How can we master the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic? The role of planning at social levels

Thürmer, J. Lukas; Wieber, Frank; Gollwitzer, Peter M.

doi:10.1080/10463283.2020.1852699

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 162 publications

(196 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, calls for unity were more effective when they elicited higher threat ratings, as indicated by significant indirect effects of message source on reconciliatory behavior. Although running counter to findings regarding punishment (e.g., McCrea et al., 2022), these observations comport well with motivation science accounts of how individuals and groups attain their goals (DeShon et al., 2004; Thürmer et al., 2021; Wieber et al., 2012). Threat may be conceived of as an indicator of insufficient goal progress, leading to increased goal‐directed effort (Carver & Scheier, 1990; Thürmer, Scheier et al., 2020).…”

Section: Beyond Punishment: Response Target and Valencesupporting

confidence: 65%

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

Thürmer

McCrea

2022

Social & Personality Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communication of criticism between groups is important to productive societal discourse, but may serve to inflame conflict. The defensive rejection of intergroup, relative to intragroup, criticism (intergroup sensitivity effect [ISE]) may contribute to such divides. The ISE has been observed in self-report measures, but such measures are weak and biased predictors of actual (divisive) behavior. We review recent research demonstrating that the ISE does have costly behavioral consequences. We next consider the debate concerning whether the ISE reflects defense of a valued social identity or enforcement of a conversational norm. We therefore review recent evidence for an ISE among individuals lacking identification with the target of the criticism. Third, we examine how the ISE may affect a variety of behaviors relevant to societal divisions, including political reconciliation, environmental sustainability, and vaccination. Lastly, we outline future research that can clarify the underlying mechanisms of the ISE and promote conciliatory intergroup behavior.

show abstract

Section: Beyond Punishment: Response Target and Valencesupporting

confidence: 65%

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

Thürmer

McCrea

2022

Social & Personality Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another promising route for governments' interventions could be reducing the effort needed to comply with behavioral restrictions. For instance, it has been suggested that simple action planning (e.g., what to do when feeling bored) could help people navigate the pandemic by supporting them in dealing with the difficulties of compliance (Bieleke et al 2020;Thürmer et al 2021). Our present results suggest that reducing effort has beneficial effects on behavior and simultaneously reduces boredom.…”

Section: Implications For Policy Makers During a Pandemicmentioning

confidence: 53%

Bored by bothering: A cost-value approach to pandemic boredom

Martarelli¹,

Wolff²,

Bieleke³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an effort to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, countries around the world have employed non-pharmaceutical containment measures. The effectiveness of such mitigation efforts relies on individual compliance (e.g., avoiding to travel or to gather). Crucially, adhering to the required behavioral recommendations places substantial burdens on those who are asked to follow them. One particularly likely outcome of adherence should be the experience of boredom. Thus, people might get bored by bothering. Drawing from research and theorizing on reward-based decision making, we conducted a high-powered study (N = 1553 US participants) to investigate whether the value and effort people ascribe to adherence to containment measures directly and indirectly (i.e., mediated by adherence) affects their experience of boredom. As expected, structural equation modeling revealed that high value and low effort predicted compliance with behavioral recommendations. Moreover, higher compliance was linked to more boredom, meaning that high value and low effort increased boredom via compliance. In contrast, high value and low effort had direct effects on boredom in the opposite direction (i.e., decreasing boredom). Attesting to their robustness and generalizability, these findings held for both prospective (with respect to upcoming winter holidays) and retrospective behavior (with respect to previous thanksgiving holidays), across US states which had or had not enforced behavioral restrictions, individual differences in boredom proneness, and demographic variables. Taken together, our results show that people can indeed get bored by bothering: Complying with nonpharmacological containment measures like avoiding to travel and to gather can come at the cost of getting bored, an experience that was strongly linked to negative affect in our study. While the observed levels of compliance were relatively high and those of boredom were relatively low, the data suggest that this could change over time because levels of boredom might rise. This might render maintenance of compliance in the general public increasingly difficult. However, we illustrate how policy makers can rely on theoretical models of boredom and behavior to maintain compliance and discuss the chances and pitfalls of doing so.

show abstract

“…Consider hand washing: Individuals might believe that hand washing is neither prudent nor morally right (personal norm), but if they believe that other people expect them to wash their hands and would punish them for failing to wash their hands (social norm), they are more likely to wash their hands – at least in the presence of others – despite their unhygienic personal norm. Social norms may even influence behavior in an automatic fashion, unless this influence is overridden by implementation intentions (Thürmer et al, 2020; see also Thürmer et al, 2021). It is crucial for public health to understand how social norms change.…”

Section: The Present Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Asymmetric Punishment Explain Norm Changes?

Tobias,

Frisch,

Sebben

et al. 2024

Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We test a general theory of norm changes based on evidence that people will punish less hygienic others more strongly than more hygienic others. The theory concludes that such asymmetric punishment would result in hygiene norms becoming ever stricter. We argue that, because complaints about one’s behavior might lead to protest, norms might not always change because of such complaints. We conducted an online experiment ( N = 1,023 Swiss adults) using handwashing as the target behavior. We replicated the asymmetry in punishment intensities and found that the intensity of protests against complaints about one’s too unhygienic behavior approached the intensity of these complaints. We conclude that, while asymmetric punishment may drive norm change, protests may lead to norm stability.

show abstract

How can we master the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic? The role of planning at social levels

Cited by 13 publications

References 162 publications

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

Bored by bothering: A cost-value approach to pandemic boredom

Can Asymmetric Punishment Explain Norm Changes?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About