Em Quem Confiam os Portugueses? A Gestão da Comunicação Governamental na Pandemia Covid-19
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17231/comsoc.40(2021).3251Palavras-chave:
comunicação, confiança, covid-19, fontes de informação, PortugalResumo
Numa situação de emergência sanitária, o grau de cumprimento público das ordens governamentais das autoridades de saúde pode afetar grandemente o curso da pandemia. Partindo do pressuposto que o (in)cumprimento das recomendações das autoridades está diretamente ligado à confiança nas fontes de informação, neste artigo, discutimos o caso concreto da comunicação governamental de Portugal durante o início da segunda vaga da doença. No contexto de uma investigação internacional da rede European Public Relations Education and Research Association Com-Covid, foi aplicado um inquérito online a 460 cidadãos portugueses entre 7 de outubro e 11 de novembro de 2020. Para este trabalho analisamos uma secção do inquérito com questões relativas às fontes de informação que inspiram maior confiança junto da população portuguesa e à opinião dos portugueses sobre a gestão da comunicação do governo. Os inquéritos foram codificados e inseridos no software estatístico SPSS. O estudo concluiu que sobressai uma perceção positiva sobre a comunicação governamental entre os inquiridos, mas que os portugueses consideram os atores do campo da saúde fontes de informação mais confiáveis do que os media ou as autoridades governamentais. Em relação à questão de género, concluiu-se que as mulheres confiam mais no governo e que têm também melhor opinião sobre a comunicação das autoridades. No que concerne à idade, verificou-se serem os jovens quem mais confia nas autoridades e nos media, ao mesmo tempo que são os mais críticos do desempenho do governo na gestão comunicacional da crise. De maneira geral, os inquiridos demonstraram pouca confiança nas redes sociais digitais e nos influenciadores digitais como fonte de informação sobre a covid-19, sendo que quanto maior é o grau académico menor é a confiança dos inquiridos nos influencers e nas redes sociais digitais.
Downloads
Referências
Abu-Akel, A., Spitz, A., & West, R. (2021). The effect of spokesperson attribution on public health message sharing during the covid-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE, 16(2), Artigo e0245100. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245100
Anderson, P., & Spitzberg, B. (2009). Myths and maxims of risk and crisis communication. In R. L. Heath & H. D. O’Hair (Eds.), Handbook of risk and crisis communication (pp. 205–226). Routledge.
Araújo, R. (2020, 12 de novembro). Continuamos à espera de um “milagre” na comunicação da covid-19. Público. https://www.publico.pt/2020/11/12/sociedade/opiniao/continuamos-espera-milagre-comunicacao-covid19-1938975
Arriaga, M. T., Ângelo, R., Gaspar, R., Espassandim, T., & Leiras, G. (2020). Princípios orientadores para comunicação de riscos e crise, baseados na perceção de riscos. Direção Geral da Saúde. https://covid19.min-saude.pt/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Principios-Orientadores-Comunicac%CC%A7a%CC%83o-Crise-2020-.pdf
Bargain, O., & Aminjonov, U. (2020). Trust and compliance to public health policies in times of covid-19. Institute of Labor Economics. https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/13205/trust-and-%20compliance-to-public-health-policies-in-times-of-covid-19
Bavel, J. J. V., Baicker, K., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., Crockett, M. J., Crum, A. J., Douglas, K. M., Druckman, J. N., Drury, J., Dube, O., Ellemers, N., Finkel, E. J., Fowler, J. H., Gelfand, M., Han, S., Haslam, S. A., Jetten, J., . . . Willer, R. (2020). Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nature Human Behavior 4, 460–471 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z
Benoit, W. L. (1995). Accounts, excuses, and apologies: A theory of image restoration. State University of New York Press.
Blair, R., Morse B., & Tsai, L. (2017). Public health and public trust: Survey evidence from the ebola virus disease epidemic in Liberia. Social Science & Medicine, 172, 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.11.016
Blavatnik School of Government. (s.d.). Covid-19 government response tracker. Retirado a 14 de fevereiro, 2021, de https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/research/research-projects/covid-19-government-response-tracker
Burton-Jeangros, C. (2019). Epidemics and risk communication: Why are lessons not learned? In M. Bourrier, N. Brender, & C. Burton-Jengros (Eds.), Managing the global health response to epidemics (pp. 105–125). Routledge.
Center for Systems Science and Engineering. (2021, 30 de janeiro). Covid-19 dashboard. Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html
Chen, L. S., & Kaphingst, K. A. (2011). Risk perceptions and family history of lung cancer: Differences by smoking status. Public Health Genomic, 14, 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1159/000294151
Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L., Zola, P., Zollo, F., & Scala, A. (2020). The covid-19 social media infodemic. Scientific Reports, 10, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-73510-5
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Earlbaum.
Coombs, W. T. (2007). Protecting organizations reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10, 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049
Devine, D., Gaskell, J., Jennings, W., & Stoker, G. (2020). Trust and the coronavirus pandemic: What are the consequences of and for trust? An early review of the literature. Political Studies Review 19(2), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929920948684
Devos, T., Spini, D., & Schwartz, S. (2002). Conflicts among human values and trust in institutions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(4), 481–94. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602321149849
Direção-Geral da Saúde. (2020, 10 de setembro). Portugal entra em situação de contingência no dia 15 de setembro. Covid-19. https://covid19.min-saude.pt/portugal-entra-em-situacao-de-contingencia-no-dia-15-de-setembro/
Earle, T., & Siegrist, M. (2008). Trust, confidence and cooperation model: A framework for understanding the relation between trust and risk perception. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 8(1-2), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGENVI.2008.017257
Earle, T. C., Siegrist, M., & Gutscher, H. (2010). Trust in risk management: Uncertainty and scepticism in the public mind. In T. C. Earle, M. Siegrist, & H. Gutscher (Eds.), Trust, risk perception and the TCC model of cooperation(pp. 1–49). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849773461
Edelman. (2020). Special report: Trust and the coronavirus. https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2020-03/2020%20Edelman%20Trust%20Barometer%20Coronavirus%20Special%20Report_0.pdf
European Public Relations Education and Research Association. (s.d.). Com-covid. https://euprera.org/what-we-do/member-networks/com-covid/
Ferrer, T., & Klein, W. (2015). Risk perceptions and health behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 5, 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.03.012
Fiolhais, C. (2021, 4 de fevereiro). Portugal nos cuidados intensivos. Público. https://www.publico.pt/2021/02/04/opiniao/opiniao/portugal-cuidados-intensivos-1949125
Freimuth, V., Musa, D., Hilyard, K., Quinn S. C., & Kim, K. (2014). Trust during the early stages of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. Journal of Health Communication, 19(3), 321–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2013.811323
Garrett, L. (2020). Covid-19: the medium is the message. The Lancet, 395(10228), 942–943. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30600-0
Gesser-Edelsburg, A., & Shir-Raz, Y. (2016). Risk communication and infectious diseases in an age of digital media. Routledge.
Global Preparedness Monitoring Board. (2019). A world at risk: Annual report on global preparedness for health emergencies. World Health Organization. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/GPMB_annualreport_2019.pdf
Gollust, S. E., Lantz, P., & Ubel, P. (2009). The polarizing effect of news media messages about the social determinants of health. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 2160–2167. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.161414
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (1999). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hale, T., Angrist, N., Goldszmidt, R., Kira, B., Petherick, A., Phillips, T., Webster, S., Cameron-Blake, E., Hallas, L., Majumdar, S., & Tatlow, H. (2021). A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford Covid-19 Government Response Tracker). Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 529–538. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8
Hampel, J. (2006). Different concepts of risk – A challenge for risk communication. International Journal of Medical Microbiology, 296, 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmm.2005.12.002
Harring, N., Sverker, C., & Jagers, Å. (2021). Covid-19: Large-scale collective action, government intervention, and the importance of trust. World Development, 138, Artigo 105236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105236
Heath, R., & O’Hair, D. (2009). Handbook of risk and crisis communication. Routledge.
Johnson, B. T., Scott-Sheldon, L. A. J., Snyder, L. B., Noar, S. M., & Huedo-Medina, T. B. (2008). Contemporary approaches to meta-analysis in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (pp. 311–347). Sage.
Krimsky, S. (2007). Risk communication in the internet age: The rise of disorganized skepticism. Environmental Hazards, 7(2), 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.05.006
Li, H. O.-Y., Bailey, A., & Huynh, D. (2020). YouTube as a source of information on covid-19: A pandemic of misinformation? BMJ Glob Health, 5, Atigo e002604. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002604
Llewellyn, S. (2020). Covid-19: How to be careful with trust and expertise on social media. BMJ, 368, m1160. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1160
Lundgren, R. E., & McMakin, A. H. (2013). Risk communication: A handbook for communicating environmental, safety and health risks. Wiley.
Malecki, K., Keating, J. A., & Safdar, N. (2020). Crisis communication and public perception of covid-19 risk in the era of social media. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 72(4), 699–704. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa758
Meyer, S., Ward, P., Coveney, J., & Rogers, W. (2014). Trust in the health system: An analysis and extension of the social theories of Giddens and Luhmann. Health Sociol Review, 17(2), 177–186. https://doi.org/10.5172/hesr.451.17.2.177
Moreno, Á., Fuentes-Lara, C., & Navarro, C. (2020). Covid-19 communication management in Spain: Exploring the effect of information-seeking behavior and message reception in public’s evaluation. El Profesional de la Información, 29(4), Artigo e290402. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.jul.02
Muto, K., Yamamoto, I., Nagasu, M., Tanaka, M., & Wada, K. (2020). Japanese citizens’ behavioral changes and pre-paredness against covid-19: An online survey during the early phase of the pandemic. PLoS ONE, 15(6), Artigo e0234292. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234292
Nerlich, B., & Koteyko, N. (2012). Crying wolf? Biosecurity and metacommunication in the context of the 2009 swine flu pandemic. Health & Place, 18(4), 710–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2011.02.008
Park, S., Boatwright, B., & Johnson-Avery, E. (2019). Information channel preference in health crisis: Exploring the roles of perceived risk, preparedness, knowledge, and intent to follow directives. Public Relations Review, 45(5), Artigo 101794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.05.015
Parmer, J., Baur, C., Eroglu, D., Lubell, K., Prue, C., Reynolds, B., & Weaver, J. (2016). Crisis and emergency risk messaging in mass media news stories: is the public getting the information they need to protect their health? Health Communication,, 31(10), 1215–1222. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2015.1049728
Plough, A., & Krimsky, S. (1987). The emergence of risk communication studies: Social and political context. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 12(3-4), 4–10.
Renn, O., & Levine, D. (1991). Credibility and trust in risk communication. Communicating Risks to the Public: International Perspectives, 4, 175–218.
Renner, B., Gamp, M., Schmälzle, R., & Schupp, H. T. (2015). Health risk perception. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol 10, pp. 702–709). Elsevier.
Reynolds, B., & Quinn, S. C. (2008). Effective communication during an influenza pandemic: the value of using a crisis and emergency risk communication framework. Health Promotion Practice, 9(4), 13S–17S. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1524839908325267
Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). Criteria for scale selection and evaluation. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 1–16). Academic Press.
Seale, H., Heywood, A. E., Leask, J., Sheel, M., Thomas, S., Durrheim, D. N., Bolsewicz, K., & Kaur, R. (2020). Covid-19 is rapidly changing: Examining public perceptions and behaviors in response to this evolving pandemic. PLoS ONE, 15(6), Artigo e0235112. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235112
Seeger, M. W., Pechta, L., Price, S., Lubell, K. M., Rose, D. A., Sapru, S., Chansky, M. C., & Smith, B. J. (2018). A conceptual model for evaluating emergency risk communication in public health. Health Security, 16(3), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1089/hs.2018.0020
Sheppard, B., Janoske, M., & Liu, B. (2012). Understanding risk communication theory: A guide for emergency managers and communicators. Behavioral Sciences Division, Science and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. https://www.start.umd.edu/sites/default/files/files/publications/UnderstandingRiskCommunicationTheory.pdf
Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G. (2000). Perception of hazards: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis, 20(5), 713–720. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.205064
Siegrist, M., & Zingg, A. (2014). The role of public trust during pandemics. European Psychologist, 19, 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000169
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13(6), 675–682.
Torres-Salinas, D. (2020). Ritmo de crecimiento diario de la producción científica sobre covid-19. Análisis en bases de datos y repositorios en acceso abierto. El Profesional de la Información, 29(2), Artigo e290215. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.mar.15
Weaver, J. B., Weaver, S., & DiClemente, R. J. (2008). Risk communication. International Encyclopedia of Public Health, 601–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012373960-5.00582-7
Witte, G., Meyer, G., & Martell, D. (2001). Effective health risk messages: A step-by-step guide. Sage.
World Health Organization. (2011). Report of the review committee on the functioning of the international health regulations (2005) in relation to pandemic (H1N1) 2009. https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA64/A64_10-en.pdf
World Health Organization. (2020a). Pandemic fatigue: Reinvigorating the public to prevent covid-19. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/335820/WHO-EURO-2020-1160-40906-55390-eng.pdf
World Health Organization. (2020b). Risk communication and community engagement readiness and response to coronavirus disease (covid-19). https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1272597/retrieve
World Health Organization. (2020c). 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV): Strategic preparedness and response plan. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/srp-04022020.pdf
Wright, G., Bolger, F., & Rowe, G. (2002). An empirical test of the relative validity of expert and lay judgments of risk. Risk Analysis, 22(6), 1107–1122. https://doi.org/10.1111/1539-6924.00276
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Secção
Licença
Direitos de Autor (c) 2021 Gisela Gonçalves, Valeriano Piñeiro-Naval, Bianca Persici Toniolo
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0.
Os autores são titulares dos direitos de autor, concedendo à revista o direito de primeira publicação. O trabalho é licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons - Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.
