• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

对政府自主性支持的政治两极分化认知会影响遵守新冠疫情安全指南的内在动机。

Politically-polarized perceptions of governmental autonomy-support impact internal motivations to comply with COVID-19 safety guidelines.

作者信息

DeCaro Daniel A, DeCaro Marci S

机构信息

Social Decision Making and Sustainability Lab, Department of Urban and Public Affairs, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Louisville, 426 W. Bloom St., Louisville, KY 40208 USA.

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, USA.

出版信息

Motiv Emot. 2023;47(1):7-27. doi: 10.1007/s11031-022-09974-x. Epub 2022 Aug 10.

DOI:10.1007/s11031-022-09974-x
PMID:35966622
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9363853/
Abstract

UNLABELLED

Compliance with health safety guidelines is essential during pandemics. However, political polarization in the U.S. is reducing compliance. We investigated how polarized perceptions of government leaders' autonomy-support and enforcement policies impacted security and internally-motivated compliance with national (Study 1a) and state (Study 1b) safety guidelines. We surveyed 773 Republicans and Democrats from four states (California, Florida, New York, Texas) during the first wave of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, participants perceived that the decision processes of opposing political administrations did not support their autonomy. Lack of autonomy-support was associated with reduced security and internal motivations to comply (  = 50.83%). When political administrations enforced health safety mandates (Democrat state leaders in this study) and were perceived as autonomy-supportive, participants reported the highest security and internally-motivated compliance (  = 49.57%). This effect was especially pronounced for Republicans, who reacted negatively to enforcement without autonomy-support. Political leaders who use fair and supportive decision-making processes may legitimize enforcement of health safety guidelines, improving compliance.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11031-022-09974-x.

摘要

未标注

在大流行期间,遵守健康安全准则至关重要。然而,美国的政治两极分化正在降低遵守程度。我们调查了对政府领导人自主支持和执法政策的两极分化看法如何影响对国家(研究1a)和州(研究1b)安全准则的安全感和内在驱动的遵守情况。在2020年新冠疫情第一波期间,我们对来自四个州(加利福尼亚州、佛罗里达州、纽约州、得克萨斯州)的773名共和党人和民主党人进行了调查。总体而言,参与者认为对立政治政府的决策过程不支持他们的自主性。缺乏自主支持与安全感降低和遵守的内在动机减少有关(=50.83%)。当政治政府执行健康安全指令(本研究中的民主党州领导人)并被视为支持自主性时,参与者报告的安全感和内在驱动的遵守程度最高(=49.57%)。这种影响在共和党人身上尤为明显,他们对没有自主支持的执法反应消极。使用公平和支持性决策过程的政治领导人可能会使健康安全准则的执行合法化,从而提高遵守程度。

补充信息

在线版本包含可在10.1007/s11031-022-09974-x获取的补充材料。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/4e24da677d11/11031_2022_9974_Fig8_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/7581147deb43/11031_2022_9974_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/368429035fb3/11031_2022_9974_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/b3024e41e594/11031_2022_9974_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/3925c52483f5/11031_2022_9974_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/977f012e6f6e/11031_2022_9974_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/9a0b0b873f62/11031_2022_9974_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/753135911aff/11031_2022_9974_Fig7_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/4e24da677d11/11031_2022_9974_Fig8_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/7581147deb43/11031_2022_9974_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/368429035fb3/11031_2022_9974_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/b3024e41e594/11031_2022_9974_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/3925c52483f5/11031_2022_9974_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/977f012e6f6e/11031_2022_9974_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/9a0b0b873f62/11031_2022_9974_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/753135911aff/11031_2022_9974_Fig7_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b20/9363853/4e24da677d11/11031_2022_9974_Fig8_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Politically-polarized perceptions of governmental autonomy-support impact internal motivations to comply with COVID-19 safety guidelines.对政府自主性支持的政治两极分化认知会影响遵守新冠疫情安全指南的内在动机。
Motiv Emot. 2023;47(1):7-27. doi: 10.1007/s11031-022-09974-x. Epub 2022 Aug 10.
2
COVID-19 and Politically Motivated Reasoning.COVID-19 与政治动机推理。
Med Decis Making. 2022 Nov;42(8):1078-1086. doi: 10.1177/0272989X221118078. Epub 2022 Aug 20.
3
Political polarization in US residents' COVID-19 risk perceptions, policy preferences, and protective behaviors.美国居民对新冠病毒疾病风险的认知、政策偏好及防护行为中的政治两极分化现象
J Risk Uncertain. 2020;61(2):177-194. doi: 10.1007/s11166-020-09336-3. Epub 2020 Nov 18.
4
Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits.运用监管执法理论解释对质量和患者安全法规的遵守情况:内部审计案例
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jan 30;18(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-2865-8.
5
Perceiving political polarization in the United States: party identity strength and attitude extremity exacerbate the perceived partisan divide.感知美国的政治极化:党派认同强度和态度极端性加剧了感知到的党派分歧。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 Mar;10(2):145-58. doi: 10.1177/1745691615569849.
6
Political differences in past, present, and future life satisfaction: Republicans are more sensitive than democrats to political climate.过去、现在和未来生活满意度中的政治差异:共和党人比民主党人对政治气候更敏感。
PLoS One. 2014 Jun 5;9(6):e98854. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098854. eCollection 2014.
7
Polarized Perceptions: How Time and Vaccination Status Modify Republican and Democratic COVID-19 Risk Perceptions.两极分化的认知:时间和疫苗接种状况如何改变共和党人和民主党人对新冠病毒的风险认知。
J Elect Public Opin Parties. 2024;34(4):624-642. doi: 10.1080/17457289.2023.2216461. Epub 2023 May 25.
8
Characterizing partisan political narrative frameworks about COVID-19 on Twitter.描绘推特上关于新冠疫情的党派政治叙事框架。
EPJ Data Sci. 2021;10(1):53. doi: 10.1140/epjds/s13688-021-00308-4. Epub 2021 Oct 30.
9
Policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Manitoba grocery sector: a qualitative analysis of media, organizational communications, and key informant interviews.曼尼托巴省杂货店部门应对 COVID-19 大流行的政策措施:对媒体、组织沟通和关键知情人访谈的定性分析。
BMC Public Health. 2022 Jun 21;22(1):1237. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13654-3.
10
Democrats and republicans can be differentiated from their faces.从他们的长相就能区分出民主党人和共和党人。
PLoS One. 2010 Jan 18;5(1):e8733. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008733.

引用本文的文献

1
Learning from regulatory failure: How Ostrom's restorative justice design principle helps naïve groups create wiser enforcement systems to overcome the tragedy of the commons.从监管失败中学习:奥斯特罗姆的恢复性司法设计原则如何帮助天真的群体创建更明智的执法系统,以克服公地悲剧。
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 23;19(8):e0307832. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307832. eCollection 2024.
2
Formalizing the fundamental Faustian bargain: Inefficacious decision-makers sacrifice their freedom of choice to coercive leaders for economic security.形式化的基本浮士德式交易:无效决策者为经济安全将选择权让与强制型领导者。
PLoS One. 2022 Sep 27;17(9):e0275265. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275265. eCollection 2022.