People have limited capacity to process and integrate multiple sources of information, so how do they integrate multiple contextual risk factors for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection? In June 2020, we elicited risk perceptions from a nationally representative sample of the public (N = 800) using three psychologically-distinct tasks. Responses were compared to a sample of medical experts who completed the same tasks. Relative to experts, the public perceived lower risk associated with environmental factors (such as whether a gathering takes place indoors or outdoors) and were less inclined to treat risk factors as multiplicative. Our results are consistent with a heuristic simply to “avoid people” and with a coarse (e.g., “safe or unsafe”) classification of social settings. A further task, completed only by the general public sample, generated novel evidence that when infection risk competes with risk in another domain (e.g., a different medical risk), people perceive a lower likelihood of contracting the virus. These results inform the policy response to the pandemic and have implications for understanding differences between expert and lay perception of risk

Timmons, S., Belton, C., Robertson, D., Barjaková, M., Lavin, C., Julienne, H., et al. (2022). Is It Riskier to Meet 100 People Outdoors or 14 People Indoors? Comparing Public and Expert Perceptions of COVID-19 Risk. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY. APPLIED [10.1037/xap0000399].

Is It Riskier to Meet 100 People Outdoors or 14 People Indoors? Comparing Public and Expert Perceptions of COVID-19 Risk

Barjaková, M;
2022

Abstract

People have limited capacity to process and integrate multiple sources of information, so how do they integrate multiple contextual risk factors for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection? In June 2020, we elicited risk perceptions from a nationally representative sample of the public (N = 800) using three psychologically-distinct tasks. Responses were compared to a sample of medical experts who completed the same tasks. Relative to experts, the public perceived lower risk associated with environmental factors (such as whether a gathering takes place indoors or outdoors) and were less inclined to treat risk factors as multiplicative. Our results are consistent with a heuristic simply to “avoid people” and with a coarse (e.g., “safe or unsafe”) classification of social settings. A further task, completed only by the general public sample, generated novel evidence that when infection risk competes with risk in another domain (e.g., a different medical risk), people perceive a lower likelihood of contracting the virus. These results inform the policy response to the pandemic and have implications for understanding differences between expert and lay perception of risk
Si
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Scientifica
Affect heuristic; Covid-19; Heuristics; Policy making; Risk perception;
English
Timmons, S., Belton, C., Robertson, D., Barjaková, M., Lavin, C., Julienne, H., et al. (2022). Is It Riskier to Meet 100 People Outdoors or 14 People Indoors? Comparing Public and Expert Perceptions of COVID-19 Risk. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY. APPLIED [10.1037/xap0000399].
Timmons, S; Belton, C; Robertson, D; Barjaková, M; Lavin, C; Julienne, H; Lunn, P
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/10281/391836
Citazioni
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
Social impact