When Political Pivots Shift Behaviors but Not Beliefs: Evidence from Trump’s Position Reversal over Facemasks during the COVID-19 Crisis
中文摘要
政治领导人在危机期间对行为和信念的塑造可能发挥重要作用。疫情期间,若干高地位政治人物,尤其是民粹主义政党领导人,通过质疑新冠防疫指南,削弱了人们对机构建议的遵从。但当这类领导人改变立场并支持此前被其贬抑的行为时,会发生什么?本文利用「美国新冠疫情认知调查」(Understanding Coronavirus in America)面板的纵向数据,采用固定效应模型,考察特朗普于2020年7月出人意料地支持佩戴口罩这一举动,如何影响个体佩戴口罩的可能性及对口罩有效性的信念。我发现,特朗普的转向提升了共和党人的口罩使用率,使共和党人与民主党人之间原有的差距缩小了40%,且在2020年初夏新冠病例激增中暴露程度更高的个体中效应更强。此外,我提供了证据表明这一时刻在疫情史上具有独特意义,显示几乎再无其他时期党派间行为收敛得如此急剧。然而,与大多数主流行为改变理论模型(尤其是健康信念模型)的预期相反,并未检测到关于口罩的信念出现相应转变。这些结果对于理解政治转向如何在危机期间塑造行为、公共卫生领域现有模型的有效性、大流行民粹主义的成因以及未来研究方向,都具有重要的理论意涵。
Abstract
Political leaders play a potentially important role shaping behaviors and beliefs during crises. In the pandemic, a number of high-status politicians, notably leaders of populist parties, were seen to diminish compliance with institutional recommendations by casting doubt on COVID guidelines. But what happens when such leaders change position and endorse previously discouraged behaviors? Using longitudinal data from the Understanding Coronavirus in America panel with fixed-effects modeling, this article examines how Trump’s unexpected endorsement of facemasks in July 2020 affected individuals’ likelihood of wearing a facemask and belief in masks’ efficacy. I find that Trump’s pivot lifted Republicans’ use of facemasks, closing 40 percent of the preexisting gap with Democrats and with stronger effects among individuals who were more exposed to the early-summer spike in COVID cases. Additionally, I provide evidence for the unique significance of this moment in the history of the pandemic, showing that at almost no other time did partisan behaviors converge as sharply. However, in contrast to expectations from most dominant theoretical models of behavioral change, especially the health belief model, no corresponding shift in beliefs about facemasks can be detected. These results have important theoretical implications for understanding how pivots can shape behaviors during crises, the validity of existing models in public health, pandemic populism’s causes, and directions of future research.