“Compliant Supporters,” “Anxious Skeptics,” and “Defiant Deniers”: A Latent Profile Analysis of People’s Responses to COVID-19 Communications

7Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This study investigates whether people’s responses to official communications about COVID-19 could be “profiled” with respect to socio-economic-demographic and behavioral characteristics. Such profiles could enhance the effectiveness of future crisis management through the use of profile-adapted communications that maximize message comprehension. A representative web panel survey (742 respondents) was conducted across Switzerland in February 2022 to assess the population’s reaction to COVID-19 communications during the pandemic. Latent profile analysis was conducted to explore if distinct profiles of reactions to the communications would emerge, and how each of them relate to conspiracy mentality and SED measures. The analyses revealed three latent profiles: “Compliant supporters” (54%), “defiant deniers” (23.6%), and “anxious skeptics” (22.4%). Respondents with high conspiracy mentality were more likely to belong to “defiant deniers” or “anxious skeptics.” Each profile was characterized by distinct SED and behavioral features (discussed in the paper). The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that one communication does not work for all people. Our study evidenced three different types of respondent profiles that require profile-adapted communications for more effective crisis control. Our study is the first to profile people’s responses to COVID-19 communications in a systematic, person-centered way. The results can be used for more effective future crisis management that delivers to each profile’s communicative needs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hannawa, A. F., & Stojanov, A. (2024). “Compliant Supporters,” “Anxious Skeptics,” and “Defiant Deniers”: A Latent Profile Analysis of People’s Responses to COVID-19 Communications. Health Communication, 39(1), 148–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2022.2162224

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free