The cost of anti-Asian racism during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Anti-Chinese sentiment increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, presenting as a considerable spike in overt violence and hatred directed at Asian American individuals. However, it is less clear how subtle patterns of consumer discrimination, which are difficult to directly observe yet greatly impact Asian American livelihoods, changed through the pandemic. Here we examine this in the context of restaurants-ubiquitous small businesses that sell goods that are closely entwined with ethnicity. Using a series of surveys, online search trends and consumer traffic data, we find that Asian restaurants experienced an 18.4% decrease in traffic (estimated US$7.42 billion lost revenue in 2020) relative to comparable non-Asian restaurants, with greater decreases in areas with higher levels of support for Donald Trump. Our findings are consistent with the roles of collective blame, out-group homogeneity and ethnic misidentification in explaining how anti-China rhetoric can harm the Asian American community, underlining the importance of avoiding racism and stigmatization in political and public health communications.

Does Partisanship Affect Compliance with Government Recommendations?

This article studies the role of partisanship in American's willingness to follow government recommendations. I combine survey and behavioral data to examine partisans' vaccination rates during the Bush and Obama administrations. I find that presidential co-partisans are more likely to believe that vaccines are safe and more likely to vaccinate themselves and their children than presidential out-partisans. Depending on the vaccine, presidential co-partisans are 4-10 percentage points more likely to vaccinate than presidential out-partisans. Using causal mediation analysis, I find that this effect is the result of partisans' differing levels of trust in government. This finding sheds light on the far-reaching role of partisanship in Americans' interactions with the federal government.

Vaccine advertising: preach to the converted or to the unaware?

Encouraging people to vaccinate is a challenging endeavor, but one which has tremendous public health benefits. Doing so requires overcoming barriers of awareness, availability, and (sometimes) vaccine hesitancy. Here we focus on nudging people to vaccinate through online advertising. We conducted a pre-registered online ads campaign encouraging people to vaccinate against three diseases: influenza, human papillomavirus, and herpes zoster. Ads were shown to ~69,000 people and were compared to similar ads shown to 8.6 million people. Outcome measures were clicks on ads and future searches for relevant terms. We find that ads have two main effects: First, a congruence effect whereby ads increase the likelihood of clicks and future searches by up to 116% in people who express an interest in the disease or the vaccine. Most commercial vaccine advertising is aimed entirely at this population. Second, we observed a priming effect, where ads shown to people who were searching for terms unrelated to the vaccine could be encouraged to click on them (odds ratios of 7.5-33.0) and, more often, search for the vaccine later (hazard ratios of 6.9-157.3). We provide analysis for optimizing vaccine advertising campaign budgets to balance the two populations. These findings demonstrate that digital advertising campaigns should consider not just advertising to direct keywords or to individuals that look exactly like existing customers, but consider tangential keywords that draw a wider target population who are likely earlier in their conversion funnel, thus increasing the number of people who vaccinate and maximizing vaccines uptake.