The Role of the Mask in Preventing and Controlling the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

Following the outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there have been debates among scientific communities, officials, and the public about the role of the mask in controlling and preventing this disease. Nonetheless, there are some ambiguities regarding various aspects of the mask which are still important to be addressed, including the type of the mask to be used, the situation in which the mask should be used, the correct way to use the mask, and the effectiveness of the mask in preventing the disease. Accordingly, addressing these ambiguities could change policy trends and public beliefs about the use of mask and help control the disease. To this end, this study discusses the role of the mask in preventing and controlling the COVID-19 pandemic.

Unobtrusive measures of prejudice: Estimating percentages of public beliefs and behaviours

This study was concerned with how accurate people are in their knowledge of population norms and statistics concerning such things as the economic, health and religious status of a nation and how those estimates are related to their own demography (e.g age, sex), ideology (political and religious beliefs) and intelligence. Just over 600 adults were asked to make 25 population estimates for Great Britain, including religious (church/mosque attendance) and economic (income, state benefits, car/house ownership) factors as well as estimates like the number of gay people, immigrants, smokers etc. They were reasonably accurate for things like car ownership, criminal record, vegetarianism and voting but seriously overestimated numbers related to minorities such as the prevalence of gay people, muslims and people not born in the UK. Conversely there was a significant underestimation of people receiving state benefits, having a criminal record or a private health insurance. Correlations between select variables and magnitude and absolute accuracy showed religiousness and IQ most significant correlates. Religious people were less, and intelligent people more, accurate in their estimates. A factor analysis of the estimates revealed five interpretable factors. Regressions were calculated onto these factors and showed how these individual differences accounted for as much as 14% of the variance. Implications and limitations are acknowledged.

What about Adaptive Introgression? The Genomic Revolution Is Shaping Scientific and Public Perception

Genetic miscegenation was historically perceived as a maladaptive process or even an imperfection of nature. However, through adaptive introgression, some species can share genes associated with well-adapted traits. Current scientific perceptions on the benefits of adaptive introgression can help to clarify how these paradoxes condition scientific progress and influence public beliefs and decision-making. We carried out a systematic review and bibliometric analysis using artificial intelligence on adaptive introgression evidence. The genomic revolution provided an exponential growing of evidence predominately interpreted as beneficial for species adaptation. We show that this remarkable increase on publications influences public perception in the medium-long term. Despite an initially emotional response, peoples’ final opinion tends to incorporate science-based evidence, although prejudices seem to influence peoples’ polarity opinion. We argue that developing the knowledge on adaptive introgression will allow to scientifically refute theories that promote genetic “purity”, used to justify racism and other forms of discrimination.

Politicized climate science: No evidence for science literacy driving motivated reasoning, or polarized belief-updating in a US national experiment

A substantial literature demonstrates public polarization over climate change, particularly among the science literate. The dominant explanation for this phenomenon is that science literacy amplifies directional motivated reasoning, the tendency to interpret evidence such that it confirms desired conclusions. However, the evidence regarding this biasing account of science literacy is inconclusive. The present study tests the biasing account of science literacy in a national survey experiment among the U.S. population. Although results replicated the typical correlational pattern of political polarization as a function of science literacy, results delivered little support for the core causal claim of the biasing account—that science literacy drives motivated reasoning, and polarized belief-updating. First, results delivered little evidence that science literacy amplified motivated reasoning, despite strong motivated reasoning effects. And second, results delivered little evidence that science literacy amplified polarized belief-updating. That is, the science literate were polarized, but science literacy was not polarizing. These results help clarify the role of science literacy for public beliefs about contested science.

Change and Stability in Public Beliefs About Same-Sex Family Rights in Norway in 2008, 2013, and 2017

Introduction In Norway, legal measures securing equal marriage and parenting rights for same- and different-sex couples took effect on January 1, 2009. The aim of this study was to assess Norwegian public beliefs about lesbian and gay family rights in the period of 2008–2017. Methods Three nationwide surveys representing the adult Norwegian population were conducted with a time series design (data collected in 2008, 2013, and 2017, n = 1246, 1250, and 1250, respectively) utilizing Web-based questionnaires. Results Over the 9-year period, there was a decline in negative beliefs about lesbian and gay parenting and marriage rights and gradually less concern about children growing up with same-sex parents, more so for men than for women. Beliefs about equal parenting rights remained more negative than beliefs about equal marriage rights. At all points in time, concern for children’s welfare was the strongest predictor of beliefs about equal parenting rights for same- and different-sex couples, and for all points in time, being older contributed to the explained variance. Conclusions We discuss how the findings may relate to policy developments concerning LGBTI rights in Norway. LGBTI rights have gained increasingly significant symbolic value in the public domain, and we suggest that it is productive to reflect on findings in relation to new landscapes of political and public discourse in Norway and Europe. Social Policy Implications The results reveal contemporary supportive public opinion regarding LGBTI family rights, which currently gives lawmakers a foundation for further institutionalizing LGBTI rights in domains such as in schools at every level and in institutions offering family support and counseling. However, there is also a need for political awareness of emerging discourses linking questions on same-sex family rights to broader divisive sociopolitical processes.

Informational Herding, Optimal Experimentation, and Contrarianism

In the standard herding model, privately informed individuals sequentially see prior actions and then act. An identical action herd eventually starts and public beliefs tend to “cascade sets” where social learning stops. What behaviour is socially efficient when actions ignore informational externalities? We characterize the outcome that maximizes the discounted sum of utilities. Our four key findings are: (a) Cascade sets shrink but do not vanish, and herding should occur but less readily as greater weight is attached to posterity. (b) An optimal mechanism rewards individuals mimicked by their successor. (c) Cascades cannot start after period one under a signal logconcavity condition. (d) Given this condition, efficient behaviour is contrarian, leaning against the myopically more popular actions in every period. We make two technical contributions: As value functions with learning are not smooth, we use monotone comparative statics under uncertainty to deduce optimal dynamic behaviour.We also adapt dynamic pivot mechanisms to Bayesian learning.