scholarly journals Working Memory Capacity Predicts Individual Differences in Social Distancing Compliance during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the U.S.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weizhen Xie ◽  
Stephen Campbell ◽  
Weiwei Zhang

Noncompliance with social distancing during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic poses a great challenge to the public health system. These noncompliance behaviors partly reflect people’s concerns for the inherent costs of social distancing while discounting its public health benefits. We propose that this oversight may be associated with the limitation in one’s mental capacity to simultaneously retain multiple pieces of information in working memory (WM) for rational decision making that leads to social distancing compliance. We tested this hypothesis in 850 U.S. residents during the first 2 weeks following the presidential declaration of national emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that participants’ social distancing compliance at this initial stage could be predicted by individual differences in WM capacity, partly due to increased awareness of benefits over costs of social distancing among higher WM capacity individuals. Critically, the unique contribution of WM capacity to the individual differences in social distancing compliance could not be explained by other psychological and socioeconomic factors (e.g., moods, personality, education, and income levels). Furthermore, the critical role of WM capacity in social distancing compliance can be generalized to the compliance with another set of rules for social interactions, namely the fairness norm, in Western cultures. Collectively, our data reveal novel contributions of a core cognitive process underlying social distancing compliance during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting a potential cognitive venue for developing strategies to mitigate a public health crisis.

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (30) ◽  
pp. 17667-17674 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weizhen Xie ◽  
Stephen Campbell ◽  
Weiwei Zhang

Noncompliance with social distancing during the early stage of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a great challenge to the public health system. These noncompliance behaviors partly reflect people’s concerns for the inherent costs of social distancing while discounting its public health benefits. We propose that this oversight may be associated with the limitation in one’s mental capacity to simultaneously retain multiple pieces of information in working memory (WM) for rational decision making that leads to social-distancing compliance. We tested this hypothesis in 850 United States residents during the first 2 wk following the presidential declaration of national emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that participants’ social-distancing compliance at this initial stage could be predicted by individual differences in WM capacity, partly due to increased awareness of benefits over costs of social distancing among higher WM capacity individuals. Critically, the unique contribution of WM capacity to the individual differences in social-distancing compliance could not be explained by other psychological and socioeconomic factors (e.g., moods, personality, education, and income levels). Furthermore, the critical role of WM capacity in social-distancing compliance can be generalized to the compliance with another set of rules for social interactions, namely the fairness norm, in Western cultures. Collectively, our data reveal contributions of a core cognitive process underlying social-distancing compliance during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting a potential cognitive venue for developing strategies to mitigate a public health crisis.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-350
Author(s):  
Yogesh Acharya ◽  
Suman Pant ◽  
Pradip Gyanwali ◽  
Ganesh Dangal ◽  
Priyanka Karki ◽  
...  

Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a growing public health crisis. Despite initial focus on the elderly population with comorbidities, it seems that large studies from the worst affected countries follow a sex-disaggregation pattern. Analysis of available data showed marked variations in reported cases between males and females among different countries with higher mortality in males.  At this early stage of the pandemic, medical datasets at the individual level are not available; therefore, it is challenging to conclude how different factors have impacted COVID-19 susceptibility. Thus, in the absence of patients’ level data, we attempted to provide a theoretical description of how other determinants have affected COVID-19 susceptibility in males compared to females.  In this article, we have identified and discussed possible biological and behavioral factors that could be responsible for the increased male susceptibility. Biological factors include - an absence of X-chromosomes (a powerhouse for immune-related genes), a high level of testosterone that inhibits antibody production, and the presence of Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors that facilitate viral replication. Similarly, behavioral factors constitute - higher smoking and alcohol consumptions, low level of handwashing practices, and high-risk behavior like non-adherence to health services and reluctance to follow public health measures in males. Keywords: COVID-19; gender; males; sex disaggregation; susceptibility


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Draheim ◽  
Jason S. Tsukahara ◽  
Jessie Martin ◽  
Cody Mashburn ◽  
Randall W Engle

Cognitive tasks that produce reliable and robust effects at the group level often fail to yield reliable and valid individual differences. An ongoing debate among attention researchers is whether conflict resolution mechanisms are task-specific or domain-general, and the lack of correlation between most attention measures seems to favor the view that attention control is not a unitary concept. We have argued that the use of difference scores, particularly in reaction time, is the primary cause of null and conflicting results at the individual differences level, and that methodological issues with existing tasks preclude making strong theoretical conclusions. The present article is an empirical test of this view in which we used a toolbox approach to develop and validate new tasks hypothesized to reflect attention processes. Here, we administered existing, modified, and new attention tasks to over 400 subjects (final N = 396). Compared to the traditional Stroop and flanker tasks, performance on the accuracy-based measures was more reliable, had stronger intercorrelations, formed a more coherent latent factor, and had stronger associations to measures of working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. Further, attention control fully accounted for the relationship between working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. These results show that accuracy-based tasks can be better suited to individual differences investigations than traditional reaction time tasks, particularly when the goal is to maximize prediction. We conclude that attention control is a unitary concept.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document