Question wording and attitudinal ambivalence: COVID, the economy, and Americans' response to a real-life trolley problem

Objective: As the coronavirus pandemic raged throughout 2020, political leaders faced a difficult choice: Should strict social distancing guidelines be maintained until the threat posed by COVID-19 was diminished enough for citizens to return to their regular activities? Or was the economic disruption caused by the pandemic something that was, according to President Trump, "worse than the problem itself"? Methods: We analyze data from a 2020 survey of registered voters. Results: Democrats were more likely than Republicans to resolve the tradeoff in favor of maintaining social distancing over rebuilding the economy. More importantly, we find that when faced with this moral dilemma (measured by one's choice between a utilitarian vs. a deontological approach when confronted with a real-life "trolley problem"), many citizens from both sides of the partisan aisle were of two minds on the subject. Conclusion: Americans are ambivalent about the appropriate government response to COVID-19. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Ambivalence and Self-Reported Adherence to Recommendations to Reduce the Spread of COVID-19

Governments worldwide still, to some extent, rely on behavioral recommendations to reduce the spread of COV1D-19. We examine the role of ambivalence toward both the specific recommendations (micro-ambivalence) and the pandemic as a whole (macro-ambivalence) about compliance. We predict that micro ambivalence relates negatively, whereas macro ambivalence relates positively to self-reported adherence to recommendations. We present two studies (N = 691) supporting our hypotheses: the more ambivalent people are toward the behavioral recommendations (micro-level), the less they report following them. Conversely, the more ambivalent people are about the pandemic as a whole (macro-levet), the more they report following recommendations. Our findings were replicated in a US sample and a representative German sample.

Question wording and attitudinal ambivalence: COVID, the economy, and Americans' response to a real‐life trolley problem

Objective Methods Results Conclusion As the coronavirus pandemic raged throughout 2020, political leaders faced a difficult choice: Should strict social distancing guidelines be maintained until the threat posed by COVID‐19 was diminished enough for citizens to return to their regular activities? Or was the economic disruption caused by the pandemic something that was, according to President Trump, "worse than the problem itself"?We analyze data from a 2020 survey of registered voters.Democrats were more likely than Republicans to resolve the tradeoff in favor of maintaining social distancing over rebuilding the economy. More importantly, we find that when faced with this moral dilemma (measured by one's choice between a utilitarian vs. a deontological approach when confronted with a real‐life "trolley problem"), many citizens from both sides of the partisan aisle were of two minds on the subject.Americans are ambivalent about the appropriate government response to COVID‐19. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Social Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell) is the property of Wiley-Blackwell 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.)