Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has put a spotlight on political leadership and decision-making around the world. Differences in how leaders address the pandemic through public messages have practical implications for building trust and an effective response within a country. Methods: We analyzed the public statements and speeches made by 20 heads of government around the world (Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Finland, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Russia, South Africa, Scotland, Sint Maarten, United Kingdom, United States, Taiwan) to highlight the differences between men and women leaders in discussing COVID-19 and pandemic response. We used a deductive analytical approach, coding speeches for specific themes based on language used and content discussed. Findings: Five primary themes emerged across a total of 122 speeches on COVID-19 made by heads of government: economics and financial relief, social welfare and vulnerable populations, nationalism, responsibility and paternalism, and emotional appeals. While all leaders described the economic impact of the pandemic, women leaders spoke more frequently about the impact on local or individual scale. Women leaders were also more often found describing a wider range of social welfare services, including addressing to: mental health, substance abuse, and domestic violence. Both men and women from lower-resource settings described detailed financial relief and social welfare support that would impact the majority of their citizen population. While 17 of the 20 leaders used war metaphors to describe the COVID-19 virus and response, men largely used these with greater volume and frequency. Conclusion: While this analysis does not attempt to answer whether men or women are more effective leaders in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, it does provide insight into the rhetorical tools and types of language used by different leaders during a national and international crisis. This language is important because it influences how leaders inspire citizens to adhere to the social contract, and the priorities they highlight and the words they use are meant to resonate with the rest of the nation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received to conduct this research
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This research did not require an institutional board review approval. Data were collected online from publicly available and accessible speeches and did not involve any human subjects.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data is available in the public domain but transcripts can be shared upon request.
