Cognition 104649 (2021)

Authors
Nick Byrd
Stevens Institute of Technology
Abstract
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.
Keywords COVID19  experimental philosophy  moral psychology  health psychology  numeracy  effective altruism  scientific realism  religion  libertarianism  identifiable victim effect  egalitarianism
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2021
DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104649
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,526
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

What Do Philosophers Believe?David Bourget & David J. Chalmers - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 170 (3):465-500.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (3):229-243.
Scalar Consequentialism the Right Way.Neil Sinhababu - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (12):3131-3144.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Reflective Reasoning & Philosophy.Nick Byrd - 2021 - Philosophy Compass 16 (11):e12786.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Public Health.Dean Rickles - 2010 - In Fred Gifford (ed.), Philosophy of Medicine. Elsevier.
Values and Beliefs Inherent to a Public Health Perspective. North Carolina Institute of Public Health.J. C. Thomas - forthcoming - Public Health Ethics. Http://Www2. Sph. Unc. Edu/Oce/Phethics/Module2/Presentation. Htm. Accessed Apr.
A Tale of Two Fields: Public Health Ethics.Craig Klugman - 2008 - Monash Bioethics Review 27 (1-2):56.
Public Health and Normative Public Goods.Richard H. Dees - 2018 - Public Health Ethics 11 (1):20-26.
The Role of Advocacy in Public Health Law.Micah L. Berman, Elizabeth Tobin-Tyler & Wendy E. Parmet - 2019 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 47 (S2):15-18.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-07-24

Total views
28 ( #396,401 of 2,461,119 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #88,007 of 2,461,119 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes