Menu Expand

Politisches Vertrauen während der Corona-Pandemie

  1. Journals
  2. Society & Social Sciences
  3. Sozialer Fortschritt
  4. Vol. 71, Issue 9
  5. pp. 637–657

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE

Style
Bytzek, E., Schnepf, J. Politisches Vertrauen während der Corona-Pandemie. Sozialer Fortschritt, 71(9), 637-657. https://doi.org/10.3790/sfo.71.9.637
Bytzek, Evelyn and Schnepf, Julia "Politisches Vertrauen während der Corona-Pandemie" Sozialer Fortschritt 71.9, 2022, 637-657. https://doi.org/10.3790/sfo.71.9.637
Bytzek, Evelyn/Schnepf, Julia (2022): Politisches Vertrauen während der Corona-Pandemie, in: Sozialer Fortschritt, vol. 71, iss. 9, 637-657, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/sfo.71.9.637
Format
Download

Politisches Vertrauen während der Corona-Pandemie

Bytzek, Evelyn | Schnepf, Julia

Sozialer Fortschritt, Vol. 71 (2022), Iss. 9 : pp. 637–657

Preview Login to order (PDF)

Additional Information

Article Details

Publisher Name
Duncker & Humblot
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3790/sfo.71.9.637
Language
German
Pages
21
Keywords

Pricing

Individual
€ 18.00 (incl. local VAT if applicable)

Author Details

Bytzek, Dr. Evelyn, Universität Koblenz-Landau, Fachbereich 6: Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften, Fortstr. 7, 76829 Landau.

Schnepf, Julia, Universität Koblenz-Landau, Fachbereich 8: Psychologie, Fortstr. 7, 76829 Landau.

References

  1. Ahluwalia, S. C./Edelen, M. O./Qureshi, N./Etchegaray, J. M. (2021): Trust in experts, not trust in national leadership, leads to greater uptake of recommended actions during the COVID‐19 pandemic, Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 12(3): S. 283–302, https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12219.  Google Scholar
  2. Bargain, O./Aminjonov, U. (2020): Trust and compliance to public health policies in times of COVID-19, Journal of Public Economics, 192: 104316, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104316.  Google Scholar
  3. Barnette, J. J. (2000): Effects of stem and Likert response option reversals on survey internal consistency: If you feel the need, there is a better alternative to using those negatively worded stems, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(3): S. 361–370, https://doi.org/10.1177/00131640021970592.  Google Scholar
  4. Baum, M. A. (2002): The constituent foundations of the rally-round-the-flag phenomenon, International Studies Quarterly, 46(2): S. 263–298, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2478.00232.  Google Scholar
  5. Brand, T./Follmer, R./Hölscher, J./Unzicker, K. (2021): Gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt in Zeiten der Pandemie. Ergebnisse einer Längsschnittstudie in Deutschland 2020, Bertelsmann Stiftung.  Google Scholar
  6. Brand, T./Follmer, R./Unzicker, K. (2020): Gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt in Deutschland 2020. Eine Herausforderung für uns alle. Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Bevölkerungsstudie, Bertelsmann Stiftung.  Google Scholar
  7. Breznau, N. (2021): The welfare state and risk perceptions: the Novel Coronavirus Pandemic and public concern in 70 countries, European Societies, 23: S. 33–46, https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2020.1793215.  Google Scholar
  8. Bytzek, E. (2007): Ereignisse und ihre Wirkung auf die Popularität von Regierungen. Von der Schleyer-Entführung zur Elbeflut, Baden-Baden.  Google Scholar
  9. Bytzek, E./Steffens, M. C./Schnepf, J./Bogado, N./Rudert, S. C. (under review): „The established parties are all the same, aren’t they!?“ Do heterogeneous versus homogeneous election pledges on immigration policies affect voting behaviour?  Google Scholar
  10. Cantillon, B./Seeleib‐Kaiser, M./van der Veen, R. (2021): The COVID‐19 crisis and policy responses by continental European welfare states, Social Policy & Administration, 55(2): S. 326–338, https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12715.  Google Scholar
  11. Chapman, T. L./Reiter, D. (2004): The United Nations Security Council and the rally’ round the flag effect, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 48(6): S. 886–909, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002704269353.  Google Scholar
  12. Chatagnier, J. T. (2012): The effect of trust in government on rallies’ round the flag, Journal of Peace Research, 49(5): S. 631–645, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343312440808.  Google Scholar
  13. Dal-Ré, R./Launay, O. (2021): Public trust on regulatory decisions: The European Medicines Agency and the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine label, Vaccine. 39(30): S. 4029–4031, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.05.095.  Google Scholar
  14. Degen, M. (2021): Aus der Schockstarre zur Akteurszentrierung – die Phasen der Pandemie-Berichterstattung, Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 31(1): S. 125–131, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41358-021-00260-9.  Google Scholar
  15. Dohle, S./Wingen, T./Schreiber, M. (2020): Acceptance and adoption of protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of trust in politics and trust in science, Social Psychological Bulletin, 15(4): S. 1–23, https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.4315.  Google Scholar
  16. Easton, D. (1965): A Systems Analysis of Political Life, New York.  Google Scholar
  17. Erhardt, J./Freitag, M./Filsinger, M./Wamsler, S. (2021): The emotional foundations of political support: How fear and anger affect trust in the government in times of the Covid‐19 pandemic, Swiss Political Science Review, 27(2): S. 339–352, https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12462.  Google Scholar
  18. Fancourt, D./Steptoe, A./Wright, L. (2020): The Cummings effect: politics, trust, and behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic, The Lancet, 396(10249): S. 464–465, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31690-1.  Google Scholar
  19. Halmburger, A./Rothmund, T./Baumert, A./Maier, J. (2019): Trust in politicians – understanding and measuring the perceived trustworthiness of specific politicians and politicians in general as multidimensional constructs, in: Bytzek, E./Rosar, U./Steinbrecher, M. (Hrsg.), Wahrnehmung – Persönlichkeit – Einstellungen, Psychologische Theorien und Methoden in der Wahl- und Einstellungsforschung, Wiesbaden, S. 235–302, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21216-2_8.  Google Scholar
  20. Kim, H. K./Tandoc Jr, E. C. (2021): Wear or not to wear a mask? Recommendation inconsistency, government trust and the adoption of protection behaviors in cross-lagged TPB models, Health Communication, Advance online publication, https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1871170.  Google Scholar
  21. Kritzinger, S./Foucalt, M./Lachat, R./Partheymüller, J./Plescia, C./Brouard, S. (2021): ‚Rally round the flag‘: the COVID-19 crisis and trust in the national government, West European Politics, 44: S. 1205–1231, https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2021.1925017.  Google Scholar
  22. Lambert, A. J./Schott, J. P./Scherer, L. (2011): Threat, politics, and attitudes: Toward a greater understanding of rally-’round-the-flag effects, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(6): S. 343–348, https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411422060.  Google Scholar
  23. Latkin, C. A./Dayton, L./Strickland, J. C./Colon, B./Rimal, R./Boodram, B. (2020): An assessment of the rapid decline of trust in US sources of public information about COVID-19, Journal of Health Communication, 25(10): S. 764–773, https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2020.1865487.  Google Scholar
  24. Masnick, A. M./Zimmerman, C. (2009): Evaluating scientific research in the context of prior belief: Hindsight bias or confirmation bias, Journal of Psychology of Science and Technology, 2(1): S. 29–36, https://doi.org/10.1891/1939-7054.2.1.29.  Google Scholar
  25. Mayer, R. C./Davis, J. H./Schoorman, F. D. (1995): An integrative model of organizational trust, Academy of Management Review, 20: S. 709–734, https://doi.org/10.5465/ amr.1995.9508080335.  Google Scholar
  26. Mueller, J. E. (1970): Presidential popularity from Truman to Johnson, American Political Science Review, 64: S. 18–34.  Google Scholar
  27. Mueller, J. E. (1973): War, Presidents and Public Opinion, Lanham u.a.  Google Scholar
  28. Norpoth, H. (1994): Hohe Politik und Wahlen: die „Deutsche Frage“ 1990, in: Klingemann, H.-D./Kaase, M. (Hrsg.), Wahlen und Wähler. Analysen aus Anlass der Bundestagswahl 1990, Opladen, S. 65- 83.  Google Scholar
  29. Norpoth, H (1995): Wiedervereinigung und Wahlentscheidung, in: Reuband, K.-H./Pappi, F. U./Best, H. (Hrsg.), Die deutsche Gesellschaft in vergleichender Perspektive. Festschrift für Erwin K. Scheuch zum 65. Geburtstag, Opladen, S. 452–471.  Google Scholar
  30. Oneal, J. R./Bryan, A. L. (1995): The rally ‘round the flag effect in US foreign policy crises, 1950–1985, Political Behavior, 17(4): S. 379–401, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01498516.  Google Scholar
  31. Petersen, M. B./Bor, A./Jørgensen, F./Lindholt, M. F. (2021): Transparent communication about negative features of COVID-19 vaccines decreases acceptance but increases trust, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(29), https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2024597118.  Google Scholar
  32. Plohl, N./Musil, B. (2021): Modeling compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines: The critical role of trust in science, Psychology, Health & Medicine, 26(1): S. 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2020.1772988.  Google Scholar
  33. Renn, O. (2020): Risk communication: Insights and requirements for designing successful communication programs on health and environmental hazards, in: Heath, R. L./O’Hair, H. D. (Hrsg.), Handbook of risk and crisis communication, New York, S. 80–98, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003070726.  Google Scholar
  34. Rothstein, B./Uslaner, E. M. (2005): All for all: Equality, corruption, and social trust, World Politics, 58(1): S. 41–72, https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2006.0022.  Google Scholar
  35. Schiffers, M. (2021): Illegitime Geschäfte in der „Coronakratie“– ethische Perspektiven auf die Einflussnahme durch politische Entscheidungsträgerinnen und -träger, Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 31(3): S. 469–477, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41358-021-00270-7.  Google Scholar
  36. Schnepf, J./Bytzek, E./Rudert, S. C./Steffens, M. C. (in press). Parteienpolarisierung gleich Rändermobilisierung? Eine experimentelle Studie zur Wirkung von Parteienpolarisierung auf die Wahlbeteiligungsabsicht, Zeitschrift für Politische Psychologie.  Google Scholar
  37. Schnepf, J./Christmann, U. (2022): „It’s a war! It’s a battle! It’s a fight!“: Do militaristic metaphors increase people’s threat perceptions and support for COVID‐19 policies?, International Journal of Psychology, 57(1): S. 107–126, https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12797.  Google Scholar
  38. Seyd, B. (2016): How should we measure political trust? Konferenzbeitrag vorgestellt in Brighton, Political Studies Association Annual Conference, 21.–23. März 2016, https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2016/Paper.v2.pdf.  Google Scholar
  39. Statistisches Bundesamt (2018a): Bevölkerung nach Nationalität und Geschlecht 2018, https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Bevoelkerungsstand/Tabellen/zensus-geschlecht-staatsangehoerigkeit-2018.html.  Google Scholar
  40. Statistisches Bundesamt (2018b): Bildungsstand der Bevölkerung. Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2018, https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bildung-Forschung-Kultur/Bildungsstand/Publikationen/Downloads-Bildungsstand/bildungsstand-bevoelkerung-5210002187004.pdf?__blob=publicationFile.  Google Scholar
  41. Statistisches Bundesamt (2020): Bevölkerung nach Nationalität und Geschlecht 2020, https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Bevoelkerungsstand/Tabellen/zensus-geschlecht-staatsangehoerigkeit-2020.html.  Google Scholar
  42. Statistisches Bundesamt (2020): Bildung, Forschung und Kultur, https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bildung-Forschung-Kultur/Bildungsstand/_inhalt.html.  Google Scholar
  43. Statistisches Bundesamt (2021): Bildungsstand der Bevölkerung. Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2020, https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Haushalte-Familien/Methoden/Downloads/mikrozensus-glossar.pdf?__blob=publicationFile.  Google Scholar
  44. Statistisches Bundesamt (2022): Bevölkerung nach Nationalität und Geschlecht 2021, https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Bevoelkerungsstand/Tabellen/zensus-geschlecht-staatsangehoerigkeit-2021.html.  Google Scholar
  45. Tesch, A. (2021): Der planlose Minister. ARD Tagesschau Kommentar, https://www.tagesschau.de/kommentar/spahn-impfen-booster-101.html.  Google Scholar
  46. Tyler, T. R. (2001): The psychology of public dissatisfaction with government, in: Hibbing, J. R./Theiss-Morse, E. (Hrsg.), What is it about government that Americans dislike, New York, S. 227–242.  Google Scholar
  47. Vlandas, T./Klymak, M. (2021): Pandemic and Partisan Polarisation: Voter Evaluation of UK Government Handling During Covid‐19, Swiss Political Science Review, 27(2): S. 325–338, https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12457.  Google Scholar
  48. Yang, K. (2020): What can COVID-19 tell us about evidence-based management?, The American Review of Public Administration, 50(6–7): S. 706–712, https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020942406.  Google Scholar

Abstract

Political Trust During the COVID-19 Pandemic

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic even strict measures for pandemic control were widely approved. However, this declined at later time points. In this context, a key variable linking the evaluation of political measures and the responsible actors is political trust. This variable is important not least for the stability of a welfare state-oriented pandemic response, as it is an essential resource for political actors, especially in times of crisis. If the COVID-19 pandemic and in particular the measures taken by welfare states have increased or decreased political trust, this would have affected the management of the ­pandemic. In this article, we discuss changes in political trust during the ­COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Based on two analyses, we showed that trust in the government’s Corona policy was comparatively high, but declined during the course of the pandemic. Based on our findings, we discuss the short-term increase in trust in politicians during the initial phase of policy implementation as a typical rally-round-the-flag phenomenon.

Table of Contents

Section Title Page Action Price
Evelyn Bytzek / Julia Schnepf : Politisches Vertrauen während der Corona-Pandemie 637
Zusammenfassung 637
Abstract: Political Trust During the COVID-19 Pandemic 637
1. Einleitung 638
2. Theoretische Überlegungen 640
3. Studienstruktur und Ergebnisse 642
3.1 Vertrauen in Politiker im Zeitverlauf der Pandemie: Daten und Methode 642
3.2 Vertrauen in Politiker im Zeitverlauf der Pandemie: Ergebnisse 644
3.3 Corona-Krisenmanagement und Vertrauen in die Bundesregierung: Daten und Methode 647
3.4 Corona-Krisenmanagement und Vertrauen in die Bundesregierung: Ergebnisse 649
4. Fazit und Diskussion 651
Literaturverzeichnis 653
Anhang 657

Contact

Duncker & Humblot GmbH Carl-Heinrich-Becker-Weg 9 12165 Berlin, Deutschland T: +49 30 790006-0

Quick Navigation

2024 Duncker & Humblot GmbH

Powered by CloudPublish

We use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website. Learn more about how we use cookies.