A randomized controlled trial of an information intervention to bolster COVID-19 vaccination intention among people with purity concerns.

OBJECTIVE: Previous literature has indicated a strong negative correlation between the moral foundation of purity/sanctity and vaccination rates. The current research investigated how purity concerns impact COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and tested an information intervention to bolster vaccination intention among people with purity concerns. METHOD: Study 1 surveyed 566 Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents in the United States. Study 2 was a between-subject-designed survey experiment that investigated the impact of three statements on the COVID-19 vaccination attitudes and intentions of 637 Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents. Statement 1 argued that vaccines are not impure from a scientific perspective; Statement 2 made the same argument with quotes from the Bible; and Statement 3 was a control statement. RESULTS: Study 1 established a significant correlation between the existence of vaccination history and purity as a moral foundation. Study 2 found that among those with no COVID-19 vaccination history, statements arguing that vaccines are not impure from either a scientific perspective or a religious perspective improved attitudes toward vaccination and intention to get vaccinated. CONCLUSION: Purity concerns can be leveraged as a way to bolster vaccination rates, especially among conservatives. However, the impurity perception only mediated the causal relationship between the treatment and the attitude toward vaccines (but not the actual intention), suggesting that changes in the actual vaccination behavior are subject to factors other than purity concerns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The impact of the removal of Zero-COVID policies on subjective well-being: Evidence from a digital world

Administrative restrictions on public mobility may impose significant well-being impacts on society. For instance, there has been a wide discussion on the psychological effects of lockdown policies during the pandemic. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the consequences of the policy transition and the uncertainty that arises from shifting from tight to loose regulations. The unexpected removal of Zero-COVID policies in China provides a special opportunity to study how policy uncertainty may affect mental health or subjective well-being. We use the Baidu Index data to test the effects of switching toward a "live-with-COVID” policy and the consequent rapid COVID spread on the frequency of well-being related search terms in China. Through a three-phase difference-in-differences approach with multiple years to check parallel sentiment trends, we find a substantial increase in fear and social dysfunction during the Transition Period when COVID-related restrictions were not fully lifted, as well as in the following Free-Spread Period. In comparison, the increase of anxiety mainly took place in the Transition Period. However, searches for anger and negative behaviors stayed relatively stable. Our results suggest that the removal of Zero-COVID policies, especially the Transition Period that generated policy uncertainty, significantly affected people's mental health.

Safety Messaging Boosts Parental Vaccination Intention for Children Ages 5-11.

The COVID-19 vaccination rate among children ages 5-11 is low in the U.S., with parental vaccine hesitancy being the primary cause. Current work suggests that safety and side effect concerns are the primary reasons for such vaccine hesitancy. This study explores whether this hesitancy can be mitigated with information interventions. Based on theories of health decision making and persuasion, we designed four information interventions with varying contents and lengths. We wrote two messages on vaccine safety (a detailed safety-long message and a succinct safety-short message), explaining the vaccine's lower dosage, low rate of side effects, and the rigorous approval process. We also had two messages on protection effects (protect-family, protect-child). We combined these four messages with a vaccine-irrelevant control message and compared their effects on parental vaccine intention. We measured the parental vaccination intention using a 0-6 Likert scale question. Among the four intervention groups, we found that the short version of the safety message increased the average vaccination intention by over 1 point compared to the control arm, while the other three interventions failed to show significance. Specifically, these effects are particularly pronounced (around 2 points) for Republican parents who had a much lower initial intention to vaccinate their children. Our study highlights the importance of concise and to-the-point information rendering in promoting public health activities and therefore has important policy implications for raising vaccination intentions among parents, especially those leaning towards more conservative political affiliation.

The Political Economy of Responses to COVID-19 in the U.S.A

Social distancing via shelter-in-place strategies, and wearing masks, have emerged as the most effective non-pharmaceutical ways of combatting COVID-19. In the United States, choices about these policies are made by individual states. We develop a game-theoretic model and then test it econometrically, showing that the policy choices made by one state are strongly influenced by the choices made by others. If enough states engage in social distancing or mask wearing, they will tip others that have not yet done so to follow suit and thus shift the Nash equilibrium. If interactions are strongest amongst states of similar political orientations there can be equilibria where states with different political leanings adopt different strategies. In this case a group of states of one political orientation may by changing their choices tip others of the same orientation, but not those whose orientations differ. We test these ideas empirically using probit and logit regressions and find strong confirmation that inter-state social reinforcement is important and that equilibria can be tipped. Policy choices are influenced mainly by the choices of other states, especially those of similar political orientation, and to a much lesser degree by the number of new COVID-19 cases. The choice of mask-wearing policy shows more sensitivity to the actions of other states than the choice of SIP policies, and republican states are much less likely to introduce mask-wearing policies. The choices of both types of policies are influenced more by political than public health considerations.

Covid-19, Shelter-In Place Strategies and Tipping

Social distancing via shelter-in-place strategies has emerged as the most effective way to combat Covid-19. In the United States, choices about such policies are made by individual states. Here we show that the policy choice made by one state influences the incentives that other states face to adopt similar policies: they can be viewed as strategic complements in a supermodular game. If they satisfy the condition of uniform strict increasing differences then following Heal and Kunreuther ([6]) we show that if enough states engage in social distancing, they will tip others to do the same and thus shift the Nash equilibrium with respect to the number of states engaging in social distancing.

Behavioral decision making for sustainable development

Human decisions are simultaneously determined by economic incentives and psychological motivations. Based upon this fundamental assumption, I compose three interdisciplinary studies which analyze individual, collective and government actions at multiple levels of aggregation, and how they in turn lead to various economic and psychological outcomes. In the first study, I explore the key predictors of the level of compliance to social distancing and mask wearing in the United states by aggregating interdisciplinary datasets and applying multi-level analysis. I use a behavioral model to classify the determinants of compliance to COVID-19 response measures into economic incentives and psychological motivations and show that the former would have an increasing marginal effect on working hours. Empirically, I show that (a) economic vulnerability was the key predictor of failure of social distancing in 2020, even taking partisanship into account. (b) mask wearing was more politicized than social distancing, and in Fall (close to the elections), Republican partisanship was the only dominant indicator of noncompliance of mask wearing. In the second study, we use a coordination game model to discuss the dynamics of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) on COVID-19 in the United States. We use a theoretical model to justify that there exist social reinforcement effects between policies in US states, i.e. the implementation of an NPI in a state would increase the possibility that others follow suit. Under certain conditions, if enough states engage in NPIs, they will tip others that have not yet done so to follow suit and thus shift the Nash equilibrium to the greatest one (all states follow). Then, we show that there can be equilibria where states with different political leanings adopt different strategies when politics is a determinant of the interaction intensity. Empirically, we use a random utility model (RUM) to test it in reality with Probit and Logit regressions, and find robust evidence that inter-state social reinforcement is important and that equilibria can be tipped in mask wearing, and slightly weaker confirmation for social distancing. In the last study, I explore how personality traits in China are different from the traditional Five-Factor model by a large twin dataset in Yunnan Province. I find robust evidence about personality structures, formation and impacts in China and state three findings: (1) Personality traits in China seem to have a significance deviation from the well-accepted Five Factor Model. Instead, it has two general factors, relying on whether the item is positive or negative in tone. Positive factors include Social Desirability, Extraversion and Openness;negative factors include Disorderliness, Neuroticism and Introversion. (2) The genetic heritability of personality traits in China is significantly lower than that measured in the Western countries. For some traits, such as Social Desirability and Disorderliness, the genetic effect is around 0 and the shared environmental effect is much larger. This challenges previous findings in the West. (3) Using a within-twin fixed effect model, we find suggestive evidence on the causal effect on economic preferences and outcomes, including education performance, income, risk attitudes and subjective well-being.These three studies use the similar behavioral science methodology to study different levels of decision making, and all have important implications for issues of sustainable development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

COVID-19, Shelter-In Place Strategies and Tipping

From the Abstract: Social distancing via shelter-in-place strategies has emerged as the most effective way to combat Covid-19 [coronavirus disease 2019]. In the United States, choices about such policies are made by individual states. Here we show that the policy choice made by one state influences the incentives that other states face to adopt similar policies: they can be viewed as strategic complements in a supermodular game. If they satisfy the condition of uniform strict increasing differences then following Heal and Kunreuther we show that if enough states engage in social distancing, they will tip others to do the same and thus shift the Nash equilibrium with respect to the number of states engaging in social distancing.COVID-19 (Disease);Social Distancing;Shelter-in-place