 percent. That same scenario results in a full 30 percent reduction in total infection cases. Results also show that coercive policy measures such as economic closure were more effective in reducing virus transmission among less risk-averse right-wing and religious areas. Findings provide new evidence of the role of political belief in household response to health risks. Results further underscore the importance of timely, targeted messaging and intervention among divergent political belief groups to reduce vaccine hesitancy and enhance disease control. Future studies should explore the external validity of findings, including the use of individual voter data, if available, to evaluate political belief effects.

How Ethical Ideology Influences Mask-Wearing Intention in a Pandemic: The Mediating Role of Moral Norms and Threat to Freedom

The present study examined how two types of ethical ideologies (idealism, and relativism) influenced behavioral intention to wear a mask during the COVID-19 pandemic through two appraisals (moral norms, and threat to freedom) of a mask-wearing issue. A total of 823 responses were collected through a cross-sectional survey, and 776 responses were used for testing hypotheses. The study found that idealism has a significant indirect effect on behavioral intention through increased moral norms and decreased threat to freedom. Also, the study revealed that relativism has a significant indirect effect on behavioral intention through increased threat to freedom.

Trust in science and scientists among university students, staff, and faculty of a large, diverse university in Los Angeles during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Trojan Pandemic Response Initiative

BACKGROUND

Mistrust in science and scientists may adversely influence the rate of COVID-19 vaccination and undermine public health initiatives to reduce virus transmission.

METHODS

Students, staff and faculty responded to an email invitation to complete an electronic survey. Surveys included 21-items from the Trust in Science and Scientists Inventory questionnaire. Responses were coded so higher scores indicated a higher trust in science and scientists, A linear regression model including sex, age group, division, race and ethnicity, political affiliation, and history of COVID-19, was used to determine variables significantly associated with trust in science and scientists scores at the p < 0.05 level.

RESULTS

Participants were mostly female (62.1%), Asian (34.7%) and White (39.5%) and students (70.6%). More than half identified their political affiliation as Democrat (65%). In the final regression model, all races and ethnicities had significantly lower mean trust in science and scientists scores than White participants [Black ([Formula: see text]= -0.42, 95% CI: -0.55, -0.43, p < 0.001); Asian ([Formula: see text]= -0.20, 95% CI: -0.24, -0.17, p < 0.001); Latinx ([Formula: see text]= -0.22, 95% CI: -0.27, -0.18, p < 0.001); Other ([Formula: see text]= -0.19, 95% CI: -0.26, -0.11, p < 0.001)]. Compared to those identifying as Democrat, all other political affiliations had significantly lower mean scores. [Republican ([Formula: see text] =-0.49, 95% CI: -0.55, -0.43, p < 0.0001); Independent ([Formula: see text] =-0.29, 95% CI: -0.33, -0.25, p < 0.0001); something else ([Formula: see text] =-0.19, 95% CI: -0.25, -0.12, p < 0.0001)]. Having had COVID-19 ([Formula: see text]= -0.10, 95% CI: -0.15, -0.06, p < 0.001) had significantly lower scores compared to those who did not have COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Despite the setting of a major research University, trust in science is highly variable. This study identifies characteristics that could be used to target and curate educational campaigns and university policies to address the COVID19 and future pandemics.

Conspiracies, Misinformation and Resistance to Public Health Measures During COVID-19 in White Nationalist Online Communication

Recent studies documented alarming growth in antiscientific discourse among extremist groups online and especially the relatively high anti-vaccine attitudes among White Nationalists (WN). In light of accelerated politization of COVID-19 containment measures and the expansion of containment to lockdowns, masking, and more, we examine current sentiment, themes and argumentation in white nationalist discourse, regarding the COVID-19 vaccines and other containment measure. We use unsupervised machine learning approaches to analyze all conversations posted in the “Covid-19” sub-forum on Stormfront between January 2020 and December 2021 (N = 9642 posts). Additionally, we manually analyze sentiment and argumentation in 300 randomly sampled posts. We identified four discursive themes: Science, Conspiracies, Sociopolitical, and Containment. Anti-containment sentiment was substantially higher than what was found in prior work done before COVID-19regarding vaccines and other containment measures. The negativity was driven mostly by arguments adapted from the anti-vaccine movement and not by WN ideology.

State mask mandates and psychological reactance theory: The role of political partisanship and COVID-19 risk in mask adoption and resistance

RATIONALE

Psychological reactance theory was applied to examine the implications of state-level mask mandates in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the role of political partisanship and COVID-19 risk on changes in self-reported mask wearing before and after the imposition and removal of state mask mandates.

METHOD

Secondary data from several sources were aggregated about self-reported mask wearing behavior, state mandates, COVID-19 infection rates, and state-level political partisanship. Difference-in-differences tests were performed using logistic regression to evaluate whether change in mask wearing behavior following the imposition or removal of a mandate was greater in states based on state-level political partisanship and COVID-19 infection rates.

RESULTS

Although mask adoption generally increased following mandates, the amount of increase was smaller in more Republican states compared to more Democratic states. Mask wearing generally decreased following the removal of mandates, with greater decreases when COVID-19 infection rates were lower.

CONCLUSION

The results collectively offer insights about the nuanced role of contextual factors in the adoption and resistance to masks following state mask mandates. Partisanship was important in responses to the imposition of state mask mandates and COVID-19 risk played a critical role in responses to mandate removal.

Exploration of the impact of political ideology disparity on COVID-19 transmission in the United States

BACKGROUND

Based on individual-level studies, previous literature suggested that conservatives and liberals in the United States had different perceptions and behaviors when facing the COVID-19 threat. From a state-level perspective, this study further explored the impact of personal political ideology disparity on COVID-19 transmission before and after the emergence of Omicron.

METHODS

A new index was established, which depended on the daily cumulative number of confirmed cases in each state and the corresponding population size. Then, by using the 2020 United States presidential election results, the values of the built index were further divided into two groups concerning the political party affiliation of the winner in each state. In addition, each group was further separated into two parts, corresponding to the time before and after Omicron predominated. Three methods, i.e., functional principal component analysis, functional analysis of variance, and function-on-scalar linear regression, were implemented to statistically analyze and quantify the impact.

RESULTS

Findings reveal that the disparity of personal political ideology has caused a significant discrepancy in the COVID-19 crisis in the United States. Specifically, the findings show that at the very early stage before the emergence of Omicron, Democratic-leaning states suffered from a much greater severity of the COVID-19 threat but, after July 2020, the severity of COVID-19 transmission in Republican-leaning states was much higher than that in Democratic-leaning states. Situations were reversed when the Omicron predominated. Most of the time, states with Democrat preferences were more vulnerable to the threat of COVID-19 than those with Republican preferences, even though the differences decreased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The individual-level disparity of political ideology has impacted the nationwide COVID-19 transmission and such findings are meaningful for the government and policymakers when taking action against the COVID-19 crisis in the United States.

Municipal Ethnic Composition and Disparities in COVID-19 Infections in New Jersey: A Blinder-Oaxaca Decomposition Analysis

COVID-19 has disproportionally impacted Latinx and Black communities in the US. Our study aimed to extend the understanding of ethnic disparities in COVID-19 case rates by using a unique dataset of municipal case rates across New Jersey (NJ) during the first 17 months of the pandemic. We examined the extent to which there were municipal-level ethnic disparities in COVID-19 infection rates during three distinct spikes in case rates over this period. Furthermore, we used the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition analysis to identify municipal-level exposure and vulnerability factors that contributed to ethnic disparities and how the contributions of these factors changed across the three initial waves of infection. Two clear results emerged. First, in NJ, the COVID-19 infection risk disproportionally affected Latinx communities across all three waves during the first 17 months of the pandemic. Second, the exposure and vulnerability factors that most strongly contributed to higher rates of infection in Latinx and Black communities changed over time as the virus, alongside medical and societal responses to it, also changed. These findings suggest that understanding and addressing ethnicity-based COVID-19 disparities will require sustained attention to the systemic and structural factors that disproportionately place historically marginalized ethnic communities at greater risk of contracting COVID-19.

Leveraging 13 million responses to the U.S. COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey to examine vaccine hesitancy, vaccination, and mask wearing, January 2021-February 2022

BACKGROUND

The urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic called upon the joint efforts from the scientific and private sectors to work together to track vaccine acceptance and prevention behaviors.

METHODS

Our study utilized individual responses to the Delphi Group at Carnegie Mellon University U.S. COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey, in partnership with Facebook. We retrieved survey data from January 2021 to February 2022 (n = 13,426,245) to examine contextual and individual-level predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, vaccination, and mask wearing in the United States. Adjusted logistic regression models were developed to examine individual and ZIP code predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination status. Given the COVID-19 vaccine was rolled out in phases in the U.S. we conducted analyses stratified by time, January 2021-May 2021 (Time 1) and June 2021-February 2022 (Time 2).

RESULTS

In January 2021 only 9% of U.S. Facebook respondents reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, and 45% were vaccine hesitant. By February 2022, 80% of U.S. Facebook respondents were vaccinated and only 18% were vaccine hesitant. Individuals who were older, held higher educational degrees, worked in white collar jobs, wore a mask most or all the time, and identified as white and Asian had higher COVID-19 vaccination rates and lower vaccine hesitancy across Time 1 and Time 2. Essential workers and blue-collar occupations had lower COVID vaccinations and higher vaccine hesitancy. By Time 2, all adults were eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine, but blacks and multiracial individuals had lower vaccination and higher vaccine hesitancy compared to whites. Those 55 years and older and females had higher odds of wearing masks most or all the time. Protective service, construction, and installation and repair occupations had lower odds of wearing masks. ZIP Code level percentage of the population with a bachelors' which was associated with mask wearing, higher vaccination, and lower vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSION

Associations found in earlier phases of the pandemic were generally found to also be present later in the pandemic, indicating stability in inequities. Additionally, inequities in these important outcomes suggests more work is needed to bridge gaps to ensure that the burden of COVID-19 risk does not disproportionately fall upon subgroups of the population.

Public policy and conspiracies: The case of mandates

Although conspiracy theories are only endorsed by a minority, conspiracy theories can nonetheless compromise public health measures to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Individuals who endorse conspiracy theories were less likely to wear masks, comply with social distancing, or get vaccinated. This poses a challenge to public health policy, in particular because vaccine uptake lags behind targets because of resistance from a relatively small, but highly vocal, number of people. One policy tool is to enact vaccine mandates, which, while controversial, have successfully increased vaccination uptake. In this article, we review the evidence about whether mandates can be successful, and whether they trigger increased opposition and conspiracy beliefs. We discuss the implications for using mandates in public health policy and argue that decisions about mandates need to be weighed against the consequences of alternative measures-which may also increase conspiracy beliefs albeit for different reasons.

COVID-19 mass media coverage in English and public reactions: a West-East comparison via Facebook posts

Newspapers and other mass media outlets are critical in shaping public opinion on a variety of contemporary issues, including the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examines how the pandemic is portrayed in the news and how the public reacted differently in the West and East using archival data from Facebook posts about COVID-19 news by English-language mass media between January 2020 and April 2022 (N = 711,646). Specifically, we employed the Valence Aware Dictionary and sEntiment Reasoner (Vader) to measure the news tone on each COVID-19 news item shared on Facebook by mass media outlets. In addition, we calculated a polarity score based on Facebook special reactions (i.e., love, angry, sad, wow, haha, and care) received by each post to measure public reactions toward it. We discovered that people in Western countries reacted significantly more negatively to COVID-19 news than their East counterparts, despite the fact that the news itself, in aggregate, generally contained a relatively similar level of neutral tone in both West and East media. The implications of these distinctions are discussed in greater detail.

Conservative Media Use and COVID-19 Related Behavior: The Moderating Role of Media Literacy Variables

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no vaccine to cure or slow its impact due to the novelty of the virus, nor were there were any other standardized measures to handle its spread. Yet, despite the detrimental consequences of the pandemic and its impact on people's lives, the behavior of individuals to combat the pandemic was not necessarily consistent with official guidelines. To make things worse, the pandemic was highly politicized in countries such as the U.S. With a help of a national survey from the U.S., we examine the associations between media literacy variables and willingness to perform recommended COVID-19 related health behavior. Moreover, we also examine the moderating role of conservative media use in this relationship. Our findings show that conservative media use was negatively associated with these protective behaviors, and that both media literacy variables were positively related with willingness to perform recommended COVID-19 related health behavior. Our results show that media literacy can mitigate some of the impact of conservative media use on individuals. Our findings help understand the complexity of protective behavior against the virus during a highly politicized pandemic.

"I feel it in my gut:" Epistemic Motivations, Political Beliefs, and Misperceptions of COVID-19 and the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election

This project examines the intersection of political constructs and epistemic motivations as they relate to belief in misinformation. How we value the origins of knowledge - through feelings and intuition or evidence and data - has important implications for our susceptibility to misinformation. This project explores how these epistemic motivations correlate with political ideology, party identification, and favorability towards President Trump, and how epistemic and political constructs predict belief in misinformation about COVID and the 2020 election. Results from a US national survey from Nov-Dec 2020 illustrate that Republicans, conservatives, and those favorable towards President Trump held greater misperceptions about COVID and the 2020 election. Additionally, epistemic motivations were associated with political preferences; Republicans and conservatives were more likely to reject evidence, and Trump supporters more likely to value feelings and intuition. Mediation analyses support the proposition that Trump favorability, Republicanism, and conservatism may help account for the relationships between epistemic motivations and misperceptions. Results are discussed in terms of the messaging strategies of right-wing populist movements, and the implications for democracy and public health.