War Metaphors in Political Communication on Covid-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Castro Seixas E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8022596 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments around the world employed militaristic metaphors to draw attention to the dangers of the virus. But, do militaristic metaphors truly affect individuals' perceived threat of the COVID-19 virus and increase their support for corresponding restrictive policies? This study assessed the effects of fictitious newspaper articles that described COVID-19 policies using similarly negatively valenced metaphors but with differing militaristic connotations (e.g., "war" vs. "struggle"). Overall, data from three framing experiments (N = 1114) in Germany and the United States indicate limited evidence on the effectiveness of the tested militaristic metaphors. In the U.S. context, the non-militaristic concept of struggle was consistently more strongly associated with the desired outcomes than militaristic metaphors were. In Studies 2 and 3, we also tested whether reporting using a narrative or straightforward facts had additional influence on the framing effect. A congruency effect of the use of a narrative and of warfare metaphors was found in the German sample, but not in that of the United States. Results of post-experimental norming studies (N = 437) in both countries revealed that the metaphor of war is associated with people ascribing greater responsibility to their governments, whereas the concept of struggle triggers a sense of individual responsibility. These results are discussed in terms of the usefulness and appropriateness of militaristic metaphors in the context of a pandemic.
| S-EPMC8652818 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scientific debates in modern societies often blur the lines between the science that is being debated and the political, moral, and legal implications that come with its societal applications. This manuscript traces the origins of this phenomenon to professional norms within the scientific discipline and to the nature and complexities of modern science and offers an expanded model of science communication that takes into account the political contexts in which science communication takes place. In a second step, it explores what we know from empirical work in political communication, public opinion research, and communication research about the dynamics that determine how issues are debated and attitudes are formed in political environments. Finally, it discusses how and why it will be increasingly important for science communicators to draw from these different literatures to ensure that the voice of the scientific community is heard in the broader societal debates surrounding science.
| S-EPMC4183176 | biostudies-other
Project description:The COVID-19-the worst pandemic since the Spanish flu-has dramatically changed the world, with a significant number of people suffering from and dying of the disease. Some scholars argue that democratic governments are disadvantaged in coping with the current pandemic mainly because they cannot intervene in their citizens' lives as aggressively as their authoritarian counterparts. Other scholars, however, suggest that possible data manipulation may account for the apparent advantage of authoritarian countries. Taking such a possibility seriously, this paper analyzes the relationship between political regimes, data transparency, and COVID-19 deaths using cross-national data for over 108 countries, obtained from Worldometer COVID-19 Data, Polity V Project, Variety of Democracy (V-Dem) Project, HRV Transparency Project among other sources. Regression analyses indicate that authoritarian countries do not necessarily tend to have fewer COVID-19 deaths than their democratic counterparts after controlling for other factors, especially data transparency. The transparency variable itself, on the other hand, is positively correlated with the number of death cases more consistently (P <0.05). Overall, the estimation results point to the possible data manipulation, not the nature of regime characteristics itself, as a more significant source for the seemingly low casualty rates in authoritarian countries.
| S-EPMC8219996 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic was severely aggravated in Brazil due to its politicization by the country's federal government. However, the impact of diffuse political forces on the fatality of an epidemic is notoriously difficult to quantify. Here we introduce a method to measure this effect in the Brazilian case, based on the inhomogeneous distribution throughout the national territory of political support for the federal government. This political support is quantified by the voting rates in the last general election in Brazil. This data is correlated with the fatality rates by COVID-19 in each Brazilian state as the number of deaths grows over time. We show that the correlation between fatality rate and political support grows as the government's misinformation campaign is developed. This led to the dominance of such political factor for the pandemic impact in Brazil in 2021. Once this dominance is established, this correlation allows for an estimation of the total number of deaths due to political influence as 350±70 thousand up to the end of 2021, corresponding to (57±11)% of the total number of deaths.
| S-EPMC9275831 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments have advocated numerous social distancing measures, and compliance with these has likely saved millions of lives globally. In an online sample drawn from the U.S. and Canada (N = 209), participants completed measures of political orientation, moral foundations, and COVID-19 social distancing attitudes and behaviours. A more left-wing political orientation, and greater endorsement of the individualizing moral foundations were significantly related to more positive social distancing attitudes, and greater self-reported compliance with relevant restrictions. A more right-wing political orientation, and greater endorsement of the binding and economic liberty foundations were associated with less positive attitudes and reduced compliance. In a series of mediation analyses, the relationships between political orientation and various social distancing measures were significantly mediated by variations in participants' moral foundations, particularly their endorsement of economic liberty and the individualizing foundations. Further data indicated that the perceived persuasiveness of messages based on each moral foundation advocating for continued social distancing was significantly related to both participants' moral values and their political orientation. Findings are discussed in terms of understanding politicized differences around social distancing as partly reflecting differential valuation of the moral foundations, and in creating effective public health messaging regarding compliance.
| S-EPMC9232135 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In two large-scale longitudinal datasets (combined N = 5761), we investigated ability-related political polarization in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed more polarization with greater ability in emotional responses, risk perceptions, and product-purchase intentions across five waves of data collection with a diverse, convenience sample from February 2020 through July 2020 (Study 1, N = 1267). Specifically, more liberal participants had more negative emotional responses and greater risk perceptions of COVID-19 than conservative participants. Compared to conservatives, liberal participants also interpreted quantitative information as indicating higher COVID-19 risk and sought COVID-related news more from liberal than conservative news media. Of key importance, we also compared verbal and numeric cognitive abilities for their independent capacity to predict greater polarization. Although measures of numeric ability, such as objective numeracy, are often used to index ability-related polarization, ideological differences were more pronounced among those higher in verbal ability specifically. Similar results emerged in secondary analysis of risk perceptions in a nationally representative longitudinal dataset (Study 2, N = 4494; emotions and purchase intentions were not included in this dataset). We further confirmed verbal-ability-related polarization findings on non-COVID policy attitudes (i.e., weapons bans and Medicare-for-all) measured cross-sectionally. The present Study 2 documented ability-related polarization emerging over time for the first time (rather than simply measuring polarization in existing beliefs). Both studies demonstrated verbal ability measures as the most robust predictors of ability-related polarization. Together, these results suggest that polarization may be a function of the amount and/or application of verbal knowledge rather than selective application of quantitative reasoning skills.
| S-EPMC8455947 | biostudies-literature
Project description:What effect has the COVID-19 pandemic had on the political donations gender gap in Canada? Drawing on data from two national surveys conducted in May and August 2020, as well as Elections Canada data from 2019 and 2020, we find an overall decline in contributions to political parties and a reduced but still significant gender gap, with women less likely to donate to political parties than men.
| S-EPMC9829954 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We use survey data to study how trust in government and consensus for the pandemic policy response vary with the propensity for altruistic punishment in Italy, the early epicenter of the pandemic. Approval for the management of the crisis decreases with the size of the penalties that individuals would like to see enforced for lockdown violations. People supporting stronger punishment are more likely to consider the government's reaction to the pandemic as insufficient. However, after the establishment of tougher sanctions for risky behaviors, we observe a sudden flip in support for the government. Higher amounts of the desired fines become associated with a higher probability of considering the COVID policy response as too extreme, lower trust in government, and lower confidence in the truthfulness of the officially provided information. These results suggest that lockdowns entail a political cost that helps explain why democracies may adopt epidemiologically suboptimal policies.
| S-EPMC9232262 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST563 | biostudies-other
Project description:Abstract Measures to cope with the COVID‐19 pandemic have put a sudden halt to street protests and other forms of citizen involvement in Europe. At the same time, the pandemic has increased the need for solidarity, motivating citizens to become involved on behalf of people at risk and the vulnerable more generally. This research note empirically examines the tension between the demobilisation and activation potential of the COVID‐19 crisis. Drawing on original survey data from seven Western European countries, we examine the extent, forms, and drivers of citizens’ engagement. Our findings show the remarkable persistence of pre‐existing political and civic engagement patterns. Concurrently, we show that threat perceptions triggered by the multifaceted COVID‐19 crisis have mobilized Europeans in the early phase of the pandemic. Similarly, the role of extreme ideological orientations in explaining (regular) political engagement indicates that the current situation may create its specific mobilisation potentials.
| S-EPMC8242449 | biostudies-literature