Politicization of a Pathogen: A Prospective Longitudinal Study of COVID‐19 Responses in a Nationally Representative U.S. Sample

Abstract

Understanding population‐level variability in responses to pathogens over time is important for developing effective health‐based messages targeted at ideologically diverse populations. Research from psychological and political sciences suggests that party and elite cues shape how people respond to major threats like climate change. Research on responses to the COVID‐19 pandemic suggests similar variability across party identities; however, prior work has methodological limitations. This prospective, longitudinal study of a large probability‐based nationally representative U.S. sample assessed in March–April 2020 (N = 6,514) and then 6 months later in September–October 2020 (N = 5,661) demonstrates that COVID‐19 fear, perceived COVID‐19 death risk, and reported health‐protective behaviors became increasingly polarized over the first 6 months of the pandemic. Initial differences between Democrats and Republicans failed to converge over time and became more pronounced. Responses among Republicans were further polarized by support for former President Donald Trump: Trump Republicans initially reported weaker responses to COVID‐19 than non‐Trump Republicans, and these differences became more pronounced over time. Importantly, political identity and Trump support were not linked to perceived infection risk of a nonpoliticized pathogen, the flu. Finally, political identity and Republican Trump support prospectively predicted COVID‐19 vaccine intentions 6 months into the pandemic.

Wastewater Monitoring for Infectious Disease: Intentional Relationships between Academia, the Private Sector, and Local Health Departments for Public Health Preparedness

“…Urgency has driven research and development toward effective biomedical and social mitigation responses including vaccine development, use of antiviral medicines, masking, interpersonal distancing, increased ventilation, and detailed public health policies [2][3][4][5]. These responses have been integrated into a politicized sociocultural landscape that encompasses attitudes ranging from rejection of science-based evidence to pro-active adoption of mitigation, therapies, and implementation of public health guidance [6][7][8].…”