ABSTRACT
This study examined the mechanisms through which responsibility frames and stigmatizing headlines influence support for governmental policies to address the pandemic. Based on a factorial design experiment, we examined the effects of 2 responsibility frames (individual vs. societal responsibility) and 4 headline types (non-stigmatized vs. name-stigmatized vs. characteristic-stigmatized vs. both-stigmatized). The results showed that the individual responsibility frame increased individual attribution of responsibility for the cause and spread of COVID-19 whereas reducing societal attribution of responsibility, compared to the societal responsibility frame. The headline that detailed both the stigmatized characteristic and name increased individual attribution of responsibility compared to the non-stigmatized headline. Furthermore, the effects of frames and headline types on policy support were sequentially mediated by attribution of responsibility and emotions. Individual attribution of responsibility led to anger whereas societal attribution of responsibility led to sympathy. Subsequently, anger increased support for punitive polices while sympathy increased support for assistive policies. This study contributes to the literature on news framing of pandemics by integrating cognitive and emotional mechanisms in forming policy attitudes. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Mass Communication & Society is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)