Scientists, presidents, and pandemics-comparing the science-politics nexus during the Zika virus and COVID-19 outbreaks

Objective We investigate how beliefs about scientists and presidents affect views about two pandemics, Zika virus (2016) and COVID-19 (2020). Methods Three New Hampshire surveys in 2016 and 2020 provide data to test how beliefs about scientists' practices and presidential approval relate to pandemic views. Results Support for presidents consistently predicts perceptions of scientists' integrity and trust in science agencies for information, but the directionality changes from 2016 to 2020-increased trust among Obama-supporters; decreased trust among Trump-supporters. Respondents who believe scientists lack objectivity are also less likely to trust science agencies during both Zika and COVID-19 and are less apt to be confident in the government's response in 2016. Assessments of pandemic responses become increasingly political during 2020; most notably, support for President Trump strongly predicts confidence in the government's efforts. Conclusion Results highlight how beliefs about scientists' practices and presidents are central to the science-politics nexus during pandemics.

Automated summary

This study investigates how beliefs about scientists and presidents influence views on pandemics, specifically Zika virus and COVID-19. Results show that support for presidents predicts perceptions of scientists' integrity and trust in government responses, with a shift in direction from 2016 to 2020. Trust in science agencies and government efforts during pandemics is also influenced by beliefs about scientists' objectivity and political leanings.