Suppr超能文献

保护英国公众免受外部威胁的心理学:将新冠疫情与闪电战进行比较。

The psychology of protecting the UK public against external threat: COVID-19 and the Blitz compared.

作者信息

Jones Edgar

机构信息

Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.

出版信息

Lancet Psychiatry. 2020 Nov;7(11):991-996. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30342-4. Epub 2020 Aug 27.

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and the World War 2 aerial bombing campaign against the UK between 1939 and 1945 both exposed the civilian population to a sustained threat. Risk, whether from exposure to viral load or the density of the bombing, led to a range of protective measures and behavioural regulations being implemented. The V1 and V2 missiles used in summer and autumn, 1944, functioned as a second wave of bombing, arriving after people believed the danger had passed. Adherence to lockdown and a reluctance to return to work after the lifting of lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK were mirrored in the preference for using home-based bomb shelters during the air raids. Heightened sensitivity to risk, or a so-called deep shelter mentality, did not materialise even during the second wave of bomb attacks and some deep bomb shelters were closed because of low occupancy. The most popular protective measures were those that reflected people's preferences, and not necessarily those that provided the greatest safety. As with the COVID-19 pandemic, the public drove government policy as much as they followed it.

摘要

新冠疫情以及1939年至1945年间针对英国的二战空袭行动,都使平民持续面临威胁。无论是因接触病毒载量还是轰炸密度而产生的风险,都促使一系列保护措施和行为规范得以实施。1944年夏秋使用的V1和V2导弹,构成了第二轮轰炸,在人们认为危险已经过去之后到来。英国在新冠疫情期间对封锁的坚持以及封锁解除后不愿重返工作岗位的情况,与空袭期间人们更倾向于使用家庭防空洞的情况如出一辙。即使在第二轮炸弹袭击期间,对风险的高度敏感,即所谓的深挖洞心态也并未出现,一些深层防空洞因使用率低而关闭。最受欢迎的保护措施是那些反映人们偏好的措施,而不一定是提供最大安全保障的措施。与新冠疫情一样,公众在很大程度上推动了政府政策,同时也遵循这些政策。

相似文献

3
The COVID-19 Pandemic: Ethical and Scientific Imperatives for "Natural" Experiments.新冠疫情:“自然”实验的伦理与科学要务
Circulation. 2020 Jul 28;142(4):309-311. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.048671. Epub 2020 May 22.
4
Passport to freedom? Immunity passports for COVID-19.通往自由的护照?新冠病毒免疫护照。
J Med Ethics. 2020 Oct;46(10):652-659. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106365. Epub 2020 Aug 15.

引用本文的文献

3
A Sartrean analysis of pandemic shaming.对疫情羞辱的萨特式分析。
Phenomenol Cogn Sci. 2023 Jan 21;22(5):1-19. doi: 10.1007/s11097-023-09890-6.
6
COVID-19 and the Blitz compared: mental health outcomes in the UK.新冠疫情与闪电战比较:英国的心理健康后果。
Lancet Psychiatry. 2021 Aug;8(8):708-716. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00118-8. Epub 2021 May 11.
7
Positive outcomes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia.澳大利亚与新冠疫情相关的积极成果。
Health Promot J Austr. 2022 Apr;33(2):311-319. doi: 10.1002/hpja.494. Epub 2021 May 12.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验