Your health vs. my liberty: Philosophical beliefs dominated reflection and identifiable victim effects when predicting public health recommendation compliance during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Your health vs. my liberty: Philosophical beliefs dominated reflection and identifiable victim effects when predicting public health recommendation compliance during the COVID-19 pandemic.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104649
复制
发表时间：
2021-07
期刊：
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Białek M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Byrd N;Białek M
在应对危机时，人们有时会优先考虑较少的具体可识别的受害者，而不是许多未具体统计的受害者。其他因素如何解释这种偏见仍不清楚。因此，两个实验研究了在COVID 19大流行期间遵守公共卫生建议如何取决于受害者的描述，反思和哲学信仰（总N = 998）。只有一个实验发现，与统计受害者的信息相比，关于个人受害者的信息增加了依从性-即，“使曲线变平”图--在控制了其他因素后未检测到的效果。然而，有关流感（与COVID 19相比）的信息通过减少对大流行的感知威胁而间接降低了合规性。然而，在这两个实验中，道德信念比信息传递和反思更能预测服从。第二个实验的额外措施显示，宗教信仰，政治偏好和对科学的信仰也预测了服从。这表明，蔑视公共卫生建议可能不是因为无效的信息或推理，而是哲学上的差异。
In response to crises, people sometimes prioritize fewer specific identifiable victims over many unspecified statistical victims. How other factors can explain this bias remains unclear. So two experiments investigated how complying with public health recommendations during the COVID19 pandemic depended on victim portrayal, reflection, and philosophical beliefs (Total N = 998). Only one experiment found that messaging about individual victims increased compliance compared to messaging about statistical victims—i.e., “flatten the curve” graphs—an effect that was undetected after controlling for other factors. However, messaging about flu (vs. COVID19) indirectly reduced compliance by reducing perceived threat of the pandemic. Nevertheless, moral beliefs predicted compliance better than messaging and reflection in both experiments. The second experiment's additional measures revealed that religiosity, political preferences, and beliefs about science also predicted compliance. This suggests that flouting public health recommendations may be less about ineffective messaging or reasoning than philosophical differences.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Byrd, Nick;Conway, Paul
通讯作者：
Conway, Paul
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Bago, Bence;De Neys, Wim
通讯作者：
De Neys, Wim
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Bago, Bence;De Neys, Wim
通讯作者：
De Neys, Wim
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
Bialek, Michal;Pennycook, Gordon
通讯作者：
Pennycook, Gordon
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Bialek, Michal;Muda, Rafal;Pienkosz, Damian
通讯作者：
Pienkosz, Damian