COVID-19 lockdown measures;
Difference-in-differences;
Institutional trust;
Netherlands;
Trust in government;
Trust in science;
PUBLIC TRUST;
POLITICAL TRUST;
RISK PERCEPTION;
HEALTH;
D O I:
10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113819
中图分类号:
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号:
1004 ;
120402 ;
摘要:
Many governments have implemented strict lockdown measures to prevent the transmission of the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Compliance with these restrictions is vital and depends greatly on the level of trust in the institutions central to their development and implementation. The objectives of this study were to assess: (1) the effects of the Dutch lockdown measures imposed in March 2020 on trust in government and trust in science; and (2) whether these differ across social groups. We draw on unique data from the high-quality Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences panel, which comprises a true probability sample of Dutch households (average participation rate: 80.4%). Our data were collected on an ongoing basis from December 2017 to March 2020 (n = 2219). Using the implementation of lockdown measures in mid-March as a natural experiment, we employed difference-in-differences analyses to assess the causal effect of the Dutch lockdown measures on trust in government and trust in science. We estimated that the imposition of the measures caused an 18% increase (95% confidence interval (CI):15%?21%)) in trust in government and a 6% increase (95% CI: 4%?8%) in trust in science. The impact on trust in government was greater among the participants aged 65 and older and those with poor self-assessed health, although the relevant CIs were wide and, in the case of self-assessed health, included the null. No differential effects were observed for trust in science. Our study indicates that the strict public-health measures imposed in the Netherlands during an acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic generated trust in the institutions involved in drafting and implementing them, especially among those with a higher risk of serious health outcomes. This suggests that, to prevent a major public-health crisis, people appreciate firm government intervention during the acute phase of an infectious disease pandemic.
机构:
South Dakota State Univ, SDSU Poll, Sch Amer & Global Studies, Brookings, SD 57007 USASouth Dakota State Univ, SDSU Poll, Sch Amer & Global Studies, Brookings, SD 57007 USA
Viskupic, Filip
Wiltse, David L.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
South Dakota State Univ, SDSU Poll, Sch Amer & Global Studies, Brookings, SD 57007 USASouth Dakota State Univ, SDSU Poll, Sch Amer & Global Studies, Brookings, SD 57007 USA
Wiltse, David L.
Meyer, Brittney A.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
South Dakota State Univ, Coll Pharm & Allied Hlth Profess, Brookings, SD 57007 USASouth Dakota State Univ, SDSU Poll, Sch Amer & Global Studies, Brookings, SD 57007 USA
机构:
Curtin Univ, John Curtin Inst Publ Policy, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
Australia & New Zealand Sch Govt, Melbourne, Vic, AustraliaCurtin Univ, John Curtin Inst Publ Policy, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
Goldfinch, Shaun
Taplin, Ross
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Curtin Univ, Perth, WA, AustraliaCurtin Univ, John Curtin Inst Publ Policy, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
Taplin, Ross
Gauld, Robin
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Univ Otago, Dunedin, New ZealandCurtin Univ, John Curtin Inst Publ Policy, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia