Your browser doesn't support javascript.
The relationship between cultural tightness-looseness and COVID-19 cases and deaths: a global analysis.
Gelfand, Michele J; Jackson, Joshua Conrad; Pan, Xinyue; Nau, Dana; Pieper, Dylan; Denison, Emmy; Dagher, Munqith; Van Lange, Paul A M; Chiu, Chi-Yue; Wang, Mo.
  • Gelfand MJ; Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA. Electronic address: mgelfand@umd.edu.
  • Jackson JC; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  • Pan X; Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
  • Nau D; Department of Computer Science and Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
  • Pieper D; Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
  • Denison E; Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
  • Dagher M; Al Mustakilla Research Group, Amman, Jordan.
  • Van Lange PAM; Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Institute for Brain and Behavior, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  • Chiu CY; Faculty of Social Science, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region, China.
  • Wang M; Warrington College of Business, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. Electronic address: mo.wang@warrington.ufl.edu.
Lancet Planet Health ; 5(3): e135-e144, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1057603
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The COVID-19 pandemic is a global health crisis, yet certain countries have had far more success in limiting COVID-19 cases and deaths. We suggest that collective threats require a tremendous amount of coordination, and that strict adherence to social norms is a key mechanism that enables groups to do so. Here we examine how the strength of social norms-or cultural tightness-looseness-was associated with countries' success in limiting cases and deaths by October, 2020. We expected that tight cultures, which have strict norms and punishments for deviance, would have fewer cases and deaths per million as compared with loose cultures, which have weaker norms and are more permissive.

METHODS:

We estimated the relationship between cultural tightness-looseness and COVID-19 case and mortality rates as of Oct 16, 2020, using ordinary least squares regression. We fit a series of stepwise models to capture whether cultural tightness-looseness explained variation in case and death rates controlling for under-reporting, demographics, geopolitical factors, other cultural dimensions, and climate.

FINDINGS:

The results indicated that, compared with nations with high levels of cultural tightness, nations with high levels of cultural looseness are estimated to have had 4·99 times the number of cases (7132 per million vs 1428 per million, respectively) and 8·71 times the number of deaths (183 per million vs 21 per million, respectively), taking into account a number of controls. A formal evolutionary game theoretic model suggested that tight groups cooperate much faster under threat and have higher survival rates than loose groups. The results suggest that tightening social norms might confer an evolutionary advantage in times of collective threat.

INTERPRETATION:

Nations that are tight and abide by strict norms have had more success than those that are looser as of the October, 2020. New interventions are needed to help countries tighten social norms as they continue to battle COVID-19 and other collective threats.

FUNDING:

Office of Naval Research, US Navy.
Subject(s)

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Social Norms / COVID-19 Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Lancet Planet Health Year: 2021 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Social Norms / COVID-19 Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Lancet Planet Health Year: 2021 Document Type: Article