Scholarlink

Background <p>In many rural US Appalachian and Midwestern counties, stigma surrounding harm reduction interventions has led health professionals and policymakers to approach drug policy implementation with caution, fearing potential backlash from politically conservative communities. One concern is that the public’s disapproval of harm-reduction policies may erode the public’s trust in its government.</p> Methods <p>This study examined how the public’s trust in the local government—as both self-reported and authority-assessed—is influenced by the perceived governmental support of comprehensive drug policies (i.e., inclusive of both drug treatment and harm reduction). Survey data gathered from 138 community authorities and 6,609 community residents from 13 Appalachian and Midwestern states between 2019 and 2023 were analyzed using a multiple regression approach. Furthermore, in an online experiment conducted in 2024, we experimentally simulated the role of authority vs. resident and manipulated the level of perceived governmental support for comprehensive drug policies (high vs. low) to assess their effects on trust and perceived governmental effort and feelings of optimism as possible mediators.</p> Results and conclusion <p>In both the field surveys and the experiment, trust was positively associated with perceptions of governmental support for comprehensive drug policies. In addition, authorities (both real and experimentally simulated roles) consistently assessed the public’s trust in them to be higher than did residents. Both effects were mediated by participants’ beliefs in the government’s effort to reduce drug use problems and optimism that drug use issues could be improved.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comprehensive drug policies increase trust in local government: an analysis of authorities’ and residents’ perspectives in rural US Appalachian and Midwestern counties

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月17日

查看全文
  • Xi Liu,
  • Man-pui Sally Chan,
  • Marta R. Durantini,
  • Dolores Albarracín,
  • Alesha Harris,
  • Alice McCaffrey,
  • Alisha Foster,
  • Amber Elliot,
  • Angela Brown,
  • Angela Settle,
  • Angela Stowers,
  • Anita Bretram,
  • Anna Wilson,
  • Anthony Lockart,
  • Becky Hunt,
  • Beth Booth,
  • Brandi Mackin,
  • Breanne Forbes-Hubbard,
  • Bree Ra-mey,
  • Chad Meador,
  • Charlene Rine,
  • Christina Bravata,
  • Connie Tinker,
  • Courtney Midkiff,
  • Cynthia Hamilton,
  • David Badger,
  • David Milliron,
  • Deborah Dillon,
  • Denise Bryan,
  • Derek Wilson,
  • Destany Wheeler,
  • Elena Creech,
  • Elizabeth Shahan,
  • Frances Vermillion,
  • Frank Lynch,
  • Fred Wells Brason,
  • Garnet Sourtherland,
  • Gerald S. Bowker,
  • Glenn Steakley,
  • Greg Brewer,
  • Isabel Barajas,
  • James R. Ratliff Jr.,
  • Jamie Colson,
  • Janet Ridley,
  • Jeannie Bentley,
  • Jennifer Berven,
  • Jennifer Dobbs,
  • Jennifer Thomas,
  • John Hale,
  • Julie Bush,
  • Julie Mundell,
  • Kari Osborne,
  • Karla Heble,
  • Kathleen Collins,
  • Kathleen Napier,
  • Kelly Amick,
  • Ken Tombley,
  • Kevin Aston,
  • Kim Major,
  • Kristen Gingery,
  • Kristine Ghering,
  • Laura Conner,
  • Lawson Koeppel,
  • Lisa Moore,
  • Lori Bumba,
  • Lori Moore,
  • Madeleine Furlow,
  • Mandy Wat- son,
  • Max Mohr,
  • Megan Sills,
  • Melissa Swisher,
  • Michael Lovell,
  • Michael Martin,
  • Michael Railing,
  • Michelle Matern,
  • Mindy Grimm,
  • Miranda Smith,
  • Nancy Bell,
  • Nancy Fry,
  • Pam Acton,
  • Pamela Bauer,
  • Pamela Williams,
  • Tom Kyser,
  • Patri- cia Friel,
  • Robin Griffin,
  • Sam Suiter,
  • Samantha Alcorn,
  • Scott Shrewsberry,
  • Sean Furlow,
  • Shawn Thorn,
  • Sherrie Booker,
  • Sherrie Montgomery,
  • Stacey Crase,
  • Stephanie Furlow,
  • Ste- phanie Johnson,
  • Stephanie Vogel,
  • Stephen Ward,
  • Steve Hall,
  • Susan Urban,
  • Susie Ritgway,
  • Tammy Riley,
  • Tasha Mackie,
  • Tina Ramirez,
  • Tracy Aaron,
  • Travis Rickford,
  • Trish Burchette,
  • Tyra Barrett,
  • Vanessa Davis,
  • Sally M.-P. Chan,
  • Annie Jung,
  • Bita Fayaz Farkhad,
  • Liliane Windsor,
  • Thomas O’Brien,
  • Aashna Sunderrajan,
  • Dolores Albarracín

摘要

Background

In many rural US Appalachian and Midwestern counties, stigma surrounding harm reduction interventions has led health professionals and policymakers to approach drug policy implementation with caution, fearing potential backlash from politically conservative communities. One concern is that the public’s disapproval of harm-reduction policies may erode the public’s trust in its government.

Methods

This study examined how the public’s trust in the local government—as both self-reported and authority-assessed—is influenced by the perceived governmental support of comprehensive drug policies (i.e., inclusive of both drug treatment and harm reduction). Survey data gathered from 138 community authorities and 6,609 community residents from 13 Appalachian and Midwestern states between 2019 and 2023 were analyzed using a multiple regression approach. Furthermore, in an online experiment conducted in 2024, we experimentally simulated the role of authority vs. resident and manipulated the level of perceived governmental support for comprehensive drug policies (high vs. low) to assess their effects on trust and perceived governmental effort and feelings of optimism as possible mediators.

Results and conclusion

In both the field surveys and the experiment, trust was positively associated with perceptions of governmental support for comprehensive drug policies. In addition, authorities (both real and experimentally simulated roles) consistently assessed the public’s trust in them to be higher than did residents. Both effects were mediated by participants’ beliefs in the government’s effort to reduce drug use problems and optimism that drug use issues could be improved.