ArticleThe Australian journal of social issues2022
Your money or your life? Public support for health initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in The Australian journal of social issues, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Empathy moderates the relationship between cognitive load and prosocial behaviour.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Disruption, Slowness, and Collective Effervescence: Children's Perspectives on COVID-19 Lockdowns.International journal on child maltreatment : research, policy and practice · 2023Article
- Your money or your life? Public support for health initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic.The Australian journal of social issues · 2022Article
- Public Health Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: The Role of the Morrison Government.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While many Australians agree with the need for COVID-19 restrictions and lockdowns, a vocal minority of citizens loudly voice opposition to government restrictions, characterised as impositions on 'free speech' and impacting the Australian economy. National data from the 2020/21 Australian Survey of Social and Attitudes and Tasmanian survey data enable an examination of those who support or oppose health initiatives aimed at minimising the impact of the pandemic. The majority of Australians believed government imposed restrictions were 'about right', although women were more likely than men to be concerned about the health implications of COVID-19. Tasmanian data show that controlling for social background, those who prioritise the economy are less likely than those concerned about the health implications of COVID-19 to wear masks in public, less likely to be tested in case they have to self-isolate, less likely to check in, and less likely to be vaccinated. Alternatively, higher trust in university research, and trust in scientists as a source of information about COVID-19 was positively associated with attitudes and behaviour designed to reduce the transmission of COVID-19.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.