Learning from the COVID-19 pandemic to combat climate change: comparing drivers of individual action in global crises

The COVID-19 pandemic and climate change are two global crises that require collective action. Yet, the inertia typically associated with behavior change to limit climate change stands in contrast to the speed associated with behavior change to stop the spread of COVID-19. Identifying the roots of these differences can help us stimulate climate-friendly behaviors. We assessed the extent to which a number of theory-based drivers underlie behaviors aiming to counter COVID-19 and climate change with an online survey (N = 534). We focused on the role of a number of drivers derived from prominent behavior change theories and meta-analyses in the field, namely, personal threat, threat to close others, threat to vulnerable others, fear, participative efficacy, injunctive and descriptive social norms, and governmental policy perceptions. We investigated (1) what drivers people perceived as most important to engage in behaviors that limit the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change and (2) the strength of the associations between these drivers and engaging in behaviors that limit the spread of the pandemic and climate change. Results highlight three key drivers for climate change action: changing perceptions of governmental policy and perceptions of threat to close others and priming participative efficacy beliefs.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Majority Population, Ethno-Racial Minorities, and Immigrants

The COVID-19 pandemic constitutes an unprecedented threat for individuals and societies, revealing stark inequalities in preparedness, exposure, and consequences. The present systematic literature review complements extant knowledge on disasters and pandemic diseases with programmatic research on the COVID-19 pandemic. Building upon an integrative definition of threat, we merge intra-personal threat regulation with group dynamics and inter-group relations. Via streamlined methods of knowledge synthesis, we first map out a broad taxonomy of threats, as appraised by the majority population and ethno-racial and immigrant minorities. Second, we delve into research linking threat appraisals with either conflict or prosociality within and across group boundaries. To conclude, we propose some guidelines for researchers to involve ethno-racial and immigrant minorities actively and for societies to cope cohesively with the impact of COVID-19.

Do We Stand Together? The Role of Perceived Personal and Group Threats in Predicting the Majority’s (Un)willingness to Confront Injustice on Behalf of a Minority

Purpose: By utilizing data from Estonia, Finland, and Norway, this study explores how the perceptions of personal and group realistic threats, namely perceived ethnic discrimination and economic insecurity among national majorities, predict their unwillingness to confront injustice on behalf of Russian-speaking minority groups.Background: Previous research on collective action to promote minorities’ rights and social standing has focused either on minorities’ own actions or factors promoting the willingness of majority group members to engage in collective action on behalf of minorities. In contrast, factors explaining the reluctance of majority group members to engage in collective action on behalf of minority groups have remained less explored. For example, studies have then ignored that the majority members may also feel threatened and may be economically insecure. Furthermore, the possible discrepancy between perceived personal vs. in-group’s situation may influence majority group members’ (un)willingness to confront injustice on behalf of a minority group.Method: We employed polynomial regression with response surface analysis to analyze data gathered among national majority members in three countries (N = 1,341).Results: Perceived personal and group realistic threats were associated with heightened unwillingness to confront injustice on behalf of the Russian-speaking minority. Furthermore, participants were more unwilling to confront injustice when they perceived more group than personal threat.Conclusion: We found that majority group members’ (un)willingness to confront injustice on behalf of the minority is related to how secure they perceive their own and their group status. Our results contribute to previous research by pointing out the important drawbacks of majorities’ support for minorities’ wish for social change.

The limitations of polling data in understanding public support for COVID-19 lockdown policies

Opinion polls regarding policies designed to tackle COVID-19 have shown public support has remained high throughout the first year of the pandemic in most places around the world. However, there is a risk that headline support over-simplifies people's views. We carried out a two-wave survey with six-month interval on a public sample ( N = 212) in the UK, examining the factors that underpin lockdown policy support. We find that the majority of people support most public health measures introduced, but that they also see significant side effects of these policies, and that they consider many of these side effects as unacceptable in a cost–benefit analysis. We also find that people judged the threat of COVID-19 via the magnitude of the policy response, and that they do not use their perception of the personal threat to themselves or close others to guide their support for policy. Polling data only offer one simple perspective and do not illustrate the ambivalence many people feel around lockdown policies. There is also a meaningful risk of public opinion and government policy forming a symbiotic relationship, which impacts upon how effectively such policies are implemented both now, and in relation to future threats.

Spatiotemporality in the Anthropocene: Deleuzoguattarian Philosophy, Quantum Physics, and the German Netflix Series Dark

Crises alter our perception of time. For medical personnel faced with treating unprecedented numbers of critically ill patients under conditions of personal threat, COVID-19 has most recently accelerated the subjective perception of time. For millions of others, social isolation has decelerated our lives. For all of us, at least in the short term, the future has become more uncertain. Theoretical physicists tell us, however, that under any conditions, the human perception of the flowing of time is only a result of our blurred, limited, macroscopic vision. As the quantum physicist Carlo Rovelli writes, therefore, “[t]o understand ourselves is to reflect on time” (2018: 179). Potentially caused by humans’ failed interactions with wild animals, the contemporary global pandemic, as well as previous outbreaks such as SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related coronavirus) or the bird flu, has led to calls to reevaluate humans’ relationships with nonhuman life, with the natural environment that includes us, in the epoch that may soon be named for our very failure – the Anthropocene. In an era in which our usual, day-to-day certainties and desire for human control have been upended, not only by the current medical crisis but also by the continuing existential threat to terrestrial life that is climate change, a rethinking of the category of the human, a new conceptualization of the entangled (human and nonhuman) material relationships on our planet and beyond, requires reflecting on time. This article engages in such reflection through a conversation with the philosophical writings of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari.

Breaking the Myth of Cyber Doom: Securitization and Normalization of Novel Threats

Physical damage resulting from cyber operations continues to reinforce the “cyber doom” narrative across societies dependent on information and communication technology. This is paradoxical given the absence of severe, lasting consequences from cyber operations and the relative restraint exercised by cyber-capable actors. Moreover, the mass adoption of vulnerable digital systems raises questions whether or not individuals’ dread cyber insecurity is as severe as we are often asked to believe. Employing a survey experiment, we find that the assumptions of the “cyber doom” narrative are misleading. While sensitivity to cybersecurity threats is shaped by negative information, the onset of panic and dread is not a given. The impact of novel environmental circumstances on opinion formation is shaped by the individuals’ embeddedness in modern digital society. Consequently, long-term exposure to any invasive development mitigates the emotional response associated with it, normalizing novel threats over time. We present evidence suggesting that the unique characteristics of a development (i.e., web-technology proliferation) matter in opinion formation, as sensitivity to digital threats to the polity is grounded on personal threat sensitivity. Thus, policymakers can expect to see public responses to new national security threats manifest through the lens of prevailing social and political narratives.

Impact of Covid-19 on clinical care and lived experience of systemic sclerosis: An international survey from EURORDIS-Rare Diseases Europe

Introduction: Outcomes related to Covid-19 in systemic sclerosis patients could be influenced by internal organ involvement and/or immunosuppressive treatment, leading to efforts to shield patients from Covid-19 transmission. We examined the impact of Covid-19 on the lived experience of systemic sclerosis with regards to other aspects of daily living including occupation and emotional well-being. Method: Individuals with systemic sclerosis or relatives/carers participated in an online survey, disseminated through international patient associations and social media pages, designed to examine the impact of Covid-19 on living with a rare disease. Results: Responses from 121 individuals (98% were patients with systemic sclerosis) from 14 countries were evaluable. Covid-19 was considered a probable/definite personal threat (93%) or threat for the individual they care for (100%). Approximately two-thirds of responders reported either cancellation or postponement/delay to appointments, diagnostic tests, medical therapies at home (e.g. infusions), surgery or transplant, psychiatry follow-up or rehabilitation services. Twenty-six percent reported at least one systemic sclerosis medicine/treatment had been unavailable, and 6% had to either stop taking usual medications or use an alternative. Most reported online consultations/telemedicine via phone (88%) and online (96%) as being ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ useful. Respondents reported tensions among family members (45%) and difficulty overcoming problems (48%). Restrictions on movement left around two-thirds feeling isolated (61%), unhappy and/or depressed (64%), although the majority (85%) reported a strengthening of the family unit. Conclusion: Covid-19 has resulted in significant impact on the clinical-care and emotional well-being of systemic sclerosis patients. Changes to clinical care delivery have been well-received by patients including telemedicine consultations.

Public attitudes towards climate change: A cross-country analysis

Addressing climate change requires international effort from both governments and the public. Climate change concern is a crucial variable influencing public support for measures to address climate change. Combining country-level data with data from the Pew Research Center Spring 2015 Global Attitudes Survey, we test whether perceived threats from climate change influence climate change concern. We distinguish between personal threat and planetary threat and we find that both threats have substantive effects on climate change concern, with personal threat exerting a greater influence on climate change concern than planetary threat. The effects of both types of threats are also moderated by Gross Domestic Product per capita, such that threats have stronger effects on climate change concern in high-income countries than in low-income countries. Our findings contribute to the existing literature and open up new debates concerning the role of threats in climate change concern and have implications for climate change communication.

The Effects of Gender Trouble: An Integrative Theoretical Framework of the Perpetuation and Disruption of the Gender/Sex Binary

In the Western world, gender has traditionally been viewed in the Western world as binary and as following directly from biological sex. This view is slowly changing among both experts and the general public, a change that has been met with strong opposition. In this article, we explore the psychological processes underlying these dynamics. Drawing on previous work on gender performativity as well as gender as a performance, we develop a psychological framework of the perpetuation and disruption of the gender/sex binary on a stage that facilitates and foregrounds binary gender/sex performance. Whenever character, costume, and script are not aligned the gender/sex binary is disrupted and gender trouble ensues. We integrate various strands of the psychological literature into this framework and explain the processes underlying these reactions. We propose that gender trouble can elicit threat—personal threat, group-based and identity threat, and system threat—which in turn leads to efforts to alleviate this threat through the reinforcement of the gender/sex binary. Our framework challenges the way psychologists have traditionally treated gender/sex in theory and empirical work and proposes new avenues and implications for future research.