Charlotte Beaudoina doctoral student at the Pacte laboratory as part of the POLINEQUAL PROJECT

The management of the health crisis has been highly politicized under Donald Trump's administration, resulting in strong divisions in public opinion around the issue. According to polls, between April and June 2020, 57% to 60% of Americans disapproved of the Trump administration's handling of the crisis. But what factors explain their perception of the seriousness of the crisis, which can be measured through the anxiety felt about the virus and its economic consequences? Is this perception influenced by political factors, such as political ideology and confidence? What role do factors of vulnerability to the virus, such as age, health or economic situation, play?

Our results show that political ideology is an important bias in the perception of the severity of the Covid-19 crisis. Americans who identify as liberals express much more anxiety than those who identify as conservatives. But trust also plays a key role. Citizens who trust the media and scientists are more anxious than those who trust the president. Finally, while age and health do not condition anxiety in the face of the crisis, economic insecurity as measured by job loss and a worsening economic situation are determining factors.

Covid-19 management divides American public opinion

Disagreement over the seriousness of the crisis crisis and the policies that should or should not be pursued to tackle the pandemic were embodied by Joe Biden and Donald Trump. For the Democratic candidate, it was a matter of putting in place more restrictions to save lives. The crisis also enabled him to reaffirm some of the key points of his platform, notably the urgent need to to implement far-reaching social reforms to protect the most precarious affected by the crisis. As for the outgoing president, he preferred he preferred to play the vaccine card, which would arrive quickly and "thanks to him ", thereby the need to implement overly restrictive measures.

But these differences are not confined to the two political personalities: they reflect deeper oppositions. Political science researchers agree that political affiliation is a highly significant predictor of attitudes and behavior towards Covid-19. Neelon, Mutiso, Mueller and Pearce (2021) as well as Baccini and Brodeur (2021 ) have shown that there is a link between political positioning and decisions made regarding Covid-19. States governed by Democrats often took swifter, more binding action to slow the pandemic. The two parties have also adopted very different positions on the virus. Republicans have tended to minimize the impact of the crisis and oppose measures taken on the grounds that they interfere with individual freedoms. The Democrats, on the other hand, advocated health security and the need to protect the most vulnerable.

The president is not the only actor who can influence citizens' perceptions and attitudes. The media can send out very strong political and partisan signals, helping to shape, reinforce and change perceptions, which are all the more malleable in that crises lead to situations of uncertainty.

A first, very simple element leads us to believe that the media play a key role in the perception of the seriousness of the crisis. The information relayed by most of them on Covid-19 is, by definition, quite anxiety-provoking. Those who consume and trust the media are more exposed to this stressful information.

Added to this is a second point more specific to the United States. Donald Trump has had a very complicated relationship with the media, which he has described as " enemies of the American people " and propagators of fake news since the start of his campaign in 2016. With the exception of a few (such as Fox News), most have been highly critical of his handling of the health crisis. The New York Times headlined on October 2, 2020, " He Could Have Seen What Was Coming: Behind Trump's Failure on the Virus, an Examination Reveals that the President Was Warned of the Possibility of a Pandemic but That Internal Divisions, Lack of Planning and His Faith in His Own Instincts Led to a Hesitant Response."

Like the media, Donald Trump and his government have continually attacked scientists, ignored their advice and even interfered in their work, when it would have seemed common sense to refer to the advice of epidemiologists and scientists in times of pandemic.

We can therefore expect to observe a strong opposition according to the degree of trust in the media and scientists. Those who trust the media and/or scientists will trust less a president who, like Donald Trump, has instead sent out "reassuring" messages. Indeed, Trump has repeatedly said that no one is trustworthy but himself. And although his support has weakened over time, he has a very "loyal" base of voters (to the point of contesting the outcome of the presidential election). This is why we hypothesize that the most conservative Americans will be more inclined to trust President Trump, less the media and scientists, and will by extension express a lower degree of concern about Covid-19 than their more liberal counterparts.

Economic insecurity, a source of anxiety in the face of the crisis

It would seem consistent that the factors that make us more or less vulnerable to the virus play a part in shaping our perception of the severity of the crisis. A person in poor health or of advanced age is more likely to develop a severe form of the virus and die from it, which should generate more anxiety. American households have also been significantly impactedby the crisis. In November 2020, 12% of the general population said they had experienced a food shortage in their home, and many had seen their financial situation worsen.

What's more, the job market has been shaken by Covid-19. In June 2020, the US unemployment rate was 14.7%. Remember that the US healthcare system is highly privatized. Medical coverage depends largely on salary status (employers pay the premiums for their employees). Although some people have access to certain forms of assistance (notably Medicaid for the poorest and Medicare for the elderly), the fact remains that a significant proportion of the population is left to fend for itself in the event of difficulties. In 2020, 13% of people under 65 had no insurance at all.

In short, millions of Americans have directly experienced the negative consequences of the crisis, which can only help to shape their perceptions of a crisis they have experienced themselves. Not being able to meet one's basic needs on a daily basis represents a high source of anxiety, compared with those who have the necessary resources to cope with unforeseen events.

Ideology and political confidence, key factors in the perception of the seriousness of the crisis

In order to verify whether ideological biases are more determining factors in the perception of the seriousness of the crisis than personal variables, we have exploited data from a representative survey (n=1523) conducted in July 2020 with the support of the Survey Research Center of Princeton. We constructed a multiple linear regression model, which allows us to test which factors best account for anxiety in relation to Covid-19 (see table below).

Our explanatory variables consist of two blocks. The first includes certain socio-demographic characteristics (gender, age, level of education, subjective social class, subjective health status) as well as three variables related to the situation during the Covid-19 crisis(1) Since the start of the crisis, would you say that your economic situation has worsened, remained the same or improved? 2) Have you lost your job since the start of the crisis? 3) Have you had or do you know someone around you who has had Covid-19?). The second block describes political ideology, interest in politics, and confidence in the president, the media and experts/scientists.

Despite the limitations of our model (due in particular to the rather open-ended wording of the question), the independent variables explain almost 27% of the variance of the variable to be explained. The high significance shown by the asterisks indicates that most of the explanatory factors we tested are relevant to understanding how perceptions of the crisis are formed.

Respondents who self-identify as "liberal" express significantly more anxiety than "conservatives". Strong interest in politics, high trust in the media and scientists are predictors of high anxiety, while expressed trust in the president is associated with low anxiety. These results confirm that political orientation and trust are determining factors in shaping attitudes towards Covid-19.

Moreover, if perceptions are influenced by ideological bias, an analogous partisan bias can be found in the behaviors adopted in the face of Covid-19. Typically, it has been shown that Democrats were more respectful of barrier gestures than Republicans, so that "social distancing behaviors were more frequent among liberals and were associated with increased depressive symptoms"(Gollwitzer et al, 2020).

Economic situation and employment are also vectors of polarization

However, certain personal factors remain just as decisive in explaining the anxiety expressed by Americans, notably gender, having lost one's job due to Covid-19, or having seen one's financial situation deteriorate (the three being linked). This confirms that those most affected by the economic consequences of the crisis are also more anxious (women also being more affected).

On the other hand, age and subjective health status were not decisive. These results concur with those of Makridis and Rothwell (2021 ), who show that factors that "increase the risk of death" from the virus have no significant effect on attitudes in the USA. 

If public policies and their perceptions are usually guided by ideological and electoral considerations, should this be the case in times of health crisis? Without suggesting that everyone should agree on everything (disagreement and debate are essential to democracy), our results are a reminder that political cleavages are particularly strong in the United States, a fact that has long alerted researchers to the relationship between political polarization and the deterioration of democracy (the two being mutually influential).

While Donald Trump's tenure has reinforced these divides, one of the biggest challenges facing incoming President Joe Biden is undoubtedly to heal them; which may start with reducing inequality to narrow the distance between the "rich" and the "poor" that undermines social cohesion.