Face mask is an efficient tool to fight the Covid-19 pandemic and some factors increase the probability of its adoption.

This study examines the dynamic impact of face mask use on both infected cases and fatalities at a global scale by using a rich set of panel data econometrics. An increase of 100% of the proportion of people declaring wearing a mask (multiply by two) over the studied period lead to a reduction of around 12 and 13.5% of the number of Covid-19 infected cases (per capita) after 7 and 14 days respectively. The delay of action varies from around 7 days to 28 days concerning infected cases but is more longer concerning fatalities. Our results hold when using the rigorous controlling approach. We also document the increasing adoption of mask use over time and the drivers of mask adoption. In addition, population density and pollution levels are significant determinants of heterogeneity regarding mask adoption across countries, while altruism, trust in government and demographics are not. However, individualism index is negatively correlated with mask adoption. Finally, strict government policies against Covid-19 have a strong significant effect on mask use.

Good reasons to vaccinate: mandatory or payment for risk?

Mandatory vaccination, including for COVID-19, can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives, and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate. I describe an algorithm for justified mandatory vaccination. Penalties or costs could include withholding of benefits, imposition of fines, provision of community service or loss of freedoms. I argue that under conditions of risk or perceived risk of a novel vaccination, a system of payment for risk in vaccination may be superior. I defend a payment model against various objections, including that it constitutes coercion and undermines solidarity. I argue that payment can be in cash or in kind, and opportunity for altruistic vaccinations can be preserved by offering people who have been vaccinated the opportunity to donate any cash payment back to the health service.

Prosocial behavior predicts meaning in life during the COVID-19 pandemic: The longitudinal mediating role of perceived social support.

The COVID-19 pandemic was an unexpected, long-term negative event. Meaning in life has been linked to better psychological adjustment to such events. The current study uses longitudinal data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic to discover whether perceived social support mediates the relationship between six dimensions of prosocial behavior (Altruistic, Anonymous, Public, Compliant, Emotional, and Dire) and meaning in life. A sample of Chinese college students (N = 514) was tracked at three time points (T1, T2, and T3) during the COVID-19 outbreak. A cross-lagged panel model (CLPM) was used for mediation analysis. The mediation effect was found in all the dimensions of prosocial behavior except for Public prosocial behavior. We also found a longitudinal, bidirectional association between perceived social support and meaning in life. The current study contributes to the growing literature on the significance of prosocial behavior in predicting meaning in life.

Altruism in medical education: assessing attitudes of hospital in-patients towards face-to-face contact with medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Limited research indicated patients were largely amenable to seeing medical students pre-pandemic. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the potential risk of nosocomial transmission and harm to patients from students. Patient opinions regarding these risks remain unexplored, which impacts elicitation of informed consent. We aim to identify these, and explore whether reflection on the risks and benefits of direct student interaction influenced patients' attitudes. For guidance, we further explored measures to reduce perceived infection risk. METHOD: We designed an original questionnaire for a cross-sectional study, completed by 200 inpatients from 25 wards between 18/02 and 16/03/2022 at Derriford Hospital, Plymouth. Patients in intensive care, with active COVID-19 infection or unable to comprehend the study information were excluded. The responses of a guardian were recorded for inpatients under 16. 17 questions were included - the initial question, reporting willingness to talk with and be examined by students, was repeated following nine questions exploring risks and benefits of student interaction. A further four questions addressed reducing the perceived infection risk. Data is summarised using frequencies and percentages, and with Wilcoxon signed-rank and rank-sum tests of association. RESULTS: 85.4% (169/198) of participants gave an initial positive response to seeing medical students, and despite a third of participants changing their response 87.9% (174/197) remained willing after the survey resulting in no significant change. Furthermore, 87.2% (41/47) of those who perceived themselves at severe risk of harm from COVID-19 remained happy to see students. Participants reported reassurance knowing students were: fully vaccinated (76.0%); wearing masks (71.5%); lateral flow test negative within the last week (68.0%) and wearing gloves and gown (63.5%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the willingness of patients to engage in medical education despite recognised risks. Patient reflection on the risks and benefits of student interaction did not significantly reduce numbers willing to see students. Even those perceiving a risk of serious harm remained happy to have direct student contact - a demonstration of altruism in medical education. This suggests informed consent should include discussion of infection control measures, risks and benefits to patients and students, and offer alternatives to direct inpatient contact.

COVID-19 related risk perception and altruistic response amongst undergraduates on reopening of educational institutes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the coronavirus disease-2019-related risk perception and altruistic response among undergraduate medical students post-lockdown. Methods: The analytical cross-sectional study was conducted from October 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021, at the Baqai Medical University, Karachi, and comprised undergraduates aged 16 and above, studying in medical, dental, physiotherapy, pharmacy and Information technology departments. Data was collected using a structured and standardised online questionnaire. Positive responses led to a perceived risk score ranging 0-9, with a higher score indicating a greater perception of risk. The score was corelated with demographic variables. Data was analysed using SPSS 21. RESULTS: Of the 743 subjects, 472(63.5%) were females. The overall mean age of the sample was 21.34±1.8 years. The mean risk perception score was 3.8±2.5, and it was significantly associated with disease exposure (p<0.001). Altruism had a strong association with the perceived risk score (p<0.001), indicating lower risk perception. Conclusion: The risk perception among the students was low, pointing towards a need of psychological assistance programme for the students.

COVID-19 infection induces higher trust in strangers.

How does the COVID-19 pandemic affect interpersonal trust? Most evidence shows that natural disasters reinforce trust and cooperation, but the COVID-19 virus differs from other calamities, since it spreads through contact with people, potentially increasing suspicion and distrust, as, according to contemporaneous writers' accounts, seems to have been the case with the Black Death, the London plague, and the Spanish influenza. We investigate the link between interpersonal trust and individuals exposed to COVID-19, either vicariously through their community or networks or directly by becoming infected. We rely on an original panel survey, including a survey experiment, with a representative sample of adults in Italy, one of the countries hardest struck by the pandemic. Our experimental findings reveal that priming people about the risk that the pandemic poses to their health leads to a substantial increase in their trust in strangers. Our panel data analysis of within-individual effects shows that those who become infected trust strangers more than those who are not infected. Our findings could be explained by people observing higher than expected altruistic behavior or becoming more dependent on other people's support, consistent with the "emancipation theory of trust." When people recover from COVID-19, however, they drop to trusting strangers as much as those who were not directly exposed to the virus, an indication that the positive effects on trust during the pandemic have an emotional source. Nonetheless, the evidence suggests that, in the aggregate, there has been a small but significant increase in trust among the general population relative to prepandemic levels.

How local partisan context conditions prosocial behaviors: Mask wearing during COVID-19.

Does local partisan context influence the adoption of prosocial behavior? Using a nationwide survey of 60,000 adults and geographic data on over 180 million registered voters, we investigate whether neighborhood partisan composition affects a publicly observable and politicized behavior: wearing a mask. We find that Republicans are less likely to wear masks in public as the share of Republicans in their zip codes increases. Democratic mask wearing, however, is unaffected by local partisan context. Consequently, the partisan gap in mask wearing is largest in Republican neighborhoods, and less apparent in Democratic areas. These effects are distinct from other contextual effects such as variations in neighborhood race, income, or education. In contrast, partisan context has significantly reduced influence on unobservable public health recommendations like COVID-19 vaccination and no influence on nonpoliticized behaviors like flu vaccination, suggesting that differences in mask wearing reflect the publicly observable and politicized nature of the behavior instead of underlying differences in dispositions toward medical care.

Empathy moderates the relationship between cognitive load and prosocial behaviour.

Cognitive load reduces both empathy and prosocial behaviour. However, studies demonstrating these effects have induced cognitive load in a temporally limited, artificial manner that fails to capture real-world cognitive load. Drawing from cognitive load theory, we investigated whether naturally occurring cognitive load from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic moderated the relationship between empathy and prosocial behaviour (operationalised as support for public health measures). This large study in an Australian sample (N = 600) identified negative relationships between pandemic fatigue, empathy for people vulnerable to COVID-19, and prosocial behaviour, and a positive relationship between empathy and prosocial behaviour. Additionally, we found that the negative effect of the pandemic on prosocial behaviour depended on empathy for vulnerable others, with pandemic fatigue's effects lowest for those with the highest empathy. These findings highlight the interrelationships of cognitive load and empathy, and the potential value of eliciting empathy to ease the impact of real-world cognitive load on prosocial behaviour.

Should I Help? Prosocial Behaviour during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The Movement Control Order (MCO) enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly altered the social life and behaviour of the Malaysian population. Because the society is facing huge social and economic challenges that need individuals to work together to solve, prosocial behaviour is regarded as one of the most important social determinants. Because it is related with individual and societal benefits, participating in prosocial activities may be a major protective factor during times of global crisis. Rather than focusing only on medical and psychiatric paradigms, perhaps all that is necessary to overcome the COVID-19 risks is for individuals to make personal sacrifices for the sake of others. In reality, a large number of initiatives proven to be beneficial in decreasing viral transmission include a trade-off between individual and collective interests. Given its crucial importance, the purpose of this concept paper is to provide some insight into prosocial behaviour during the COVID-19 period. Understanding prosocial behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic is crucial because it may assist in the establishment of a post-COVID society and provide useful strategies for coping with future crises.

Acute anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with higher levels of everyday altruism.

Prior laboratory research has suggested that humans may become more prosocial in stressful or threatening situations, but it is unknown whether the link between prosociality and defense generalizes to real-life. Here, we examined the association between defensive responses to a real-world threat (the COVID-19 pandemic) and everyday altruism. Four independent samples of 150 (N = 600) US residents were recruited online at 4 different timepoints, and self-report measures of perceived COVID-19 threat, defensive emotions (e.g., stress and anxiety), and everyday altruism were collected. Our operationalization of defensive emotions was inspired by the threat imminence framework, an ecological model of how humans and animals respond to varying levels of threat. We found that perceived COVID-19 threat was associated with higher levels of everyday altruism (assessed by the Self-report Altruism scale). Importantly, there was a robust association between experiencing acute anxiety and high physiological arousal during the pandemic (responses typically characteristic of higher perceived threat imminence), and propensity to engage in everyday altruism. Non-significant or negative associations were found with less acute defensive responses like stress. These findings support a real-life relation between defensive and altruistic motivation in humans, which may be modulated by perceived threat imminence.

Prosocial behavior in emergencies: Evidence from blood donors recruitment and retention during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of COVID-19 represents a specific challenge for voluntary transfusional systems sustained by the intrinsic motivations of blood donors. In general, health emergencies can stimulate altruistic behaviors. However, in this context, the same prosocial motivations, besides the personal health risks, could foster the adherence to social distancing rules to preserve collective health and, therefore, discourage blood donation activities. In this work, we investigate the consequences of the pandemic shock on the dynamics of new donors exploiting the individual-level longitudinal information contained in administrative data on the Italian region of Tuscany. We compare the change in new donors' recruitment and retention during 2020 with respect to the 2017-2019 period (we observe 9511 individuals), considering donors' and their municipalities of residence characteristics. Our results show an increment of new donors, with higher proportional growth for older donors. Moreover, we demonstrate that the quality of new donors, as proxied by the frequency of subsequent donations, increased with respect to previous years. Finally, we show that changes in extrinsic motivations, such as the possibility of obtaining a free antibody test or overcoming movement restrictions, cannot explain the documented increase in the number of new donors and in their performance. Therefore, our analyses indicate that the Tuscan voluntary blood donation system was effective in dealing with the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Reflection of Types of Prosocial Behavior During COVID-19 in Collectivistic Asian Countries-India and Indonesia.

COVID-19 is an infectious disease that has widened the gap between victims and non-victims in society. Understanding how individuals support and assist COVID-19 sufferers in a pandemic crisis is critical. Thus, this study aims to qualitatively evaluate the prosocial intention and types of prosocial behavior toward COVID-19 victims by low socioeconomic individuals from India and Indonesia's collectivistic societies. We conducted semi-structured and in-depth interviews during the lockdown from March to May 2020, via phone and in-person, using a purposive selection of respondents (total n = 50). The data were analyzed using the qualitative synthesis method. Five themes were discovered: 1) too scared to help, 2) love to help but scared: moral dilemma, 3) informing authority who knows how to handle, 4) caring, sharing, and supporting, but with a distance, and 5) helping at one's personal health risk. This study highlights that prosocial intentions range from minor acts of kindness to self-harm and out-of-bounds acts of kindness for COVID-19 victims.

The Impact of Positivity and Parochial Altruism on Protective Behaviours during the First COVID-19 Lockdown in Italy.

Implementation of COVID-19 protective behaviours, such as social distancing or frequent hand washing during the lockdown, was critical to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this cross-sectional study, we examined the effect of positivity and parochial altruism on implementing COVID-19 health-protective behaviours during the Italian lockdown. A sample of 460 participants completed an online questionnaire that included demographic measures, Positivity Scale and COVID-19 measures of health-protective behaviours. To measure parochial altruism, we used a hypothetical dictator game played with others who could vary in their social distance from the participants. Results showed that participants in the hypothetical game gave more money to parents and siblings than to best friends, cousins, neighbours, and strangers. Furthermore, both positivity and parochial altruism (more altruism toward close vs. distant people) were positively associated with implementing hygiene behaviours but not with social distancing. Finally, mediation analysis showed that increases in parochial altruism mediated the effect of positivity on hygiene behaviour. These findings extend knowledge about the factors beyond the implementation of COVID-19 health-protective behaviours during a lockdown situation.

Prosocial nudges and visual indicators increase social distancing, but authoritative nudges do not.

Social distancing reduces the transmission of COVID-19 and other airborne diseases. To test different ways to increase social distancing, we conducted a field experiment at a major US airport using a system that presented color-coded visual indicators on crowdedness. We complemented those visual indicators with nudges commonly used to increase COVID-19-preventive behaviors. Analyzing data from 57,146 travelers, we find that visual indicators and nudges significantly affected social distancing. Introducing visual indicators increased the share of travelers practicing social distancing, and this positive effect was enhanced by introducing nudges focused on personal benefits ("protect yourself") and public benefits ("protect others"). Conversely, an authoritative nudge referencing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("don't break CDC COVID-19 guidelines") did not change social distancing behavior. Our results demonstrate that visual indicators and informed nudges can boost social distancing and potentially curb the spread of contagious diseases.

A practical test of the link between perceived identifiability and prosociality with two field studies.

Covering the face with masks in public settings has been recommended since the start of the pandemic. Because faces provide information about identity, and that face masks hide a portion of the face, it is plausible to expect individuals who wear a mask to consider themselves less identifiable. Prior research suggests that perceived identifiability is positively related to prosocial behavior, and with two pre-registered field studies (total N = 5706) we provide a currently relevant and practical test of this relation. Our findings indicate that mask wearers and non-wearers display equivalent levels of helping behavior (Studies 1 and 2), although mask wearers have a lower level of perceived identifiability than those without a mask (Study 2). Overall, our findings suggest that claims that face masks are related to selfish behavior are not warranted, and that there is no practical link between perceived identifiability and prosocial behavior.