Data from two MTurk studies with U.S. respondents (total N =1,153) revealed an ideological divide in adherence to social distancing guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, political conservatism inversely predicted compliance with behaviors aimed at preventing the spread of the COVID-19. Differences in reported social distancing were mediated by divergent perceptions of the health risk posed by COVID-19 (Studies 1 and 2), which were explained by differences in self-reported knowledge of COVID-19 (Study 1) and perceived media accuracy in covering the pandemic (Studies 1 and 2). The politicization of COVID-19 may have prompted conservatives to discount mainstream media reports of the severity of the virus, leading them to downplay its health risks and consequently adherence less to social distancing protocols. These effects hold when controlling for key demographic characteristics as well as psychological variables, including belief in science and COVID-19-related anxiety. Thus, political ideology may uniquely explain COVID-19 behavior.
At the state level within the United States, did political ideology predict the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19)? Throughout March 2020, the United States became the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic, recording the most cases of any country worldwide. The current research found that, at the state level within the United States, more conservative political ideology predicted delayed implementation of stay-at-home orders and more rapid spread of COVID-19. Effects were significant across two distinct operationalizations of political ideology and held over and above relevant covariates, suggesting a potentially unique role of political ideology in the United States’ COVID-19 outbreak. Considering political ideological factors may offer valuable insights into epidemiological processes surrounding COVID-19.
Traditionally, handshaking has conferred benefits for businesspeople—signaling politeness, establishing an intention to cooperate, and promoting deal-making. How might the psychological meaning of handshaking have shifted due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led handshaking to become touted as an imminent threat to public health? Through a highly powered, preregistered study (N = 595), we compared U.S. adults’ perceptions of a businessperson who shakes hands vs. refrains from shaking hands during the era of COVID-19. Participants judged handshakers more negatively than non-handshakers, in terms of both global attitude toward them (d = 2.21) and approval of their job performance (d = 2.66). Mediation analyses suggest that businesspeople were judged negatively for shaking hands principally because doing so made them seem less competent and less moral. Judgments of handshaking were more negative among liberals than conservatives and among women than men. To maximize others’ perceptions of them, it would behoove businesspeople to refrain from shaking hands for the foreseeable future. The months and years ahead may be an unprecedented time to rediscover the psychology of handshaking and its role in the workplace.
Vaccinating the public against COVID-19 is critical for pandemic recovery, yet a large proportion of people remain unwilling to get vaccinated. Beyond known factors like perceived vaccine safety or COVID-19 risk, an overlooked sentiment contributing to vaccine hesitancy may rest in moral cognition. Specifically, we theorize that a factor fueling hesitancy is perceived moral reproach: the feeling, among unvaccinated people, that vaccinated people are judging them as immoral. Through a highly powered, preregistered study of unvaccinated U.S. adults (total N = 846), we found that greater perceived moral reproach independently predicted stronger refusal to get vaccinated against COVID-19, over and above other relevant variables. Of 22 predictors tested, perceived moral reproach was the fifth strongest—stronger than perceived risk of COVID-19, underlying health conditions status, and trust in scientists. These findings suggest that considering the intersections of morality and upward social comparison may help to explain vaccine hesitancy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.