Person:

Baum, Matthew

This study assesses the relationship between political partisanship and attitudes and behavior with respect to the Swine Flu crisis of 2009 in general, and the U.S. mass vaccination program in particular. I argue that even seemingly non-partisan political issues like public health are increasingly characterized by partisan polarization in public attitudes, and that such polarization is in part attributable, at least in part, to the breakdown of the information commons that characterized the American mass media from roughly the 1950s until the early 1990s. In its place has arisen an increasingly fragmented and niche-oriented media marketplace in which individuals are better able to limit their information exposure to attitudes and opinions that reinforce, rather than challenge, their preexisting beliefs. I test my argument against a variety of data sources, including opinion surveys and state level Swine Flu vaccination rate data.

What do Americans think about the US role in world affairs and why do they think the way they do? Americans typically do not think about foreign policy most of the time, and, as a consequence, know relatively little about it (Almond 1950, Lippmann 1955, Converse 1964, Erskine 1963, Edwards 1983, Sobel 1993, Holsti 2004, Canes-Wrone 2006, Page and Bouton 2006, Berinsky 2007). While foreign policy issues can become salient when major international events (like 9/11 and the Iraq War) arise or when political candidates focus on foreign policy (Aldrich, Sullivan and Borgida 1989), ceteris paribus, Americans know and care more about domestic politics (Delli-Carpini and Keeter 1996, Holsti 1994, Canes-Wrone 2006, Converse 1964). Consequently, typical Americans are broadly aware of foreign policy, and have some available attitudes about it (Page and Bouton 2006, Aldrich et al. 1989). However, except in the face of political priming by elites or exogenous shocks, such attitudes may not be broadly accessible when making political decisions, like voting.

We surveyed 19,058 individuals across all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted on 10-26 July 2020 by PureSpectrum via an online, nonprobability sample, with state-level representative quotas for race/ethnicity, age, and gender (for methodological details on the other waves, see covidstates.org). In addition to balancing on these dimensions, we reweighted our data using demographic characteristics to match the U.S. population with respect to race/ethnicity, age, gender, education, and living in urban, suburban, or rural areas. This was the seventh in a series of surveys we have been conducting since April 2020, examining attitudes and behaviors regarding COVID-19 in the United States.

We surveyed 19,058 individuals across all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted on 10-26 July 2020 by PureSpectrum via an online, nonprobability sample, with state-level representative quotas for race/ethnicity, age, and gender (for methodological details on the other waves, see covidstates.org). In addition to balancing on these dimensions, we reweighted our data using demographic characteristics to match the U.S. population with respect to race/ethnicity, age, gender, education, and living in urban, suburban, or rural areas. This was the seventh in a series of surveys we have been conducting since April 2020, examining attitudes and behaviors regarding COVID-19 in the United States.

In June and July 2020, we surveyed 37,325 individuals across all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. The two survey waves used in this report were conducted on 12-28 June and 10-26 July 2020 by PureSpectrum via an online, nonprobability sample, with state-level representative quotas for race/ethnicity, age, and gender (for methodological details on the other waves, see covidstates.org). In addition to balancing on these dimensions, we reweighted our data using demographic characteristics to match the U.S. population with respect to race/ethnicity, age, gender, education, and living in urban, suburban, or rural areas. This was part of a project including a series of large-scale surveys we have been conducting since April 2020, examining attitudes and behaviors regarding COVID-19 in the United States.

We surveyed 19,052 individuals across all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted on 10-26 July 2020 by PureSpectrum via an online, nonprobability sample, with state-level representative quotas for race/ethnicity, age, and gender (for methodological details on the other waves, see covidstates.org). In addition to balancing on these dimensions, we reweighted our data using demographic characteristics to match the U.S. population with respect to race/ethnicity, age, gender, education, and living in urban, suburban, or rural areas. This was the seventh in a series of surveys we have been conducting since April 2020, examining attitudes and behaviors regarding COVID-19 in the United States.

We surveyed 20,333 individuals across all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted on 2-15 May 2020 by PureSpectrum via an online, nonprobability sample, with state-level representative quotas for race/ethnicity, age, and gender. In addition to balancing on these dimensions, we reweighted our data using demographic characteristics.

We surveyed 18,132 individuals across all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted on 16-31 May 2020 by PureSpectrum via an online, nonprobability sample, with state-level representative quotas for race/ethnicity, age, and gender. In addition to balancing on these dimensions, we reweighted our data using demographic characteristics.

From April 17 to 26 we conducted a large, 50 state survey, the results of which are presented in this report. The first section of the report looks at the nation as a whole while the second section focuses on individual states and comparisons across states.

We conducted a mixed-methods research project in Nigeria, India, and Pakistan consisting of surveys, survey experiments, and semi-structured interviews, to better understand the spread and impact of misinformation, and in particular of misinformation on mobile messaging apps (MIMs).

One of our goals was to evaluate the relevance and prevalence of viral false claims in each country. We found evidence that popular “false claims” debunked by fact-checking companies are widely recognized, but, unsurprisingly, news from mainstream media are more widely recognized than the false claims. This is certainly a good sign, which confirms similar trends reported elsewhere (Allen et al., 2020; Guess et al., 2019).

However, we also found preliminary evidence that misinformation circulates wide on messaging apps. When asked whether and where they encountered researcher-selected false claims, participants reported to be exposed to more false claims than “mainstream claims” (i.e., true) on messaging apps, while this was not the case for traditional media, such as newspapers and TV News. While others have found false claims to be more prevalent on social media than on mainstream media (Stecula et al., 2020), this is the first systematic evidence that messaging apps might be the primary source for spread of misinformation.