ArticlePloS one2024
Political party affiliation, social identity cues, and attitudes about protective mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This cross-sectional study aimed to determine 1) whether German citizens' adherence to health professionals' recommendations and mandates regarding protective masks during the COVID-19 pandemic varied according to their political party affiliations, and 2) how behavioral cues provided by members of shared social groups, such as family and friends, influenced individual mask-wearing behavior. A quota-based sample of German voters (n = 330) consisting of 55 citizens whose voting intentions aligned with each of the country's six main political parties responded to an online questionnaire consisting of multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Univariate descriptive statistical analyses of quantitative data were conducted, and multiple regressions were performed to determine log odds and significant variations among group-based responses. A pragmatic inductive coding process was used to conduct a thematic analysis of qualitative data. Results indicated that those participants who expressed an intention to vote for the populist radical right party were the least likely to follow health experts' recommendations and the most likely to express anger and dissatisfaction over mask mandates. Prospective Left Party voters were the most likely to adhere to the advice of their doctors, while those associated with the Green Party were the most likely to adhere to the advice of public health experts. Most survey participants reported aligning their mask-wearing behavior with that of family and friends, with prospective CDU/CSU voters particularly likely to consider the mask-wearing behavior of family members. The results indicate that public health officials should consider how group-related factors influence public health compliance in order to encourage protective mask-wearing in the future.
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.