University of Minnesota.
Johns Hopkins University.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2017 Dec;42(6):1005-1037. doi: 10.1215/03616878-4193606. Epub 2017 Aug 11.
This study examines the public's motivated reasoning of competitive messages about sugary drink taxes, a public health policy approach attempted with some recent success in the United States. In an experiment embedded in a nationally representative survey fielded in the fall of 2012, we randomized participants ( = 5,147) to receive one of four messages: control, a strong protax message, a two-sided message, or a message refuting arguments made in soda company antitax messages. The protax message showed no effects on tax support, while the two-sided message depressed Republicans' support. The refutation message boosted independents' support but produced backlash among Republicans. This motivated response was pronounced among Republicans who were plausibly previously exposed to the sugary drink tax debate. These findings reinforce the communication challenges in an increasingly politicized US health policy discourse.
本研究考察了公众对含糖饮料税竞争信息的动机推理，这是一种公共卫生政策方法，在美国最近取得了一些成功。在 2012 年秋季进行的一项全国代表性调查中嵌入的实验中，我们随机分配参与者（n=5147）接受以下四种信息之一：对照组、强烈的赞成税信息、双面信息或反驳苏打水公司反税信息中论点的信息。赞成税信息对税收支持没有影响，而双面信息则降低了共和党人的支持率。反驳信息提高了独立派的支持率，但却引起了共和党人的强烈反对。这种动机反应在那些可能之前已经接触过含糖饮料税辩论的共和党人中更为明显。这些发现强化了在美国日益政治化的健康政策话语中进行沟通的挑战。
