Search

Early public health strategies to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the United States relied on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) as vaccines and therapeutic treatments were not yet available. Implementation of NPIs, primarily social distancing and mask wearing, varied widely between communities within the US due to variable government mandates, as well as differences in attitudes and opinions. To understand the interplay of trust, risk perception, behavioral intention, and disease burden, we developed a survey instrument to study attitudes concerning COVID-19 and pandemic behavioral change in three states: Idaho, Texas, and Vermont. We designed our survey (n = 1034) to detect whether these relationships were significantly different in rural populations. The best fitting structural equation models show that trust indirectly affects protective pandemic behaviors via health and economic risk perception. We explore two different variations of this social cognitive model: the first assumes behavioral intention affects future disease burden while the second assumes that observed disease burden affects behavioral intention. In our models we include several exogenous variables to control for demographic and geographic effects. Notably, political ideology is the only exogenous variable which significantly affects all aspects of the social cognitive model (trust, risk perception, and behavioral intention). While there is a direct negative effect associated with rurality on disease burden, likely due to the protective effect of low population density in the early pandemic waves, we found a marginally significant, positive, indirect effect of rurality on disease burden via decreased trust (p = 0.095). This trust deficit creates additional vulnerabilities to COVID-19 in rural communities which also have reduced healthcare capacity. Increasing trust by methods such as in-group messaging could potentially remove some of the disparities inferred by our models and increase NPI effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We use data from 33 in‐depth interviews conducted with residents in the rural inland Northwestern state of Idaho who self‐identify as skeptical about anthropogenic climate change, to examine the nuance within the narratives that skeptics employ to voice their skepticism. Our findings show that the arguments employed by those who are skeptical of climate change do not constitute a clear typology of skepticism or "skeptics." Rather, individuals weave together unique stories—shaped by their social locations, personal experiences, and underlying ideological beliefs—and, through combining different argument threads, explain why they believe climate change is a fictitious problem. Our findings suggest that while some skeptics may lean on religion‐based or conspiracy‐based narratives to rationalize their skepticism, others may rely on science attitudes, personal experiences, or a range of additional reasons to be skeptical of climate change. In short, climate skepticism is not uniform nor accurately typologized, but a complex tapestry of socially shaped beliefs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using interviews with residents of Idaho (a rural northwest US state) who identify as skeptical of climate change, we examine how skeptics rationalize their doubts about climate science. Skeptics tend to question the reality and human causes of climate change by (1) raising concerns about incentive structures in science that could bias climatology, (2) doubting the accuracy of data and models used by climate scientists, and (3) perceiving some practices of climate science and scientists as exclusionary. Despite these concerns, skeptics exhibit deference to scientific authority when using scientific assessments to make policy decisions, including environmental policy. Understanding skeptics' concerns about climate science and areas where they support science-based policy, will lead to better dialogue between scientists, interest groups, policy makers, and the skeptical public, potentially clarifying avenues to communicate climate information and enact climate policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing survey instruments of trust in science and scientists that focus on the general public are potentially insufficient to assess climate skeptics' perspectives towards climate science. They may miss important aspects of climate science about which skeptics raise concerns, and may not accurately measure climate skeptics' distrust in climatology. We introduce a new survey instrument developed using data gathered from interviewing 33 self-identified climate change skeptics in Idaho. The survey items capture skeptics' beliefs regarding climate scientists' trustworthiness and credibility, their deference to scientific authority, and their perceptions of alienation from the climate science community. We validate our survey instrument using data from an online survey administered to 1000 residents in the U.S. Pacific Northwest who are skeptical of climate change. By employing standard survey design principles, we demonstrate how our new (dis)trust in climate science instrument performs in tandem with well-known predictors of science attitudes and pro-environmentalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Effective risk communication strategies are critical to reducing lead exposure in mining-impacted communities. Understanding the strength of the associations between perceived risk and individuals' behavioral intentions to protect their health is important for developing these strategies. We conducted a survey within three communities of northern Idaho, USA ( n = 306) in or near a Superfund Megasite with legacy mining contamination. Survey data were used to test a theoretical model based on the Health Belief Model. Respondents had higher intentions to practice health protective behaviors when they perceived the risk of lead contamination as severe and recognized the benefits of practicing health protective behaviors. Women reported higher behavioral intentions than men, but age and mining affiliation were not significantly associated with behavioral intentions. Although managing lead hazards in communities impacted by mining is challenging due to widely distributed contamination, effective health risk messages, paired with remediation, are powerful tools to protect the health and safety of residents.