RAPID: A participatory study of how policy-makers and marginalized communities in the American South consume and act on scientific information in the context of Covid-19

决策者在向公众解释和传达信息以发出（或迫使）危机中采取集体行动方面发挥着至关重要的作用。然而，在最脆弱社区内传播科学建议的最有效战略方面，他们面临着严重的知识差距。本项目研究1）美国最贫穷的三个州的决策者如何应对COVID-19（美国）东南部（即亚拉巴马，路易斯安那州和密西西比）和2）边缘化，低收入社区如何消费，解释，并采取行动的决策者基于科学的信息。具体而言，将分析以科学为基础的信息的有效性，重点是各种信息来源的影响力，以及与富裕社区相比，低收入社区提供COVID-19信息的机构的可信度。该项目的设计是参与式的，确保最终用户参与塑造，实施，并通过项目的持续时间从研究中学习。该项目将增进关于领导人如何能够更有效地与公众接触的知识，并将提供关于如何迫使该国一些最脆弱社区的个人在面临危机时采取集体行动以改善社区福祉的见解。该项目包括五个目标。第一个目标是通过与来自联邦、州和地方机构的至少12名决策者举行的远程焦点小组研讨会，确定调查和访谈的问题范围。这个研讨会将允许利益相关者将他们的信息需求直接纳入我们的项目。其次，研究人员将对来自东南部的大量代表性样本（n= 9，000）进行邮寄调查。实验方法将用于预测基于科学的信息的有效性、对机构的信任和信息来源的差异，这些差异是人口统计、不同的社会经济脆弱程度和其他变量的函数。第三，他们将采访这些州的决策者，以确定他们在应对COVID-19时所面临的挑战，以及说服他们采取特定政策制定行动的科学信息（例如发出“呆在家里的命令”）。第四，来自联邦、州、地方和部落司法管辖区的决策者将参加远程网络研讨会，分享调查结果。第五，该项目将为美国各地的决策者创建一个网络应用程序，将我们的数据应用于他们的社区。这将使他们能够选择代表其社区的人口和社会经济因素，并提供建议的信息和媒体特征，以提高其政策决定的效力。随着这一流行病的继续蔓延，调查结果可以帮助决策者更好地与边缘化社区接触。这一知识可以应用于其他危机，其中自愿集体行动导致增加总的人类福祉，尽管私人成本。这个奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并已被认为是值得通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估的支持。

Decision makers play a crucial role in interpreting and communicating information to the public to signal (or compel) collective action in a crisis. However, they face a critical knowledge gap on the most effective strategies for communicating scientific recommendations within the most vulnerable communities. This project examines 1) how decision makers responded to COVID-19 in the three poorest states in the United States (U.S.) Southeast (i.e. Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi) and 2) how marginalized, low income communities consumed, interpreted, and acted on science-based messaging from decision makers. Specifically, the effectiveness of science-based messages will be analyzed, focusing on how influential various sources of messages were and the perceived trustworthiness of the institutions delivering COVID-19 information in low income communities compared to their wealthier counterparts. The project is participatory in its design, ensuring end users are involved in shaping, implementing, and learning from research through the duration of the project. The project will advance knowledge on how leaders can become more effective at engaging the public and will provide insights on how to compel individuals in some of the nation’s most vulnerable communities to undertake collective action to improve community well-being in the face of crises. This project includes five objectives. The first objective is to scope questions for surveys and interviews through a remote focus group workshop with at least 12 decision makers from federal, state, and local agencies. This workshop will allow stakeholders to include their informational needs directly into our project. Second, the researchers will implement a mail out survey to a large, representative sample of individuals from the Southeast (n=9,000). Experimental methods will be used to predict differences in the effectiveness of science-based messages, trust in institutions, and message sources as a function of demographics, different levels of socio-economic vulnerability, and other variables. Third, they will interview decision makers in these states to determine the challenges they faced responding to COVID-19, and the scientific messages that convinced them to take particular policy making actions (such as giving a “stay at home order”). Fourth, a remote webinar with decision makers from federal, state, local, and tribal jurisdictions will be hosted to share the findings. Fifth, the project will create a web application for decision makers across the U.S. to apply our data to their community. It will allow them to select demographic and socio-economic factors that represent their communities and provide suggested messaging and media characteristics that will increase the effectiveness of their policy decisions. Findings can help decision-makers better engage marginalized communities as the pandemic continues to unfold. This knowledge may be applied to other crises where voluntary collective action leads to increases in aggregate human well-being despite private costs.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.