RESUMEN
The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Coronavirus , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Actividades Humanas , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Cuarentena , Adaptación Psicológica , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/transmisión , Toma de Decisiones , Monitoreo Epidemiológico , Salud Global , Humanos , Liderazgo , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/transmisión , Salud Pública , SARS-CoV-2 , Medios de Comunicación Sociales , Estrés PsicológicoRESUMEN
Prospect theory is among the most influential frameworks in behavioural science, specifically in research on decision-making under risk. Kahneman and Tversky's 1979 study tested financial choices under risk, concluding that such judgements deviate significantly from the assumptions of expected utility theory, which had remarkable impacts on science, policy and industry. Though substantial evidence supports prospect theory, many presumed canonical theories have drawn scrutiny for recent replication failures. In response, we directly test the original methods in a multinational study (n = 4,098 participants, 19 countries, 13 languages), adjusting only for current and local currencies while requiring all participants to respond to all items. The results replicated for 94% of items, with some attenuation. Twelve of 13 theoretical contrasts replicated, with 100% replication in some countries. Heterogeneity between countries and intra-individual variation highlight meaningful avenues for future theorizing and applications. We conclude that the empirical foundations for prospect theory replicate beyond any reasonable thresholds.
