Study Reveals Normative Messaging Successfully Bridges the Partisan Gap in Public Health Risk-Taking

University of Plymouth study shows that appealing to shared social benefits reduces pandemic risk-taking regardless of political affiliation.

By: AXL Media

Published: Mar 30, 2026, 6:36 AM EDT

Source: Information for this report was sourced from University of Plymouth

The Psychology of Partisan Crisis Response

A new study has highlighted how political affiliations significantly shape the initial reactions of individuals during a global health emergency. Conducted during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers observed that while citizens often look to their preferred political leaders for behavioral cues, these tendencies are not entirely fixed. The study, which involved more than 800 United States citizens who voted in the 2016 Presidential Election, aimed to determine if specific messaging could override partisan instincts. According to the research team, understanding these underlying psychological drivers is essential for crafting effective public policy that resonates with a divided populace.

Simulating Outbreak Risks Through Interactive Gaming

To measure risk-taking behavior without the noise of real-world politics, participants engaged in an interactive game simulating a virtual disease outbreak. In this environment, reducing transmission risk required a personal cost, such as a reduction in game points, while contracting the virtual illness resulted in the loss of all bonus payments. This "sandbox" approach allowed the researchers to isolate causal factors and observe how participants balanced self-interest against communal safety. The University of Plymouth’s School of Psychology utilized this method to bypass the biases that people may have already developed from exposure to daily news and public health advertisements.

Divergent Baselines in Risk Assessment

The initial data confirmed a notable partisan divide in how participants approached danger. Voters for the Republican Party were statistically more likely to make high-risk decisions within the game compared to Democratic voters. These risk-taking tendencies in the simulation were directly correlated with real-world behaviors, as those who took more chances in the game reported a lower intention to wear masks, practice social distancing, or limit their mobility during the actual pandemic. This suggests that the partisan gap in health outcomes, which was particularly pronounced in the United States, was rooted in fundamental differences in how different groups perceive and act upon risk.