Akesson Jesper, Ashworth-Hayes Sam, Hahn Robert, Metcalfe Robert, Rasooly Itzhak
The Behaviouralist, London, England.
University of Oxford and Technology Policy Institute, Oxford, England.
J Risk Uncertain. 2022;64(2):147-190. doi: 10.1007/s11166-022-09375-y. Epub 2022 Jun 2.
Little is known about how people's beliefs concerning the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) influence their behavior. To shed light on this, we conduct an online experiment ( ) with US and UK residents. Participants are randomly allocated to a control group or to one of two treatment groups. The treatment groups are shown upper- or lower-bound expert estimates of the infectiousness of the virus. We present three main empirical findings. First, individuals dramatically overestimate the dangerousness and infectiousness of COVID-19 relative to expert opinion. Second, providing people with expert information partially corrects their beliefs about the virus. Third, the more infectious people believe that COVID-19 is, the less willing they are to take protective measures, a finding we dub the "fatalism effect". We develop a formal model that can explain the fatalism effect and discuss its implications for optimal policy during the pandemic.
人们对2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的信念如何影响其行为,目前所知甚少。为了阐明这一点,我们对美国和英国居民进行了一项在线实验( )。参与者被随机分配到一个对照组或两个治疗组之一。治疗组会看到关于该病毒传染性的上限或下限专家估计值。我们呈现了三个主要实证发现。第一,相对于专家意见,个人显著高估了COVID-19的危险性和传染性。第二,向人们提供专家信息部分纠正了他们对该病毒的信念。第三,人们认为COVID-19传染性越强,他们采取保护措施的意愿就越低,我们将这一发现称为“宿命论效应”。我们建立了一个可以解释宿命论效应的正式模型,并讨论了其对疫情期间最优政策的影响。