Data misreporting during the COVID19 crisis: The role of political institutions.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Adam A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8820020 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Data misreporting during the COVID19 crisis: The role of political institutions.
Adam Antonis A Tsarsitalidou Sofia S
Economics letters 20220207
We use Benford's law of first digits to determine whether there is evidence of data misreporting in the total COVID19 reported cases across countries. We try to model the differences in the Mean Absolute Deviation of actual data from those predicted by Benford's law to indicate the factors that lead to data misreporting using regression analysis. Using the Instrumental Variable model of Lewbel (2012) and Settler Mortality as an external instrument for democracy, we show that autocratic countries ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study shows that social and political trust may diverge in the face of shared threats, and that this pattern is driven by negative information about crisis management. Leveraging a three-wave panel survey and an information-provision experiment in the USA during the COVID-19 crisis, our research reveals that negative perceptions of pandemic management lead to a decline in political trust and a parallel increase in social trust. This dynamic is pronounced among government supporters, who, confronted with COVID-19 challenges, experience a substantial erosion of political trust. Simultaneously, there is a notable rise in social trust within this group. Our analysis suggests that, as government supporters attributed more responsibility for the crisis to their political leader, political trust was supplanted by social trust. Disenchanted voters, feeling let down by institutions, sought support in society. Both the survey and the experiment underscore that societal shocks can prompt individuals to shift from relying on formal institutions to informal ones as a coping strategy. This research contributes a generalizable framework explaining how negative perceptions of crisis management can lead societies to substitute political trust with social trust, advancing our understanding of societal responses to shared threats and adaptive strategies during crises.
| S-EPMC10764309 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the COVID-19 pandemic, science has been prominently featured in institutional communication and political agendas as never before. Governments substantially relied on scientific experts to analyze pandemic trends, develop anti-COVID-19 vaccines and adopt containment strategies. In this paper, we analyze speeches by three political leaders-Boris Johnson (Prime Minister, UK), Sergio Mattarella (President of the Republic, Italy), and Ursula von der Leyen (President, European Commission)-between February 20, 2020, and February 20, 2022, to identify how science was addressed and framed. The results of the quantitative and qualitative exploration of the speeches highlight three main ways in which political leaders view science: a national pride narrative-i.e., science as an instrument and indicator of national pride and international standing of the country; an ethical narrative-i.e., science as an agent of social growth; an integration narrative-i.e., science as a driving force of both European integration and stronger collaboration between knowledge production and industry. The predominant narrative varies in relation to the political leaders' different institutional contexts and roles.
| S-EPMC10038249 | biostudies-literature
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
Project description:Traditionally, political scientists define political institutions deductively. This approach may prevent from discovery of existing institutions beyond the definitions. Here, a principal component analysis was used for an inductive extraction of dimensions in Polity IV data on the political institutions of all nations in the world the last two centuries. Three dimensions of institutions were revealed: core institutions of democracy, oligarchy, and despotism. We show that, historically and on a world scale, the dominance of the core institutions of despotism has first been replaced by a dominance of the core institutions of oligarchy, which in turn is now being followed by an increasing dominance by the core institutions of democracy. Nations do not take steps from despotic, to oligarchic and then to democratic institutions, however. Rather, nations hosting the core democracy institutions have succeeded in historically avoiding both the core institutions of despotism and those of oligarchy. On the other hand, some nations have not been influenced by any of these dimensions, while new institutional combinations are increasingly influencing others. We show that the extracted institutional dimensions do not correspond to the Polity scores for autocracy, "anocracy" and democracy, suggesting that changes in regime types occur at one level, while institutional dynamics work on another. Political regime types in that sense seem "canalized", i.e., underlying institutional architectures can and do vary, but to a considerable extent independently of regime types and their transitions. The inductive approach adds to the deductive regime type studies in that it produces results in line with modern studies of cultural evolution and memetic institutionalism in which institutions are the units of observation, not the nations that acts as host for them.
| S-EPMC3463615 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We performed a quantitative and a qualitative study, addressing the experiences of health services of 16 European Union institutions during the Covid-19 pandemic. Among the 165 eligible subjects, 114 (69%) participated in the survey. The biggest problem reported was limitation of social contacts (53%). At work, the biggest problems were workload (50%) and shortage of staff (37%). The majority were positive about teamwork. Teleworking was seen positively by 81%. Most participants felt better prepared for future situations by their recent experience (94%). Participants underlined the importance of strengthening the collaboration with the local health systems (80%), as well as with medical services and internal services within their own institution (75%). The qualitative analysis also reported participants’ fear of becoming infected, and of their family members getting sick. Similarly reported were the sense of isolation and anxiety, the excessive workload and work complexity, shortage of staff, and the benefits of teleworking. Study findings highlight: i) the need to strengthen mental health support to health personnel, not only during crisis situations; ii) the need for sufficient health workers, with swift recruitment strategies in times of crisis; iii) the importance of clear protocols to ensure no shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE); iv) the importance of teleworking, which represents an opportunity for major reorganisation of work within EU medical services; v) the need to strengthen collaboration with local health systems and the medical services of EU institutions.
| S-EPMC10276498 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With much unknown about the new coronavirus, the scientific consensus is that human hosts are crucial to its spread and reproduction-the more people behave like regular socializing beings they are, the more likely it is that the virus will propagate. Hence, many nations worldwide have mandated physical-distancing measures. In the current preregistered research, we focus on examining two factors that may help explain differences in adherence to COVID-19 preventive behaviors and policy support across different countries-political orientation and analytic thinking. We positioned our research within the dual-process framework of human reasoning and investigated the role of cognitive reflection, open-minded thinking, and political ideology in determining COVID-19 responsible behavior (physical distancing and maintaining hygiene) and support for restrictive COVID-19 policies on a sample of 12,490 participants from 17 countries. We have not been able to detect substantial relationships of political orientation with preventive behaviors and policy support, and overall found no reliable evidence of politicization, nor polarization regarding the issue. The results of structural equation modeling showed that the inclination towards COVID-19 preventive measures and their endorsement were defined primarily by the tendency of open-minded thinking. Specifically, open-minded thinking was shown to be a predictor of all three criteria-avoiding physical contact, maintaining physical hygiene, and supporting COVID-19 restrictive mitigation policies. Cognitive reflection was predictive of lesser adherence to stricter hygiene and only very weakly predictive of lesser policy support. Furthermore, there was no evidence of these effects varying across political contexts. The mediation analysis suggested a partial mediation effect of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs on the relationships of open-mindedness and cognitive reflection with physical distancing (but not adherence to stricter hygiene) and COVID-19 policy support, albeit very small and significant primarily due to sample size. There was also no evidence of these effects varying across political contexts. Finally, we have not been able to find strong evidence of political orientation modifying the relationship between analytical thinking and COVID-19 behaviors and policy support, although we explored the pattern of these effects in the US and Canadian samples for exploratory purposes and comparison with other similar studies.
| S-EPMC8341110 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Enforcement is a challenge for effective international cooperation. In human rights and environmental law, along with many other domains of international cooperation, "naming and shaming" is often used as an enforcement mechanism in the absence of stronger alternatives. Naming and shaming hinges on the ability to identify countries whose efforts are inadequate and effectively shame them toward better behavior. Research on this approach has struggled to identify factors that explain when it influences state behavior in ways that lead to more cooperation. Via survey of a large (N = 910) novel sample of experienced diplomats involved in the design of the Paris Agreement, we find support for the proposition that naming and shaming is most accepted and effective in influencing the behavior of countries that have high-quality political institutions, strong internal concern about climate change, and ambitious and credible international climate commitments. Naming and shaming appears less effective in other countries, so further enforcement mechanisms will be needed for truly global cooperation. We also find that the climate diplomacy experts favor a process of naming and shaming that relies on official intergovernmental actors, in contrast with studies suggesting that NGOs, media, and other private actors are more effective at naming and shaming. We suggest that these tensions-the inability for naming and shaming to work effectively within the countries least motivated for climate action and the preference for namers and shamers that seem least likely to be effective-will become central policy debates around making cooperation on climate change more enforceable.
| S-EPMC10556554 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Data management is essential in a flow cytometry (FCM) shared resource laboratory (SRL) for the integrity of collected data and its long-term preservation, as described in the Cytometry publication from 2016, ISAC Flow Cytometry Shared Resource Laboratory (SRL) Best Practices (Barsky et al.: Cytometry Part A 89A(2016): 1017-1030). The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic introduced an array of challenges in the operation of SRLs. The subsequent laboratory shutdowns and access restrictions brought to the forefront well-established practices that withstood the impact of a sudden change in operations and illuminated areas that need improvement. The most significant challenges from a data management perspective were data access for remote analysis and workstation management. Notably, lessons learned from this challenge emphasize the importance of safeguarding collected data from loss in various emergencies such as fire or natural disasters where the physical hardware storing data could be directly affected. Here, we describe two data management systems that have been successful during the current emergency created by the pandemic, specifically remote access and automated data transfer. We will discuss other situations that could arise and lead to data loss or challenges in interpreting data. © 2020 International Society for Advancement of Cytometry.
| S-EPMC7753671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper studies the Greek sovereign debt crisis in the aftermath of the 2007-8 global financial crisis looking for barriers to, and engines of, growth. The vehicle is a calibrated medium-scale micro-founded macroeconomic model. Departing from 2008, our simulations show that the adopted economic adjustment program (the fiscal austerity mix combined with the fiscal and monetary assistance provided by the EU, ECB and IMF), jointly with the observed deterioration in institutional quality (the degree of protection of property rights) can explain most (around 22% of GDP) of the cumulative loss in GDP in the data (around 26% of GDP) between 2008 and 2016. In particular, the economic adjustment program can explain a fall of around 12%, while the deterioration in property rights accounts for another 10%. Counterfactual simulations, on the other hand, show that this loss could have been around 9% only, if the country had followed a different fiscal policy mix; if the degree of product marker liberalization was closer to that in the core euro zone countries; and, above all, if institutional quality in Greece had simply remained at its pre-crisis level. On the other hand, in the absence of the official fiscal bailouts, the depression would be much deeper, while, the accommodative role played by the quantitative policies of the ECB has been vital to the Greek economy. These results can be useful in the face of the ongoing covid-19 crisis. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at (10.1007/s11079-020-09613-3)
| S-EPMC8005671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A longstanding theory indicates that the threat of a common enemy can mitigate conflict between members of rival groups. We tested this hypothesis in a pre-registered experiment where 1670 Republicans and Democrats in the United States were asked to complete an online social learning task with a bot that was labeled as a member of the opposing party. Prior to this task, we exposed respondents to primes about (a) a common enemy (involving Iran and Russia); (b) a patriotic event; or (c) a neutral, apolitical prime. Though we observed no significant differences in the behavior of Democrats as a result of priming, we found that Republicans-and particularly those with very strong conservative views-were significantly less likely to learn from Democrats when primed about a common enemy. Because our study was in the field during the 2020 Iran Crisis, we were able to further evaluate this finding via a natural experiment-Republicans who participated in our study after the crisis were even less influenced by the beliefs of Democrats than those Republicans who participated before this event. These findings indicate common enemies may not reduce inter-group conflict in highly polarized societies, and contribute to a growing number of studies that find evidence of asymmetric political polarization in the United States. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for research in social psychology, political conflict, and the rapidly expanding field of computational social science.
| S-EPMC9652360 | biostudies-literature