When Wearing a Mask Is (Not) the Norm: Political Partisanship and Persuasion in the Context of COVID-19

Abstract

This study examined the effects of source partisanship and credentials on persuasion. Democrats and Republicans (N = 206) read a policy statement advocating for a national mask mandate, ostensibly written by either a doctor or layperson, associated either with the Democratic or Republican party. Participants’ perceptions of the source and receptivity to the message aligned with their political party’s normative position on the issue: Democrats rated the source as more competent and trustworthy, engaged in less counterarguing, and supported the policy more than Republicans. Although the doctor was trusted more than the layperson and Republicans (but not Democrats) attributed more trust and competence to an ingroup than an outgroup source, source characteristics had no effect on message receptivity.

Keywords:

• COVID-19
• norms
• Persuasion
• Social Categorization
• Social Identity
• Source Characteristics

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 Democrats (n = 103; M_age = 20.54; 67.0% women) and Republicans (n = 103; M_age = 21.13; 58.3% women) did not significantly differ in terms of mean age, t(204) = −.70, p = .49, or gender distribution, χ²(3) = 2.98, p = .40.

2 Analyses excluding participants who incorrectly recalled the source’s partisanship (n = 37) yielded similar results.

3 Though, as noted earlier, this effect may be moderated by ingroup sources’ perceived prototypicality.