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
[11]   The role of impulsivity in the development of substance use and eating disorders [J].
Dawe, S ;
Loxton, NJ .
NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS, 2004, 28 (03) :343-351
[12]   Impulsivity as a determinant and consequence of drug use: a review of underlying processes [J].
de Wit, Harriet .
ADDICTION BIOLOGY, 2009, 14 (01) :22-31
[13]   Risk perceptions of COVID-19 around the world [J].
Dryhurst, Sarah ;
Schneider, Claudia R. ;
Kerr, John ;
Freeman, Alexandra L. J. ;
Recchia, Gabriel ;
van der Bles, Anne Marthe ;
Spiegelhalter, David ;
van der Linden, Sander .
JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH, 2020, 23 (7-8) :994-1006
[14]   Measuring numeracy without a Math test: Development of the subjective numeracy scale [J].
Fagerlin, Angela ;
Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J. ;
Ubel, Peter A. ;
Jankovic, Aleksandra ;
Derry, Holly A. ;
Smith, Dylan M. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2007, 27 (05) :672-680
[15]   Cognitive reflection and decision making [J].
Frederick, S .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2005, 19 (04) :25-42
[16]  
Gerhold L., 2020, Results from a Survey in Germany, DOI DOI 10.31234/OSF.IO/XMPK4
[17]  
Gugerty L., 2020, BELIEF BIAS CAUSAL L
[18]   My Lived Experiences Are More Important Than Your Probabilities: The Role of Individualized Risk Estimates for Decision Making about Participation in the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) [J].
Holmberg, Christine ;
Waters, Erika A. ;
Whitehouse, Katie ;
Daly, Mary ;
McCaskill-Stevens, Worta .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2015, 35 (08) :1010-1022
[19]   Behavioral biases and cognitive reflection [J].
Hoppe, Eva I. ;
Kusterer, David J. .
ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2011, 110 (02) :97-100
[20]   The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks [J].
Kahan, Dan M. ;
Peters, Ellen ;
Wittlin, Maggie ;
Slovic, Paul ;
Ouellette, Lisa Larrimore ;
Braman, Donald ;
Mandel, Gregory .
NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 2012, 2 (10) :732-735