» Articles » PMID: 34506543

Replicating the Disease Framing Problem During the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic: A Study of Stress, Worry, Trust, and Choice Under Risk

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2021 Sep 10
PMID 34506543
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In the risky-choice framing effect, different wording of the same options leads to predictably different choices. In a large-scale survey conducted from March to May 2020 and including 88,181 participants from 47 countries, we investigated how stress, concerns, and trust moderated the effect in the Disease problem, a prominent framing problem highly evocative of the COVID-19 pandemic. As predicted by the appraisal-tendency framework, risk aversion and the framing effect in our study were larger than under typical circumstances. Furthermore, perceived stress and concerns over coronavirus were positively associated with the framing effect. Contrary to predictions, however, they were not related to risk aversion. Trust in the government's efforts to handle the coronavirus was associated with neither risk aversion nor the framing effect. The proportion of risky choices and the framing effect varied substantially across nations. Additional exploratory analyses showed that the framing effect was unrelated to reported compliance with safety measures, suggesting, along with similar findings during the pandemic and beyond, that the effectiveness of framing manipulations in public messages might be limited. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed, along with directions for further investigations.

Citing Articles

Correction: Replicating the Disease framing problem during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic: A study of stress, worry, trust, and choice under risk.

PLoS One. 2024; 19(12):e0315440.

PMID: 39636898 PMC: 11620341. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315440.


Protective behaviors during COVID-19 confinement measures in Greece: the role of anxiety, perceived risk and risky-choice framing.

Koulierakis G, Dermatis A, Zavras D, Pavi E AIMS Public Health. 2023; 10(2):281-296.

PMID: 37304597 PMC: 10251049. DOI: 10.3934/publichealth.2023021.


Validity testing of the conspiratorial thinking and anti-expert sentiment scales during the COVID-19 pandemic across 24 languages from a large-scale global dataset.

Han H, Blackburn A, Jeftic A, Tran T, Stockli S, Reifler J Epidemiol Infect. 2022; 150:e167.

PMID: 36093606 PMC: 9530382. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268822001443.


Comparing stress and behavioral coping strategies during the early stages of the COVID-19 crisis among domestic and overseas Taiwanese.

Chen C, Wu H, Yeh M, Wang A Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):11613.

PMID: 35803989 PMC: 9264308. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-15567-y.


Trust in the scientific research community predicts intent to comply with COVID-19 prevention measures: An analysis of a large-scale international survey dataset.

Han H Epidemiol Infect. 2022; 150:e36.

PMID: 35131001 PMC: 8886075. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268822000255.


References
1.
Ma Q, Pei G, Wang K . Influence of negative emotion on the framing effect: evidence from event-related potentials. Neuroreport. 2015; 26(6):325-32. DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0000000000000346. View

2.
Van Bavel J, Baicker K, Boggio P, Capraro V, Cichocka A, Cikara M . Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nat Hum Behav. 2020; 4(5):460-471. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z. View

3.
Lerner J, Gonzalez R, Small D, Fischhoff B . Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism: a national field experiment. Psychol Sci. 2003; 14(2):144-50. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.01433. View

4.
Habersaat K, Betsch C, Danchin M, Sunstein C, Bohm R, Falk A . Ten considerations for effectively managing the COVID-19 transition. Nat Hum Behav. 2020; 4(7):677-687. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-020-0906-x. View

5.
Stiegelis H, Hagedoorn M, Sanderman R, Bennenbroek F, Buunk B, van den Bergh A . The impact of an informational self-management intervention on the association between control and illness uncertainty before and psychological distress after radiotherapy. Psychooncology. 2004; 13(4):248-59. DOI: 10.1002/pon.738. View