Your Health vs. My Liberty: Philosophical beliefs dominated reflection and identifiable victim effects when predicting public health recommendation compliance
Philosophers and scientists have emphasized how our responses to global crises are often alarmingly ineffective. For example, people often prioritize a few nearby victims over many victims abroad. We wanted to understand individual differences in responses to public health crises during the COVID19 pandemic. Two experiments investigated how compliance with public health recommendations depended on messaging, cognitive style, and prior philosophical beliefs (Total N = 998). One of the two experiments found that compliance with public health recommendations was slightly improved by messaging about individual victims compared to messaging about statistical victims—i.e., "flatten the curve" graphs. However, both experiments found that beliefs about morality were more potent predictors of compliance than strategic messaging or reflective reasoning. In the second experiment, religiosity and beliefs about science were similarly predictive. This suggests that non-compliance with public health recommendations may not be a matter of ineffective messaging or reasoning, but philosophical differences.