It's Politics, Isn't It? Investigating Direct and Indirect Influences of Political Orientation on Risk Perception of COVID-19

Longitudinal attenuation in political polarization: Evidence from COVID-19 vaccination adherence in Brazil

BACKGROUND

While political polarization in policy opinions, preferences, and observance is well established, little is known about whether and how such divisions evolve, and possibly attenuate, over time. Using the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil as the backdrop, we examine the longitudinal evolution of a highly relevant and polarizing policy: adherence to the COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

Studies 1 (N = 3346) and 2 (N = 10,214) use nationwide surveys to document initial differences and subsequent changes in vaccination adherence between conservatives ("Bolsonaristas") and non-conservatives ("non-Bolsonaristas"). Study 3 (N = 742) uses an original dataset to investigate belief changes among conservatives and their association with asymmetric changes in vaccination adherence.

RESULTS

Despite substantial differences at the early stages of rollout, the gap in vaccination adherence between conservatives and non-conservatives significantly decreased with the passage of time, driven essentially by a much faster uptake among the initially most skeptic-the conservatives. Study 3 demonstrates that the asymmetric changes in vaccination adherence were associated with meaningful belief changes among the conservatives, especially about the perceived effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines and the expected adherence of peers to the vaccination campaign.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, these studies show that, in a context where the superiority of the promoted policy becomes clear over time and individuals have the opportunity to revisit prior beliefs, even intense political polarization can be attenuated.

Applying the extended parallel process model to understand households' responses to tornado and earthquake risks in Oklahoma

Oklahoma is a multihazard environment where both natural (e.g., tornadoes) and technological hazards (e.g., induced seismicity) are significant, making Oklahoma a unique setting to better understand how to manage and prepare for multiple hazards. While studies have attempted to understand drivers of hazard adjustments, few have focused on the overall number of adjustments undertaken instead of individual adjustments or adjustments in a multihazard environment. To address these gaps, we employ a survey sample of 866 households in Oklahoma to understand households' danger control responses (protective hazard adjustments) for tornado and earthquake risks in Oklahoma. We apply the extended parallel processing model (EPPM) to categorize respondents according to their relative level of perceived threat and efficacy of protective actions in predicting the number of hazard adjustments they intend to or have adopted in response to tornadoes and induced earthquakes. In line with the EPPM, we found that households have the highest number of danger control responses when their perceived threat and efficacy are both high. Counter to the EPPM literature, we found low threat coupled with high efficacy moved some individuals toward the adoption of danger control responses in response to both tornadoes and earthquakes. When households have high efficacy, threat appraisals matter in tornado danger control responses but not in earthquake danger control responses. This EPPM categorization opens new research approaches for studies of natural and technological hazards. This study also provides information for local officials and emergency managers making mitigation and preparedness investments and policies.

Political ideology shapes risk and benefit judgments of COVID-19 vaccines

In April 2021, the use of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine was paused to investigate whether it had caused serious blood clots to a small number of women (six out of 6.8 million Americans who had been administered that vaccine). As these events were unfolding, we surveyed a sample of Americans (N = 625) to assess their reactions to this news, whether they supported the pausing of the vaccine, and potential psychological factors underlying their decision. In addition, we employed automated text analyses as a supporting method to more classical quantitative measures. Results showed that political ideology influenced the support for the pausing of the vaccine; liberals were more likely to oppose it than conservatives. In addition, the effect of political ideology was mediated by the difference between perceived benefit and risk and the language style used to produce reasons in support (or against) the decision to pause the vaccine. Liberals perceived the benefit of vaccines higher than the risk, used a more analytic language style when stating their reasons, and had a more positive attitude toward the vaccine. We discuss the implications of our findings considering vaccine hesitancy and risk perception during the COVID-19 pandemic.

People's political views, perceived social norms, and individualism shape their privacy concerns for and acceptance of pandemic control measures that use individual-level georeferenced data

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic became a major global health crisis, many COVID-19 control measures that use individual-level georeferenced data (e.g., the locations of people's residences and activities) have been used in different countries around the world. Because these measures involve some disclosure risk and have the potential for privacy violations, people's concerns for geoprivacy (locational privacy) have recently heightened as a result, leading to an urgent need to understand and address the geoprivacy issues associated with COVID-19 control measures that use data on people's private locations.

METHODS

We conducted an international cross-sectional survey in six study areas (n = 4260) to examine how people's political views, perceived social norms, and individualism shape their privacy concerns, perceived social benefits, and acceptance of ten COVID-19 control measures that use individual-level georeferenced data. Multilevel linear regression models were used to examine these effects. We also applied multilevel structure equation models (SEMs) to explore the direct, indirect, and mediating effects among the variables.

RESULTS

We observed a tradeoff relationship between people's privacy concerns and the acceptance (and perceived social benefits) of the control measures. People's perceived social tightness and vertical individualism are positively associated with their acceptance and perceived social benefits of the control measures, while horizontal individualism has a negative association. Further, people with conservative political views and high levels of individualism (both vertical and horizontal) have high levels of privacy concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results first suggest that people's privacy concerns significantly affect their perceived social benefits and acceptance of the COVID-19 control measures. Besides, our results also imply that strengthening social norms may increase people's acceptance and perceived social benefits of the control measures but may not reduce people's privacy concerns, which could be an obstacle to the implementation of similar control measures during future pandemics. Lastly, people's privacy concerns tend to increase with their conservatism and individualism.

Comparing the Effect of Declarative vs. Procedural Knowledge on Health Behavior Moderated by Outrage Factors

Knowledge's effect on behavioral responses in a health crisis has been a point of inquiry in many empirical studies that obtained significant findings. However, a variety of knowledge types has been considered in these studies rarely. This study compared the effect of declarative vs. procedural knowledge on behavioral responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, we examined whether outrage factors, which refer to perceived risk characteristics that are likely to elicit emotional responses, can moderate cognitive knowledge's effect. Data were collected with a survey conducted five months after the first COVID-19 case was confirmed in South Korea. A total of 1,000 respondents completed questions on the two types of knowledge, risk perception, and health behaviors in the pandemic crisis, and three different outrage factors. The results showed that procedural knowledge on how-to-do something was associated significantly with the health behaviors in the crisis, while the declarative knowledge that involves knowing that "something is the case" was not. Further, the outrage factors moderated knowledge's effect in such a way that procedural knowledge's influence on health behaviors diminished when the respondents perceived that the pandemic was uncontrollable. On the other hand, procedural knowledge's effect increased when the outrage factor of fairness was heightened. The implications are discussed in the context of studies of knowledge's effect and the outrage factors' moderation.

Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic: Mortality impacts in Poland versus European Union

With COVID-19 moving toward an endemic phase, it is worthwhile to identify lessons from the pandemic that can promote the effective strengthening of national health systems. We look at a single country, Poland, and compare it with the European Union (EU) to contrast approaches and outcomes. Among possible relevant indices, we examine characteristics of COVID-19-related mortality and excess all-cause mortality from March 2020 to February 2022. We demonstrate that both the numbers of COVID-related deaths and all-cause deaths in Poland were much higher than the EU average for most months in the study period. We juxtapose the percentage of fully vaccinated population and cumulative COVID-19 deaths per million people for EU Member States and show that typically higher vaccination rates are accompanied by lower mortality. We also show that, in addition to medical science, the use of a risk science toolbox would have been valuable in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland. Better and more widespread understanding of risk perception of the pandemic and the COVID-19 vaccines would have improved managing vaccine hesitancy, potentially leading to more effective pro-vaccination measures.

The association between the risk perceptions of COVID-19, trust in the government, political ideologies, and socio-demographic factors: A year-long cross-sectional study in South Korea

Risk perception research, targeting the general public, necessitates the study of the multi-faceted aspects of perceived risk through a holistic approach. This study aimed to investigate the association between the two dimensions of risk perception of COVID-19, i.e., risk as a feeling and analysis, trust in the current government, political ideologies, and socio-demographic factors in South Korea. This study used a year-long repeated cross-sectional design, in which a national sample (n = 23,018) participated in 23 consecutive telephone surveys from February 2020 to February 2021. Most factors differed in the magnitude and direction of their relationships with the two dimensions of risk perception. However, trust in the current government, alone, delineated an association in the same direction for both dimensions, i.e., those with a lower level of trust exhibited higher levels of cognitive and affective risk perception. Although these results did not change significantly during the one-year observation period, they are related to the political interpretation of risk. This study revealed that affective and cognitive risk perceptions addressed different dimensions of risk perception. These findings could help governments and health authorities better understand the nature and mechanisms of public risk perception when implementing countermeasures and policies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and other public health emergencies.

Medical capacity investment for epidemic disease: The effects of policymaker's confidence and public trust

Due to the server bed shortage, which has raised ethical dilemmas in the earliest days of the COVID-19 crisis, medical capacity investment has become a vital decision-making issue in the attempt to contain the epidemic. Furthermore, economic strength has failed to explain the significant performance difference across countries in combatting COVID-19. Unlike common diseases, epidemic diseases add substantial unpredictability, complexity, and uncertainty to decision-making. Knowledge miscalibration on epidemiological uncertainties by policymaker's over- and underconfidence can seriously impact policymaking. Ineffective risk communication may lead to conflicting and incoherent information transmission. As a result, public reactions and attitudes could be influenced by policymakers' confidence due to the level of public trust, which eventually affects the degree to which an epidemic spreads. To uncover the impacts of policymakers' confidence and public trust on the medical capacity investment, we establish epidemic diffusion models to characterize how transmission evolves with (and without) vaccination and frame the capacity investment problem as a newsvendor problem. Our results show that if the public fully trusts the public health experts, the policymaker's behavioral bias is always harmful, but its effect on cost increment is marginal. If a policymaker's behavior induces public reactions due to public trust, both the spread of the epidemic and the overall performance will be significantly affected, but such impacts are not always harmful. Decision bias may be beneficial when policymakers are pessimistic or highly overconfident. Having an opportunity to amend initially biased decisions can debias a particular topic but has a limited cost-saving effect.

Factors Affecting the Public Intention to Repeat the COVID-19 Vaccination: Implications for Vaccine Communication

Although most of the pandemic-related mandatory restrictions have been lifted or eased, vaccination is still recommended as an effective measure to minimize the damage from COVID-19 infection. Since COVID-19 eradication is unlikely, it is necessary to understand the factors affecting the public's vaccination intention when COVID-19 vaccination is continuously recommended. This study aims to explore the factors that affect the intention to repeat the COVID-19 vaccination in South Korea. An online survey was conducted in January 2022 with adults living in Gyeonggi-do, South Korea. In a hierarchical logistic regression analysis, sociodemographic factors, COVID-19 infection-related factors, COVID-19 vaccination-related factors, sociocultural factors, and communication factors were taken into account. In this study, more than three-quarters (78.1%) of Koreans were willing to repeat the COVID-19 vaccination. People who had high-risk perceptions, had been vaccinated against COVID-19 at least once, had more authoritarian attitudes, regarded the vaccination as a social responsibility, and had positive attitudes toward health authorities' regular briefings were more likely to repeat the vaccination. In contrast, those who directly or indirectly experienced COVID-19 vaccine side effects and who showed psychological reactance against the government's vaccination recommendation were less likely to repeat the vaccination. Our research indicates that empathetic communication, promotion of the prosocial aspect of vaccination, and regular and transparent provision of vaccine information are essential for promoting the intention to repeat the COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19-related excess mortality - an overview of the current evidence

Analysis of excess deaths, defined as the difference in the total number of deaths in an emergency compared to the number of deaths expected under normal conditions, allows a more reliable assessment of the impact on health systems caused by the global threat of SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2). So far, data for the two years of the pandemic (2020-2021) indicates the occurrence of 14.9 million excess deaths according to WHO (World Health Organization) estimates. The purpose of the analysis conducted was to define the concept and identify the causes of excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inconsistent and unreliable death registration systems; overburdened health systems in low- and middle-income countries; reduced access to medical services for patients with health problems other than COVID-19; the introduction of social distancing and lockdown rules, which translated into increased deaths from psychiatric illnesses and addictions; political considerations and media messages that interfered with vaccination acceptance and adherence; and the additional impact of other natural disasters (hurricanes, floods, drought) were identified as the most important reasons for excess deaths occurrence. The correct identification of country-specific factors and the correct response and countermeasures taken appear crucial in terms of limiting the negative impact of the current pandemic, but also of future threats of a similar nature, in order to reduce excess deaths.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and GAD: The role of risk perception and vaccination status

Background and purpose

As Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) continues to spread around the world, COVID-19 vaccines are the most effective weapons against the global pandemic. Yet vaccine hesitancy remains a serious problem and can pose certain hazards to individuals' mental health, such as rising anxiety. Therefore, based on Self-Discrepancy Theory, this paper aims to explore the role of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy on individual generalized anxiety disorder and its influence mechanisms through two studies.

Methods

Study one involved 654 Chinese participants using the Vaccine Hesitancy Questionnaire and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scale. In Study two, the Vaccine Hesitation Questionnaire, GAD-7 scale, Perceived Risk of COVID-19 pandemic scale, and Vaccination Status Questionnaire were used and data from 3,282 Chinese residents was collected.

Results

Vaccine hesitancy directly increases generalized anxiety disorder; risk perception plays a partial mediating role between vaccine hesitancy and generalized anxiety disorder; vaccination status moderated vaccine hesitancy's effect on risk perception and generalized anxiety disorder.

Conclusion

Vaccine hesitancy predicts generalized anxiety disorder through risk perception, but the mediating role of risk perception is moderated by vaccination status, which means that for the vaccinated group when their vaccine hesitancy is reduced, it will be easier to reduce the risk perception and thus the generalized anxiety disorder.

Comparing coronavirus (COVID-19) and climate change perceptions: Implications for support for individual and collective-level policies

COVID-19 (coronavirus) and climate change are both global issues that have wide-reaching and serious consequences for human health, the economy, and social outcomes for populations around the world, and both require a combination of systemic governmental policies and community support for action. This paper compares people’s responses to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the United Kingdom (UK). A representative survey of the UK population (n = 1,518) conducted in November and December 2020 explored public perceptions of (a) personal and government responsibility, (b) efficacy and trust, and (c) support for policies to address the two issues. The results show that, while there are a number of similarities between coronavirus and climate change, major differences exist regarding individual action. In comparison to the coronavirus pandemic, people feel less personal responsibility, think that their own personal actions are less efficacious, and express lower levels of support for (in particular individual-level) policies to address climate change. These findings suggest that experiences from the coronavirus pandemic cannot directly be translated to climate change, and thus that climate change is likely to require different policy responses and framing.

Reliability but not bias: Developing a scale to measure preferred channels for risk information during the COVID pandemic

To develop a new measure of preferred sources for risk information, two studies asked respondents to indicate what channels they were reliant on for information about COVID-19, from 25 news channels ranging across the political spectrum. Unexpectedly, dependencies clustered around level of reliability rather than the political orientation of the news channel. In other words, each cluster included media channels from both the left and right side of the political spectrum, while dependencies clustered into sources that varied by the degree to which their content is reliable. Participants who turned to lower reliability channels indicated lower risk perceptions, less accurate probability estimations, reduced vaccination intentions, and lower protective behavioral intentions. Those inclined to use higher reliability channels indicated higher risk perceptions, more accurate probability estimations, increased vaccination intentions, and higher protective behavioral intentions. These relationships are discussed in terms of implications for our understanding of source reliance and risk perception, information sufficiency, and implications for both future research and public health interventions.

Effects of Psychological Discomfort on Social Networking Site (SNS) Usage Intensity During COVID-19

To cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries are implementing social measures. Social distancing, working from home, and non-face-to-face lectures have led to major changes in people's activities. Since face-to-face classes are restricted, students in higher education become to feel psychological and cognitive discomforts such as isolation and risk perception. The purpose of this study is to explore the effects of psychological discomforts on the social network site (SNS) usage intensity of University students. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), this study applied SmartPLS 3.3.9 to analyze 271 valid samples. The results show that the affective risk perception significantly affects social distancing attitude. Cognitive risk perception is positively related to social distancing intention. In addition, cabin fever syndrome influences SNS usage intensity, affective risk perception, and cognitive risk perception. In conclusion, psychological discomfort partially affects the intensity of SNS use. Therefore, the government should set policies by reflecting citizens' mental difficulties and SNS activities together. Moreover, companies are needed to carefully consider the risk of the sense of isolation when marketing to SNS users.

Social cognition theories and behavior change in COVID-19: A conceptual review

The COVID-19 pandemic has had unprecedented health, economic, and social consequences worldwide. Although contact reductions and wearing face coverings have reduced infection rates, and vaccines have reduced illness severity, emergence of new variants of the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, and the shift from pandemic to endemic patterns of infection, highlights the importance of ongoing preventive behavior adherence to manage future outbreaks. Research applying social cognition theories may assist in explaining variance in these behaviors and inform the development of efficacious behavior change interventions to promote adherence. In the present article, we summarize research applying these theories to identify modifiable determinants of COVID-19 preventive behaviors and the mechanisms involved, and their utility in informing interventions. We identify limitations of these applications (e.g., overreliance on correlational data, lack of long-term behavioral follow-up), and suggest how they can be addressed. We demonstrate the virtue of augmenting theories with additional constructs (e.g., moral norms, anticipated regret) and processes (e.g., multiple action phases, automatic processes) to provide comprehensive, parsimonious behavioral explanations. We also outline how the theories contribute to testing mechanisms of action of behavioral interventions. Finally, we recommend future studies applying these theories to inform and test interventions to promote COVID-19 preventive behavior adherence.

Analyzing Risk Communication, Trust, Risk Perception, Negative Emotions, and Behavioral Coping Strategies During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China Using a Structural Equation Model

Objective

Risk communication and the degree of trust are major factors that affect the public's behavioral coping strategies and play an important role in emergency risk management. However, the internal formation mechanism involved in the public's psychological behavior remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the association among risk communication, trust, risk perception, negative emotions, and behavioral coping strategies during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and to identify and quantify the factors that influence public behavior.

Methods

We launched an online survey through social media from April to July 2020 in China. Relevant data were elicited using a self-designed questionnaire that mainly examined respondent characteristics, risk communication, trust, risk perception, negative emotions, protective coping behavior, and excessive coping behavior in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 735 valid responses were obtained. A structural equation model was then used to explore relationship pathways among the components.

Results

The higher the degree of risk communication (β = -0.10, p < 0.05) and trust (β = -0.22, p < 0.001), the lower the public risk perception. Risk communication and trust had a direct effect on public behavioral coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic. The higher the level of risk communication (β = 0.14, p < 0.001) or trust (β = 0.48, p < 0.001), the more likely it was that this would encourage the public to adopt protective coping behaviors, while the public was less likely to engage in excessive coping behaviors as the degree of trust increased (β = -0.12, p < 0.01). Risk perception influenced by poor risk communication and trust generated negative emotions (β = 0.31, p < 0.001), and such negative emotions further positively influenced public behavioral coping strategies (whether protective [β = 0.09, p < 0.05] or excessive [β = 0.24, p < 0.001] behaviors).

Conclusion

Risk communication, trust, risk perception, and negative emotions were significantly directly or indirectly related to public behavior. The findings provide useful information for emergency risk management and a theoretical basis for follow-up research on public coping behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic.

An application of the extended parallel process model to protective behaviors against COVID-19 in South Korea

This study applied the extended parallel process model (EPPM) to investigate the factors affecting people's preventive behaviors against COVID-19, and thereby, draw relevant policy implications for current and future other epidemics. The EPPM was used to examine the danger control and fear control responses, along with the separate effects of their sub-factors (perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, response efficacy, and self-efficacy) on personal hygiene behaviors, social distancing measures, and fatalism. In total, data from an online survey of 813 adults were analyzed. The results of multiple regression analysis showed a strong effect of self-efficacy on danger control (ß = 0.23 for personal hygiene behaviors, β = 0.26 for social distancing) and fear control responses (ß = -0.13 for fatalism). However, based on the type of control response, the effect of perceived susceptibility and perceived severity, which were the main factors in threat appraisal, was insignificant or marginally significant. Further, a higher perceived severity was associated with higher fatalism in the fear control response (ß = 0.09). Those who were currently employed performed fewer social distancing measures compared to those who did not (ß = -0.11), whereas there was no difference in personal hygiene behaviors. These results suggest that risk communication in emerging infectious disease crises should provide customized information on people who are hard to comply with social distancing. Besides delivering the message of self-efficacy, policies should be implemented to create a social environment in which individuals can practice social distancing without constraints.

Global systemic risk and resilience for novel coronavirus in postpandemic era

The ongoing pandemic has evolved and is posing diverse challenges for the world. Countermeasures for risks are needed to address both direct and indirect effects of disease on the healthcare system, economic and industrial sectors, governance, environment, transportation, energy, and communication systems. There are indicators of a forthcoming postpandemic era. The rethinking and reevaluation of policies adopted throughout the pandemic are ongoing to address cascading threats of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases. The first Special Issue introduced the topic. This second Special Issue describes international collaboration and innovation for pandemic risk and resilience, with a focus on future policy and operations of global systems toward a postandemic era.