Human choices in a simulated pandemic: New study tests interventions to
foster safer behavior

Date:
February 25, 2022
Source:
University of Plymouth
Summary:
A new study has shown that it is possible to test the effectiveness
of interventions designed to foster safer behavior in order to
slow the spread of a virus.



FULL STORY ==========================================================================
The world has relied on adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions,
such as ventilation, mask-wearing and physical distancing, to keep us safe throughout the ongoing pandemic. With vaccines completing the toolbox,
these measures and the accompanying public health messaging continue to
play an important role.


==========================================================================
Now a new study has shown that it is possible to test the effectiveness
of interventions designed to foster safer behaviour in order to slow
the spread of a virus.

The study, led by the Max Planck Institute for Human Development,
Germany, with collaborators at the University of Plymouth, UK, and the
IESE Business School, Spain, found that the most effective approach was
a message that directly appealed to the public, contained moral reason,
and was clear and consistent.

The research, published in Science Advances, asked seven groups of 100
people each in a cross section of the US population to take part in
games designed to emulate virus transmission.

How did the game work? The game was presented in a neutral framing,
replacing terms associated with pandemics by references to neutral
colours. Blue players represented healthy individuals, and purple players infected individuals.



==========================================================================
All 100 players in each game started as blue; then eight randomly selected players were switched to purple (this represents the initial outbreak).

In each of 25 rounds, players decided between two actions: action G
offering low risk and low reward (8 points) and action H offering
high risk and high reward (40 points). All players were randomly
paired. Blue paired with purple players may switch to purple; the
transmission probability was between 0.05 and 0.25 and was determined
by the riskiness of the pair's chosen actions.

Finally, scores summed across all rounds were translated into payoffs
for blue players only, at a rate of -L-1 per 200 points -- so if they
took more risks and managed to stay blue, they got a higher reward.

However, if they got 'infected' and turned purple, they lost everything.

What was being tested? The research tested the effectiveness of different types of interventions in preventing risk-taking behaviour.



==========================================================================
The scenario was purposely chosen to be separate from COVID-19 to ensure
that participants were at the same level of experience. The interventions implemented principles of several methods used by countries and media
outlets worldwide, and found that people reduced their risk-taking
behaviour as follows:
* The most effective method was a message with the simple imperative
(ie
giving an instruction) with a moral explanation: "Choose action
G to protect your and other players' bonus money." On average,
participants also earned the highest amount of money in this
condition.

* Second most effective were illustrations of the spreading
consequences of
early transmission.

* Third most effective was a simulator tool that allowed participants
to
observe the outcome of simulated games with different levels of
risk- taking behaviour.

* Not at all effective was sharing (purple) case rate numbers:
Based on the
results, people did not anticipate exponential growth in
transmissions and under-reacted to initial increases.

* Worse still was the communication of 'descriptive norms' describing
other
participants' behaviour (eg 60% of participants chose the safer
option) - - this actually led to a slight increase in risk-taking
behaviour.

Lead study author Dr Jan Woike, Lecturer in Psychology at the University
of Plymouth, said: "Nonpharmaceutical interventions -- such as wearing
masks, maintaining physical distance, and reducing contacts -- require large-scale behaviour change, which depends on individual compliance and cooperation. The behavioural sciences offer cognitive and communicative
tools to help, but the effectiveness of the methods to increase compliance
has rarely been tested in controlled scenarios that still reflect the
dynamics of infectious outbreaks.

"What's so important about this framework is that it allows to test
the effectiveness of an intervention before implementing it in a real
pandemic with health consequences for participants.

"It was interesting to note that the most effective intervention was not
the one that participants liked the most. Clear and consistent messaging
worked best in reducing risk-taking behaviours.

"We don't know if and when the next pandemic, or even the next
concerning variant in this pandemic, may arrive, but policy-makers
need to know which interventions are most likely to promote socially advantageous behaviour, and this is a step to making that possible."
special promotion Explore the latest scientific research on sleep and
dreams in this free online course from New Scientist -- Sign_up_now_>>> ========================================================================== Story Source: Materials provided by University_of_Plymouth. Note:
Content may be edited for style and length.


========================================================================== Journal Reference:
1. Jan K. Woike, Sebastian Hafenbra"dl, Patricia Kanngiesser,
Ralph Hertwig.

The transmission game: Testing behavioral interventions in a
pandemic- like simulation. Science Advances, 2022; 8 (8) DOI:
10.1126/ sciadv.abk0428 ==========================================================================

Link to news story: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/02/220225142026.htm

--- up 11 weeks, 6 days, 7 hours, 13 minutes
* Origin: -=> Castle Rock BBS <=- Now Husky HPT Powered! (1:317/3)