Who Does the Caring? Gender Disparities in COVID-19 Attitudes and Behaviors

Do men and women exhibit different attitudes and behaviors toward COVID-19 public health measures? Is there a gender gap in support for and compliance with government recommendations during a public health crisis? While the disproportionate effect of the pandemic on women suggests that they would oppose burdensome quarantine measures, theories of gender differences in prosocial and communion attitudes indicate that women should be more likely to conform with public health measures designed to protect the most vulnerable. We test hypotheses about a gender gap in attitudes toward public health recommendations through an original, nationally representative survey implemented in Peru, one of the countries hit hardest by the coronavirus pandemic, and the construction of a representative matched sample that allows us to make comparisons between women and men. We find that women are more likely than men to endorse lockdown measures and to support the continuation of a nationwide quarantine. We also find evidence of a gender gap in compliance with public health recommendations about avoiding crowded areas and social gatherings. Our findings have important policy implications. The results suggest that public health recommendations to fight COVID-19 should be framed in a way that maximizes compliance by both men and women.

Does issue framing shape support for COVID-19 lockdown measures? Evidence from a survey experiment in Peru

Two issue frames quickly emerged in policy and media communications about COVID-19 lockdown measures. Initially, a public health frame advocated for strong quarantine policies to slow the spread of the virus. As the economic costs associated with quarantine measures became clear, an economic frame pushed for an end to (or a relaxation of) these measures to alleviate the economic damage associated with lockdowns. We do not know much about how these competing communication frames affected lockdown support, especially in poor- and middle-income countries. To explore this question, we embedded a framing experiment in a nationally representative telephone survey in May 2020 in Peru, one of the world’s hardest-hit countries by the coronavirus pandemic. The vignette experiment reveals that the economic frame produces a decrease in public support for quarantine measures in Peru. In contrast, respondents exposed to a health frame do not increase their approval of the same measures.

A Tale of Two Pandemics: Economic Inequality and Support for Containment Measures in Peru

Research suggests that the coronavirus pandemic disproportionately affected poor communities. However, relatively little is known about how this differential impact affected support for, and compliance with, COVID-19 lockdown policies. This article examines the relationship between socioeconomic inequalities and public opinion towards COVID-19 containment measures in Peru. Despite the strict quarantine measures adopted by the government of Peru, the country struggled to contain the spread of the disease. We designed and implemented a nationally representative survey in Peru and found that economically vulnerable sectors are more likely to oppose the quarantine and are more likely to defy the stay-at-home recommendations to leave home and go to work. Our contribution highlights that poor citizens? housing and economic conditions can explain why the poor are more likely to react negatively to COVID-19 lockdown policies.