Individual differences in risk perception and misperception of COVID-19 in the context of political ideology

被引:18
作者
Weil, Audrey M. [1 ]
Wolfe, Christopher R. [2 ]
机构
[1] Washington Coll, Psychol Dept, 300 Washington Ave, Chestertown, MD 21620 USA
[2] Miami Univ, Dept Psychol, Oxford, OH 45056 USA
关键词
argumentation; individual differences; misinformation; pandemic; political ideology; risk assessment; COGNITIVE REFLECTION; MYSIDE BIAS; DECISION-MAKING; NUMERACY; IMPULSIVITY; HEALTH; ARGUMENTATION; COMPREHENSION; VALIDATION; PREDICTORS;
D O I
10.1002/acp.3894
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The COVID-19 pandemic has been characterized by misinformation, politicization of public health, and extreme differences in risk assessment. In two studies, we sought to understand factors that contribute to differences in people's understanding of the virus and associated risks. We found that conservative participants reported higher levels of acceptable risk, have lower risk estimates of activities, and endorsed more misinformation. Participants with personal health risk factors rated COVID-19 risks as higher, more reflective participants had lower acceptable risk levels, and impulsive participants endorsed more misinformation. In our second study, we also found that reflective participants were more likely to wear a mask, get vaccinated, and maintain social distancing, and that participants judged arguments about COVID-19 measures largely based on the claim rather than supporting reasons. By clarifying these individual differences, public health experts can more effectively create targeted interventions for at risk populations, and be better prepared for future outbreaks.
引用
收藏
页码:19 / 31
页数:13
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]   Between global and national prescriptions for education administration: the rocky road of neoliberal education reform in Qatar [J].
Abdel-Moneim, Mohamed Alaa .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, 2020, 74
[2]   Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: a meta-analysis [J].
Allum, Nick ;
Sturgis, Patrick ;
Tabourazi, Dimitra ;
Brunton-Smith, Ian .
PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE, 2008, 17 (01) :35-54
[3]  
Baak B.N., 2021, COVID 19 VACCINATION
[4]  
Barratt E.S., 1994, VIOLENCE MENTAL DISO, P61
[5]  
Barrios J.M., 2020, Risk Perception Through the Lens of Politics in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic, DOI [DOI 10.3386/W27008, 10.3386/w27008]
[6]   The cognitive reflection test is robust to multiple exposures [J].
Bialek, Michal ;
Pennycook, Gordon .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2018, 50 (05) :1953-1959
[7]   Impulsivity Partially Mediates the Relationship Between BIS/BAS and Risky Health Behaviors [J].
Braddock, Kurt H. ;
Dillard, James Price ;
Voigt, Danielle C. ;
Stephenson, Michael T. ;
Sopory, Pradeep ;
Anderson, Jason W. .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY, 2011, 79 (04) :793-810
[8]   Political Ideology Predicts Perceptions of the Threat of COVID-19 (and Susceptibility to Fake News About It) [J].
Calvillo, Dustin P. ;
Ross, Bryan J. ;
Garcia, Ryan J. B. ;
Smelter, Thomas J. ;
Rutchick, Abraham M. .
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PERSONALITY SCIENCE, 2020, 11 (08) :1119-1128
[9]  
Campitelli G, 2010, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V5, P182
[10]   The effectiveness of argumentation in tutorial dialogues with an Intelligent Tutoring System for genetic risk of breast cancer [J].
Cedillos-Whynott, Elizabeth M. ;
Wolfe, Christopher R. ;
Widmer, Colin L. ;
Brust-Renck, Priscila G. ;
Weil, Audrey ;
Reyna, Valerie F. .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2016, 48 (03) :857-868