Dr. Shannon Lane, associate professor of social work at the , published "Influence of Political Ideology on Coping and Personal Protection Practices During the Early Days of the COVID‐19 Pandemic" in the Journal of Policy Practice and Research. The article was co-authored by Wurzweiler students Alexandra Chana Fishman and Frank Fuentas, Dr. Kathryn Krase of Krase Consulting and Springfield College's Dr. Donna Wang.
The abstract of the paper is below:
Even prior to COVID-19, it was clear that political ideology was defining experiences and attitudes of Americans. Responses to the societal repercussions brought about by the pandemic quickly seemed to follow the same pattern of difference across the spectrum of political beliefs. This study explores the relationship of political ideology to personal responses to COVID. The present article reports on the results of an online survey in the USA conducted in June 2020 that explored the impact of personal political ideology on individual responses to the COVID- 19 pandemic. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that political ideology was related to the likelihood of respondents following government guidance on personal protective practices. Ideological identification was not a significant predictor of the likelihood to specifically follow guidance from state officials, specifically, when satisfaction with state and federal leaders were controlled for. Differences in responses to COVID, including use of personal protection strategies and coping mechanisms are related to political ideology. Practice and policy should be responsive to these differences.
To read the full article, click here.Dr. Lane also co-published "Who Is a Social Worker? Lessons on Sampling From Political Participation Research" with Dr. Patrick Meehan of the University of Michigan and Dr. Jason Ostrander of Sacred Heart University. The abstract of the paper is below:
Defining social workers for the purposes of research is not as straightforward as it sounds. To date, researchers who have examined social workers as a group have used a variety of sampling methods. Multiple methods speak to the variety of options for defining social workers. Understanding membership within the profession is a precondition to understanding research about the behavior of those within the profession. This research note explores these sampling methods in detail. Each has its advantages, but none are without their own disadvantages, some of which bias their view of the profession. As researchers who have considered the political behavior of social workers, we consider six methods for sampling social workers that have been used to understand their behavior in this specific domain. Importantly, the sampling methods examined here can be applied to research about social workers outside of politics. These include sampling (1) members of professional organizations, (2) licensed social workers, (3) social work students, (4) graduates of social work programs, (5) social work faculty, and (6) members of social work-related occupations. After reviewing the advantages and disadvantages of each, we provide scholars a table for reference. The authors recommend that the Council on Social Work Education, National Association of Social Workers, and several other professional associations pull together members to explore a unified definition of social work through integrated practice and refrain from focusing on what makes us different.
To read the full article, click here.
