Lockdowns fuel COVID-19 threat perception, according to recent research in the UK
A new study, led by psychologists from Cardiff, Bath, and Essex universities, has shed light on the diversity and complexity of public opinion regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken to control it. The findings of the research, published today in the journal Royal Society Open Science with the DOI: 10.1098/rsos.210678, suggest that people may take the pandemic less seriously once restrictions are lifted, and that headline polls may not accurately represent the extent of public conflict over these measures.
The research team examined reasons behind headline polling support for COVID-19 measures, conducting two UK surveys six months apart during 2020. They found that people's judgment of the severity of the COVID-19 threat is influenced by the government's imposition of a lockdown. However, the more people judged the risk in this way, the more they supported lockdown, yet thought many of its side effects were "unacceptable" in a cost-benefit analysis.
Any messaging that targets people's personal sense of threat is unlikely to actually raise support for any further restrictions, according to the study. Raising people's personal threat was unlikely to enhance their support for restrictive measures. This finding challenges the common belief that heightening people's fear of the virus would lead to increased support for lockdowns and other restrictions.
Professor Lorraine Whitmarsh, an environmental psychologist from the University of Bath, emphasizes the importance of bold government actions in addressing serious issues, like climate change. She suggests bold actions could include halting all road building (as recently done in Wales) or preventing airport expansions.
Dr. Paul Hanel, a lecturer in psychology at the University of Essex, highlights the significance of asking the right questions in polling data to avoid a limited and potentially misleading understanding of public opinions. He calls for a more nuanced use of polling data during the pandemic to accurately represent the diversity and complexity of public opinion.
The researchers warn of a potential symbiotic relationship between public opinion and government policy, which could impact future policy implementations. They recommend bold actions such as enhancing forest resilience through improved forest management, increasing carbon sequestration by forests, implementing innovative urban projects like biochar-based sponge cities to improve water retention and biodiversity, developing international and multi-level governance frameworks to reduce pollution—especially marine plastic pollution—and fostering collaboration among stakeholders for climate adaptation and mitigation efforts.
The study shows the importance of understanding the diversity and potential conflicts within public opinions regarding COVID-19 measures. As the pandemic continues, this understanding could help policymakers make more informed decisions and better communicate with the public about the measures needed to control the spread of the virus.
Read also:
- Parliamentary Meetings in the Federal Diet of Germany this Week
- Wheat in current times contains lower levels of essential nutrients
- Hospital in Taos faces imminent closure due to looming federal budget reductions
- Proposal request for a worker radiation protection directive, addressing the risks associated with ionizing radiation exposure, put forth by the Commission.
