People's political persuasions can have a significant influence on their initial response to a global health crisis, according to new research.
But while they do tend to respond to guidance issued or followed by their political leaders of choice, the study showed that people's behaviour can be altered by targeted interventions that highlight the potential impact of choices they make on those around them.
The research was carried out around the time of the COVID-19 pandemic and recruited more than 800 United States citizens who had voted for either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential Election.
They were invited to take part in an interactive game that included simulations of a virtual disease outbreak, with efforts to reduce the transmission risk incurring a personal cost while participants contracting the virtual disease losing all bonus payments for the game.
The researchers observed the participants' responses and compared differences in behaviour among participants who had voted for either candidate in the election.
They found voters for the Republican Party (Trump) were significantly more likely to make decisions involving an element of risk than those who voted for the Democrats (Clinton), and risk-takers in the game were less likely to intend to wear masks, engage in physical distancing, wash their hands or reduce their mobility in the context of the real ongoing pandemic.
However, despite starting from different baselines, both groups reduced their risk-taking tendencies when presented with a simple message asking them to choose the safer option for their own and others' benefit.
The effect of the intervention was stronger in an abstract version of the game (avoiding medical terms) than in a version directly addressing a pandemic. At the same time, both groups showed a strong effect of reducing their risk-taking in the pandemic-framed version, showing a potential effect of prevalent messaging at the time of the study.
The study was led by researchers in the University of Plymouth's
[SCHOOL]
"> School of Psychology working with colleagues from the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin and the IESE Business School in Barcelona.
They say the research, published in the Journal of Behavioural Decision Making, does support previous suggestions that people on the political left are more likely to adopt preventive health behaviours than those on the political right.
However, the researchers believe their findings also demonstrate that exploring ways to connect with people based on personal principles is as important - if not more so - than reaching out to them on the basis of their political views.
/University Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.
