Actitudes y conductas públicas ante la COVID-19 en Estados Unidos: estudio de un caso en orden a la comprensión de un sistema político polarizado
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2022.806008Palabras clave:
COVID-19, polarización política, EE.UU., Generación XResumen
¿Cómo reacciona la ciudadanía en un sistema político polarizado ante una emergencia como la pandemia de la COVID-19?, ¿cómo procesa la ciudadanía las narrativas polarizadas que están en conflicto?, y ¿qué imagen se forman de la gestión política de la amenaza de la pandemia? En EE. UU, hay que retrotraerse a la epidemia de la polio de hace 70 años para encontrar una emergencia sanitaria como la pandemia de la COVID-19. No obstante, hay importantes diferencias; en la década de 1950, el clima político de los EE.UU. era mucho más uniforme y consensuado que el actual, profundamente dividido y polarizado. Este trabajo utiliza datos de un estudio longitudinal realizado durante 35 años en personas jóvenes de la Generación X (ahora ya en la cuarentena) y datos provenientes de encuestas realizadas en Estados Unidos durante tres décadas, con el propósito de examinar los patrones de adquisición de la información en la comprensión de una nueva amenaza. Nuestro análisis de los últimos 35 años de la Generación X muestra que, en las elecciones de 2020, el factor predictivo del voto individual que tuvo más fuerza fue una ideología política polarizada, pero, aquellas personas que contaban con una mejor comprensión del coronavirus fueron más críticas con la gestión de la pandemia de la COVID-19 que realizó la administración de Donald Trump y estuvieron más predispuestas a votar por Joe Biden que a votar por Trump. Un análisis paralelo de una muestra probabilística representativa de personas adultas estadounidenses en 2020 reveló el mismo patrón de influencia del partidismo ideológico, la comprensión del coronavirus y la evaluación de la administración de Trump. Los resultados muestran que el conocimiento y la comprensión pueden proporcionar un efecto moderador crítico en un sistema político polarizado y dividido.
Descargas
Citas
Abramowitz, Alan I. (2010). The Disappearing Center: Engaged citizens, polarization, and American democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Abramowitz, Alan I. (2018). The Great Alignment: Race, Party Transformation, and the Rise of Donald Trump. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvhrczh3
Abramowitz, Alan I. and Saunders, Kyle L. (2006). Exploring the bases of partisanship in the American electorate: Social identity versus ideology. Political Research Quarterly, 59(2), 175-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591290605900201
Abramowitz, Alan I. and Webster, Steven W. (2018). Negative Partisanship: Why Americans Dislike Parties but Behave Like Rabid Partisans. Advances in Political Psychology, 39(Suppl. 1), 119-135. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12479
Algara, Carlos; Amlani, Sharif; Collitt, Samuel et al. (2022). Nail in the Coffin or Lifeline? Evaluating the Electoral Impact of COVID-19 on President Trump in the 2020 Election. Political Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-022-09826-x
Amlani, Sharif and Algara, Carlos. (2021). Partisanship and nationalism in American elections: Evidence from presidential, senatorial, and gubernatorial elections in U.S, counties, 1872-2020. Electoral Studies 73(October 1), 102387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2021.102387
Bengtson, Vern L., Biblarz, Timothy J., and Roberts, Roberts E. (2002). How Families Still Matter: A longitudinal study of youth in two generations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bernacer, Javier; Garcia-Manglano, Javier; Camina, Eduardo and Güell, Francisco (2021). Polarization of beliefs as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of Spain. PLoS ONE, 16(7), e0254511. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254511 PMid:34255781 PMCid:PMC8277027
Bartels, Larry and Jackman, Simon (2013). A generational model of political learning. Electoral Studies, 33, 7-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2013.06.004
Burns, James McGregor (1963). The Deadlock of Democracy: Four-party politics in America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Campbell, Angus; Converse, Philip E.; Miller, Warren E. and Stokes, Donald E. (1960). The American Voter. New York: Wiley.
Carmines, Edward G. and Stimson, James A. (1980). The two faces of issue voting. American Political Science Review, 74(1), 78-91. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955648
Carmines, Edward. G. and Stimson, James A. (1989). Issue Evolution: Race and the transformation of American politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691218250 PMid:2544103
Carsey, Thomas M. and Layman, Geoffrey C. (2006). Changing sides or changing minds? Party identification and policy preferences in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 464-477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00196.x
Castle, Jeremiah J. and Stepp, Kyla K. (2021). Partianship, religion, and issue polarization in the United States: A reassessment. Political Behavior, 43, 1311-1335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09668-5
Ceci, Stephen J. and Papierno, Paul B. (2005). The rhetoric and reality of gap closing: When the "have-nots" gain but the "haves" gain even more. American Psychologist, 60(2), 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.149 PMid:15740447
Claassen, Ryan L.; Djupe, Paul A.; Lewis, Andrew R. and Neiheisel, Jacob R. (2021). Which party represents my group? The group foundations of partisan choice and polarization. Political Behavior, 43, 615-636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09565-6
Conis, Elena (2017). Polio, DDT, and disease risk in the United States after World War II. Environmental History, 22, 696-721. https://doi.org/10.1093/envhis/emx086
Converse, Philip E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (ed.), Ideology and Discontent. New York: The Free Press. Reprinted in Critical Review 18(1-3), 1-74. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913810608443650
Converse, Philip E. (1970). Attitudes and non-attitudes: Continuation of a dialogue. In Edward R. Tufte (ed.), The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Converse, Philip E. (1974). Nonattitudes and American public opinion: Comment: The status of nonattitudes. American Political Science Review, 68, 650-660. https://doi.org/10.2307/1959510
Cramer, Katherine J. (2016). The Politics of Resentment: Rural consciousness in Wisconsin and the rise of Scott Walker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226349251.001.0001
Dannefer, Dale (2003). Cumulative advantage/disadvantage and the life course: Cross-fertilizing age and social science theory. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 58(6), S327-S337. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/58.6.S327 PMid:14614120
Dannefer, Dale (2020). Systemic and reflexive: Foundations of cumulative dis/advantage and life course processes. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 75(6), 1249-1263. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gby118 PMid:30295844
Dawson, Richard R. and Prewitt, Kenneth (1969). Political Socialization. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Finkel, Eli J.; Bail, Christopher A.; Cikara, Mina; Ditto, Peter. H.; Iyengar, Shanto; Klar, Samara; Mason, Lilliana; McGrath, Mary. C.; Nyhan, Brendan; Rand, David G.; Skitka, Linda J.; Tucker, Joshua. A.; Van Bavel, Jay J.; Wang, Cynthia. S.; Druckman, James N. (2021). Political Sectarianism in America. Science, 370(6516), 533-536. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1715 PMid:33122374
Fowler, A., Hill, S., Lewis, J., Tausanovitch, C., Vavereck, L., & Warshaw, C. (2022). Moderates. American Political Science Review, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055422000818
Gerber, Alan S. and Patashnik, Eric M. (2011). The politicization of evidence-based medicine: The limits of pragmatic problem solving in an era of polarization. California Journal of Politics and Policy, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.5070/P2MS3P
Guntermann, Eric; Lenz, Gabriel S. and Myers, Jeffrey R. (2021). The impact of the economy on presidential elections throughout US history. Political Behavior, 43, 837-857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-021-09677-y
Hayduk, Leslie A. (1987). Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801834783
Hetherington, Marc. J.; Long, Meri T. and Rudolph, Thomas J. (2016). Revisiting the myth: New evidence of a polarized electorate. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80 (Special issue), 321-350. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw003
Hillygus, D. Sunshine and Shields, Todd G. (2008). The Persuadable Voter: Wedge issues in presidential campaigns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400831593
Hochschild, Jennifer L. and Einstein, Katherine L. (2015). Do Facts Matter? Normal, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
Hyman, Herbert H. (1959). Political Socialization: A study in the psychology of political behavior. New York: The Free Press.
Hyman, Herbert H. and Wright, Charles R. (1979). Education's Lasting Influence on Values. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hyman, Herbert H.; Wright, Charles R., and Reed, John S. (1975). The Enduring Effects of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Iyengar, Shanto and Westwood, Sean J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690-707. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12152
Iyengar, Shanto; Sood, Gaurav and Lelkes, Yphtach (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405-431. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs038
Iyengar, Shanto; Lelkes, Yphtach M.; Levendusky, Matthew; Malhotra, Neil and Westwood, Sean J. (2019). The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science, 22, 129-146. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034
Jacobson, Gary C. (2021). The presidential and congressional elections of 2020: A national referendum on the Trump presidency. Political Science Quarterly, 136, 11-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/polq.13133
Jöreskog, Karl and Sörbom, Dag (1993). LISREL 8. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Lee, Valerine E. and Burkam, David T. (2002). Inequality at the starting gate: Social background differences in achievement as children begin school. Washington: Economic Policy Institute.
Lelkes, Yphtach (2016). Mass polarization: Manifestations and measurements. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(Special issue), 392-410. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw005
Lelkes, Yphtach (2018.) Affective polarization and ideological sorting: A reciprocal, albeit weak, relationship. The Forum, 16(1), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2018-0005
Lupia, Arthur and McCubbins, Mathew (1998). The Democratic Dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know? New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mason, Lilliana (2015). "I disrespectfully disagree": The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 128-145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12089
Mason, Lilliana (2016). A crosscutting calm: How social sorting drives affective polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(Special issue), 351-377. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw001
Mason, Lilliana (2018a.) Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226524689.001.0001
Mason, Lilliana (2018b). Ideologues without issues: The polarizing consequences of ideological identities. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(Special Issue), 866-887. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfy005
Mason, Lilliana and Wronski, Julie (2018). One tribe to bind them all: How our social group attachments strengthen partisanship. Advances in Political Psychology, 39(suppl. 1), 257-277. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12485
McCright, Aaron and Dunlap, Riley (2011). The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public's views of global warming, 2001-2010. Sociological Quarterly 52(2), 155-194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x
Mendoza Aviña, Marco and Sevi, Senra (2021). Did exposure to COVID-19 affect vote choice in the 2020 Presidential Election? Research & Politics 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680211041505
Miller, Jon D. (1983). The American People and Science Policy: The Role of Public Attitudes in the Policy Process. New York: Pergamon Press.
Miller, Jon D. (2010). Adult Science Learning in the Internet Era. Curator, 53(2), 191-208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2010.00019.x
Miller, Jon D. and Inglehart, Ronald F. (2012). American Attitudes toward Science and Technology. In William S. Bainbridge (ed.), Leadership in Science and Technology: A reference handbook (Vol. 1) (pp. 298-306). New York: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412994231.n34
Miller, Jon D. and Kreps, Gary L. (2010). Biological Literacy: A key to cancer prevention and control in the 21st century. In Lila Rutten, Bradley W. Hesse, Richard P. Moser, and Gary L. Kreps (eds.), Building the Evidence Base in Cancer Communication (pp. 225-247) Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Miller, Jon D. and Laspra, Belén (2017). Generation X in mid-life: A summary from the Longitudinal Study of American Life. Generations: Journal of the American Society on Aging, 41(3), 27-33.
Miller, Jon D., Woods, Logan T., and Kalmbach, Jason. (2022). The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic in a polarized political system: Lessons from the 2020 election. Electoral Studies 80:102548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2022.102548 PMid:36311165 PMCid:PMC9595380
Miller, Jon D.; Kalmbach, Jason; Woods, Logan T. and Cepuran, Claire (2020). The accuracy and value of voter validation in national surveys: Insights from longitudinal and cross-sectional studies. Political Research Quarterly, 74(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912920903432
Miller, Jon D.; Ackerman, Mark S.; Laspra, Belén and Huffaker, Jordan S. (2021). The acquisition of health and science information in the 21st century. The Information Society, 37(2), 82-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2020.1870022
Muldoon, Orla T.; Liu, James H.; and McHugh, Cillian. (2021). The political psychology of COVID-19. Political Psychology 42(5):715-728. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12775 PMid:34548719 PMCid:PMC8447463
Pacheco, Julianna S. and Plutzer, Eric (2008). Political participation and cumulative disadvantage: The impact of economic and social hardship on young citizens. Journal of Social Issues, 64(3), 571-593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00578.x
Rossiter, Clinton (1966). 1787: The Grand Convention. New York: Macmillian. https://doi.org/10.2307/1371478
Ruisch et al., (2021). Examining the Left-Right Divide Through the Lens of a Global Crisis: Ideological Differences and Their Implications for Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Political Psychology, 42(5). https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12740 PMid:34226775 PMCid:PMC8242330
Sapolsky, Harvey (1968). Science, voters, and the fluoridation controversy. Science 162 (3852), 427-433. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3852.427 PMid:5683048
Sexton, Patricia. C. (1961). Education and income: Inequalities of opportunity in our public schools. New York: Viking Press.
Verba, Sidney; Burns, Nancy, and Schlozman, Kay L. (2003). Unequal at the Starting Line: Creating Participatory Inequalities across generations and among groups. The American Sociologist 34(1-2), 45-69 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-003-1005-y
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2023 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
© CSIC. Los originales publicados en las ediciones impresa y electrónica de esta Revista son propiedad del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, siendo necesario citar la procedencia en cualquier reproducción parcial o total.
Salvo indicación contraria, todos los contenidos de la edición electrónica se distribuyen bajo una licencia de uso y distribución “Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional ” (CC BY 4.0). Consulte la versión informativa y el texto legal de la licencia. Esta circunstancia ha de hacerse constar expresamente de esta forma cuando sea necesario.
No se autoriza el depósito en repositorios, páginas web personales o similares de cualquier otra versión distinta a la publicada por el editor.
Datos de los fondos
National Science Foundation
Números de la subvención MDR8550085;REC96-27669;RED-9909569;REC-0337487;DUE-0525357;DUE-0712842;DUE-0856695;DRL-0917535;HRD-1348619
National Institute on Aging
Números de la subvención 5R01AG049624-02
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Números de la subvención NNX16AC66A
