Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32621294›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of social psychology2020

Mapping public health responses with attitude networks: the emergence of opinion-based groups in the UK's early COVID-19 response phase.

Paul J Maher, Pádraig MacCarron, Michael Quayle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of social psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Paul J MaherDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Social Issues Research, University of Limerick, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0119-0411
Pádraig MacCarronDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Social Issues Research, University of Limerick, Ireland.
Michael QuayleDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Social Issues Research, University of Limerick, Ireland.

Funding

European Research Council (ERC) 802421
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Partisan patterns of compliance with public health measures are a feature of early COVID-19 responses. In many cases, these differences in behaviour relate to pre-existing group identities. However, in times of rapid societal change, novel opinion-based groups can emerge and provide a new basis for partisan identification and divergent collective behaviour. Here, we use network methods to map the emergence of opposing opinion-based groups and assess their implications for public health behaviour. In a longitudinal study, we tracked public health attitudes and self-reported behaviour in a sample of UK participants over four time points. Network visualisation reveal a rift in attitudinal alignment over time and the genesis of two distinct groups characterised by trust, or distrust, in science (Study 1a; N = 253). These groups also diverge in public health behaviour. In a brief follow-up study (N = 206), we find that this opinion polarization partially reflects underlying societal divides. We discuss implications for opinion-based group research and public health campaigns.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthBetacoronavirusPublic OpinionAdultCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FemaleHealth PromotionHumansMalePandemicsPneumonia, ViralPoliticsPublic HealthRisk Reduction BehaviorSARS-CoV-2attitude networksCOVID-19identityopinion-based groupspolitical polarization

Identifiers

PMID32621294
PMCPMC7361608

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.