Partisanship or Personal Experience?: Explaining Attitudes about COVID in Mexico

• In Event: Misinformation and Conspiracy Theories

Abstract

Emerging research from the United States suggests that citizens’ perceptions about the severity of the coronavirus (COVID-19) and the adoption of personal preventative behaviors are shaped by political party affiliation. This finding builds on political science scholarship that emphasizes the power of elite messaging in shaping public opinion (Zaller 1992). While intriguing, this nascent relationship has not been fully explored outside the US. Given the rising worldwide rates of COVID-19 infections, it is important to understand whether and to what degree the relationship between partisanship and COVID-19 attitudes and behaviors is generalizable. Is partisanship as powerful elsewhere as it is in the US? What factors override the power of partisan appeals?

We explore this question in one important case, Mexico. The potential role of partisanship in shaping citizens’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is particularly concerning here. Mexico’s current president - labeled a populist by many - was elected on an anti-establishment platform that heightened political polarization in the country. He has consistently downplayed the severity of the pandemic and ridiculed World Health Organization recommendations to stay home and wear a mask. His supporters, largely composed of the poor and popular classes, are particularly vulnerable to the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19. If partisanship shapes citizen evaluations of the pandemic and adherence to preventive measures among this population, the consequences are dire.

However, drawing on public opinion research, we hypothesize that personal experiences with the virus, such as knowing someone who was infected, may override the power of partisanship. We test this hypothesis via statistical analysis of large-n survey data. We execute a “hard test” of the personal experience hypothesis by focusing on those most likely to align themselves with the President’s pandemic narrative - his supporters. Specifically, we analyze the role personal experience vs. partisanship plays in shaping evaluations of the pandemic among party sympathizers vs. hard-liners (party militants). We show that, among the President’s supporters, personal experience with COVID-19 is more strongly associated with concern about the pandemic and one’s personal level of risk than degree of partisan commitment. Remarkably, partisanship has no statistically significant relationship with COVID attitudes or behaviors among this segment of the population, even among those most loyal to the President. Our findings suggest that when citizens are able to identify a personal connection to the risks of COVID-19, they are more likely to recognize the pandemic as a serious concern, despite partisan appeals.

Authors

• Rebecca V. Bell-Martin, Tecnologico de Monterrey

• Alejandro Diaz-Dominguez, Tecnologico de Monterrey