Uncertainty about the impact of social decisions increases prosocial behaviour

When advisors do not know what is best for advisees: Uncertainty inhibits advice giving

While seeking advice can be beneficial for advisees, advisors may not always possess the necessary knowledge to provide appropriate guidance. Poor-quality advice can mislead advisees rather than offering assistance. Despite the research interest in advisees, few studies have investigated advisors' psychological and behavioral responses, especially when they faced uncertainty regarding the optimal course of action for advisees. To fill this gap, we developed novel paradigms aiming at manipulating advisors' uncertainty, allowing for a systematic investigation of advisors' behavior, motivation, and emotion. Across four studies, we consistently found that advisors under uncertainty give less advice. Furthermore, we observed that uncertainty modulates advisors' motivation to influence, worry about harm to others, and/or sense of power. The motivation to influence and/or worry about harm to others can mediate the effect of uncertainty on advice giving. Besides, we identified nuanced distinctions in the effects of ambiguity and risk, two distinct types of uncertainty, on advisors' psychological processes. Our findings shed light on advisors' self-monitoring of the quality of their advice, thereby contributing to a deeper understanding of advisor-advisee communication from the perspective of advisors.

Social Preferences Toward Humans and Machines: A Systematic Experiment on the Role of Machine Payoffs

There is growing interest in the field of cooperative artificial intelligence (AI), that is, settings in which humans and machines cooperate. By now, more than 160 studies from various disciplines have reported on how people cooperate with machines in behavioral experiments. Our systematic review of the experimental instructions reveals that the implementation of the machine payoffs and the information participants receive about them differ drastically across these studies. In an online experiment (N = 1,198), we compare how these different payoff implementations shape people's revealed social preferences toward machines. When matched with machine partners, people reveal substantially stronger social preferences and reciprocity when they know that a human beneficiary receives the machine payoffs than when they know that no such "human behind the machine" exists. When participants are not informed about machine payoffs, we found weak social preferences toward machines. Comparing survey answers with those from a follow-up study (N = 150), we conclude that people form their beliefs about machine payoffs in a self-serving way. Thus, our results suggest that the extent to which humans cooperate with machines depends on the implementation and information about the machine's earnings.

Sure-thing vs. probabilistic charitable giving: Experimental evidence on the role of individual differences in risky and ambiguous charitable decision-making

Charities differ, among other things, alongside the likelihood that their interventions succeed and produce the desired outcomes and alongside the extent that such likelihood can even be articulated numerically. In this paper, we investigate what best explains charitable giving behaviour regarding charities that have interventions that will succeed with a quantifiable and high probability (sure-thing charities) and charities that have interventions that only have a small and hard to quantify probability of bringing about the desired end (probabilistic charities). We study individual differences in risk/ambiguity attitudes, empathy, numeracy, optimism, and donor type (warm glow vs. pure altruistic donor type) as potential predictors of this choice. We conduct a money incentivised, pre-registered experiment on Prolific on a representative UK sample (n = 1,506) to investigate participant choices (i) between these two types of charities and (ii) about one randomly selected charity. Overall, we find little to no evidence that individual differences predict choices regarding decisions about sure-thing and probabilistic charities, with the exception that a purely altruistic donor type predicts donations to probabilistic charities when participants were presented with a randomly selected charity in (ii). Conducting exploratory equivalence tests, we find that the data provide robust evidence in favour of the absence of an effect (or a negligibly small effect) where we fail to reject the null. This is corroborated by exploratory Bayesian analyses. We take this paper to be contributing to the literature on charitable giving via this comprehensive null-result in pursuit of contributing to a cumulative science.

Explaining interpersonal differences in COVID-19 disease prevention behavior based on the health belief model and collective resilience theory: a cross-sectional study from Bolivia

BACKGROUND

Governments have attempted to combat the COVID-19 pandemic by issuing guidelines for disease prevention behavior (e.g., wearing masks, social distancing, etc.) and by enforcing these guidelines. However, while some citizens have complied with these guidelines, others have ignored them or have even participated in large-scale protests. This research aims both to understand the causes of such variation in citizens' adherence to government guidelines on disease prevention behavior and to extend the scientific literature on disease prevention to account for the collective resilience of a society to diseases. Thus, this research draws on the health belief model and collective resilience theory to develop hypotheses about the determinants of a citizen's disease prevention behavior. These hypotheses deal with how citizens' vulnerability, attitudes toward disease prevention, and social orientation are associated with COVID-19 prevention behaviors.

METHODS

From March 24 to April 4, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey was conducted in Bolivia. It included questions on demographic characteristics, chronic health problems, emotional burden, attitudes towards preventive behaviors, trust in public institutions, and culture. Among 5265 participants who clicked on the survey, 1857 at least partially filled it out. After removing data with missing responses to any variable, the final sample consists of 1231 respondents. The collected data were analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling.

RESULTS

Regarding a citizen's vulnerability, chronic health problems have a U-shaped association with disease prevention behavior. Moreover, age, female gender, and worries have positive associations with disease prevention behavior, whereas depression showed a negative association. Regarding attitudes toward disease prevention, trust in public institutions, and attitudes toward social distancing, a government-imposed lockdown and the enforcement of this lockdown showed positive associations with disease prevention behavior. Regarding social orientation, individualism and collectivism both have positive relationships with disease prevention behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

In the COVID-19 pandemic, a citizen's low vulnerability, weak social orientation, and beliefs about low benefits of disease prevention behavior are associated with poor compliance with guidelines on disease prevention behavior. More research on these associations would help generalize these findings to other populations and other public health crises.

Keeping the Kids Home

Abstract. During the COVID-19 pandemic, social consequences in day-to-day decisions might not have been salient to the decider and thus egoistic. How can prosocial intentions be increased? In an experimental vignette study with N = 206, we compared the likelihood that parents send sick children to kindergarten after four interventions (general information about COVID-19, empathy, reflection of consequences via mental simulation, and control group). Independent of the intervention, empathic concern with individuals who were affected by COVID-19 and the salience of social consequences were high. The reported likelihood of sending a sick child to kindergarten was somewhat reduced in the control group and even more reduced in the reflection and empathy group, but not in the information group.

A dual-process approach to prosocial behavior under COVID-19 uncertainty

Uncertainty has been shown to reduce the willingness to cooperate in various social dilemmas and negatively affect prosocial behavior. However, some studies showed that uncertainty does not always decrease prosocial behavior, depending on the type of uncertainty. More specifically, recent research has shown that prosocial behavior tends to increase under impact uncertainty-uncertainty about the consequences for others if they become infected. In addition, researchers have argued that intuition favors prosocial behavior while deliberation leads to selfish behavior. Our study explored how intuitive (time pressure) or deliberate mental processing, under outcome, or impact uncertainty affect prosocial behavior in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our sample consists of 496 participants, and we used a 4 (COVID-19 scenario: Control vs. Impact Uncertainty vs. Worst-Case vs. Indirect Transmission) by 2 (decision time: time delay vs. time pressure) between-subjects design. Results suggest that participants are more inclined to stay at home (prosocial intention) when forced to make their decisions intuitively rather than deliberately. Additionally, we found that uncertainty does not always decrease prosocial behavior. It seems that uncertainty does not affect the prosocial intention in a scenario with a real infectious disease. These findings suggest that the distinction between outcome and impact uncertainty may be due to the realism of experimental stimuli interventions.

A dual-process approach to cooperative decision-making under uncertainty

Cooperative behaviors are typically investigated using social dilemmas inserted into scenarios with well-known characteristics. Nonetheless, in real life, group members may be uncertain about what others will decide (social uncertainty) and the characteristics of the dilemma itself (environmental uncertainty). Previous studies have shown that uncertainty reduces the willingness to cooperate. Dual-process approaches to cooperation have given rise to two different views. Some authors argue that deliberation is needed to overrule selfish motives, whereas others argue that intuition favors cooperation. In this work, our goal was to investigate the role of intuitive mental processing on cooperation in a prisoner’s dilemma game involving uncertainty. Our results showed that participants cooperated less with their counterparts as the number of rounds progressed, suggesting a learning process and that intuitive mental processing in the first 50 rounds appears to favor cooperation under both deterministic and stochastic conditions. These results may help clarify the literature’s mixed effects regarding cognitive processing manipulation on cooperation. Developing a better understanding of these effects may improve strategies in social problems involving cooperation under uncertainty and cognitive constraints.

The Effect of Uncertainty on Pain Decisions for Self and Others

Background

Estimating others’ pain is a challenging inferential process, associated with a high degree of uncertainty. While much is known about uncertainty’s effect on self‐regarding actions, its impact on other‐regarding decisions for pain have yet to be characterized.

Aim

The present study exploited models of probabilistic decision‐making to investigate how uncertainty influences the valuation and assessment of another’s pain.

Materials & Methods

We engaged 63 dyads (43 strangers and 20 romantic couples) in a task where individual choices affected the pain delivered to either oneself (the agent) or the other member of the dyad. At each trial, agents were presented with cues predicting a given pain intensity with an associated probability of occurrence. Agents either chose a sure (mild decrease of pain) or risky (50% chance of avoiding pain altogether) management option, before bidding on their choice. A heat stimulation was then issued to the target (self or other). Decision‐makers were then asked to rate the pain administered to the target.

Results

We found that the higher the expected pain, the more risk‐averse agents became, in line with findings in value‐based decision‐making. Furthermore, agents gambled less on another individual’s pain (especially strangers) and placed higher bids on pain relief than they did for themselves. Most critically, the uncertainty associated with expected pain dampened ratings made for strangers’ pain. This contrasted with the effect on an agent’s own pain, for which risk had a marginal hyperalgesic effect.

Discussion & Conclusion

Overall, our results suggested that risk selectively affects decision‐making on a stranger’s suffering, both at the level of assessment and treatment selection, by (1) leading to underestimation, (2) privileging sure options and (3) altruistically allocating more money to insure the treatment’s success.

Significance

Uncertainty biases decision‐making but it is unclear if it affects choice behavior on pain for others. In examining this question, we found individuals were generally risk‐seeking when faced with looming pain, but more so for self; and assigned higher monetary values and subjective ratings on another’s pain. However, uncertainty dampened agents’ assessment of a stranger’s pain, suggesting latent variables may contradict overt altruism. This bias may underlie pain underestimation in clinical settings.

Factors that motivate men who have sex with men in Berlin, Germany, to use or consider using HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis-A multi-methods analysis of data from a multicentre survey

BACKGROUND

While our knowledge of what motivates men who have sex with men (MSM) to use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has grown in recent years, quantitative survey-based studies have not asked MSM explicitly to name their motivations. We did so using a qualitative open-ended question and aimed to categorise the responses and explore whether these were related to where MSM were located along a conceptual continuum of PrEP care.

METHODS

In a multicentre survey examining knowledge and use of PrEP among MSM in Berlin, Germany, we additionally asked an open-ended question about motivations for using or considering PrEP. Data were collected from 10/2017-04/2018. One researcher developed a thematic framework deductively from the literature and another did so inductively from the free-text data, and a merged framework was used to code responses independently. We used Fisher's exact test to assess whether the frequency of motivations differed significantly between respondents using or considering PrEP.

RESULTS

Of 875 questionnaires, 473 were returned and 228 contained a free-text response. Motivations in the following categories were reported: (1) Safety/protection against HIV (80.2% of participants, including general safety; additional protection to condoms), (2) Mental well-being and quality of life (23.5%, including reduced anxiety; better quality of life), (3) Condom attitudes (18.9% intent not to use condoms), (4) Expectations about sexuality (14.4%, including worry-free sex or more pleasurable sex, with explicit mention of sex or sexuality), (5) Norms/social perspectives (0.8%). The difference in frequencies of motivations between those using or considering PrEP was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Safety and protection against HIV, particularly having additional protection if condoms fail, were the most common motivations for using or considering PrEP, followed by mental well-being and quality of life. Many respondents reported several motivations, and responses overall were heterogeneous. This suggests that approaches to increase PrEP uptake that focus exclusively on its effectiveness in preventing HIV are unlikely to be as successful as a holistic approach that emphasises multiple motivations and how these fit into the broader sexual and psychological health of MSM.

Prosocial behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. The role of responsibility and vulnerability

In two pre-registered and fully incentivized studies (N = 501), we investigate prosocial behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Based on a comparison with pre-pandemic data, Study 1 shows that individuals' general prosociality measured with a (context-independent) Social Value Orientation Slider changed significantly before vs. during the early stage of the pandemic towards increased prosociality. In addition, we identified pandemic-specific context factors for prosocial behavior measured by a series of Dictator games with different recipients. Allocations in the Dictator game increased with the giver's responsibility and the recipients' vulnerability to the virus. Study 2 replicates and extends this finding in a sample representative for the adult German population in terms of age and gender. We show that, for different actors (self, recipient, politicians), different dimensions of responsibility (responsibility to help, responsibility for the problem cause, and for the solution) are associated with prosocial behavior. Contrary to what could be expected from diffusion of responsibility, prosocial behavior increased not only when individuals themselves felt responsible to help but also when they perceived politicians to be responsible to help. Assigning responsibility for the cause of the COVID-19 crisis to recipients and politicians was associated with a decrease in prosocial behavior. However, responsibility for the solution had no influence. We discuss implications for public policies.

Hyper-altruistic behavior vanishes with high stakes

Using an incentivized experiment with statistical power, this paper explores the role of stakes in charitable giving of lottery prizes, where subjects commit to donate a fraction of the prize before they learn the outcome of the lottery. We study three stake levels: 5€ (n = 177), 100€ (n = 168), and 1,000€ (n = 171). Although the donations increase in absolute terms as the stakes increase, subjects decrease the donated fraction of the pie. However, people still share roughly 20% of 1,000€, an amount as high as the average monthly salary of people at the age of our subjects. The number of people sharing 50% of the pie is remarkably stable across stakes, but donating the the whole pie-the modal behavior in charity-donation experiments-disappears with stakes. Such hyper-altruistic behavior thus seems to be an artifact of the stakes typically employed in economic and psychological experiments. Our findings point out that sharing with others is a prevalent human feature, but stakes are an important determinant of sharing. Policies promoted via prosocial frames (e.g., stressing the effects of mask-wearing or social distancing on others during the Covid-19 pandemic or environmentally-friendly behaviors on future generations) may thus be miscalibrated if they disregard the stakes at play.

Effect of uncertainty-dependent residential mobility on loss aversion

The current research aimed to examine the relationship between residential mobility and loss aversion, a ubiquitous decision-making bias conceptualized in prospect theory. Combining correlational, experimental, and electroencephalography approaches, we tested the hypothesis that residential mobility may increase loss aversion. The results revealed a positive correlation between residential mobility and loss aversion (Study 1). These effects were moderated by individuals' residential mobility/stability mindsets. Behaviorally, we observed a positive association between residential mobility history and loss aversion among individuals with a high (vs. low) subjective uncertainty after manipulating their residential mobility mindset by priming them with a mobile or stable lifestyle (Study 2). On the neural level, we found that the mindset of residential mobility (vs. stability) enhanced the differential feedback-related negativity (FRN) modulations between the large-win and large-loss conditions among Chinese participants with a high subjective uncertainty (Study 3). In conclusion, residential mobility elevated loss aversion by enhancing feelings of subjective uncertainty. Our findings provide novel insights into how changes in the socioecological environment shape individuals' decision-making bias.

Prosocial Orientation of Russians During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Caring for Others and Yourself

To mitigate the potentially devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is vital to identify psychosocial and moral resources. The care, preservation, protection, and well-being of social communities are attributes of prosocial behavior that can be such a resource. The purpose of the study is to identify the features of prosocial orientation of Russian youth during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as to identify strategies for prosocial behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. The sample consisted of 447 people. The study was conducted in May 2020 in the form of an online survey of subjects using Google Forms ("Moral Foundations Questionnaire method" and "Portrait Values Questionnaire"). The research made it possible to establish that Russians were dominated by norms of care, fairness, purity; values of benevolence-universalism, security, and self-direction. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the prosocial orientation of Russians may manifest itself in the following behavioral strategies: proactive prosocial strategy of "caring for others" (true altruism, expressed in forms of volunteering, helping a stranger, and charity despite the risk of contracting a coronavirus infection); egoistic strategy of prosocial behavior "self-care through caring for others" (volunteering based on self-development; helping a stranger to improve your own psychological well-being); conventional prosocial strategy "self-care" (self-isolation and preventive behavior). In the long run, it is necessary to identify personal and environmental resources that allowed people to effectively implement a prosocial self-isolation strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as various forms of volunteerism.

Ending the Pandemic: Are Rapid COVID-19 Tests a Step Forward or Back?

Some experts have promoted the use of rapid testing for COVID-19. However, with the current technologies available, continuing to replace laboratory-based, real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests with rapid (point-of-care) tests may lead to an increased number of false negative tests. Moreover, the more rapid dissemination of false negative results that can occur with the use of rapid tests for COVID-19 may lead to increased spread of the novel coronavirus if patients do not understand the concept of false negative tests. One means of combatting this would be to tell patients who have a "negative" rapid COVID-19 test that their test result was "indeterminate."

Motivations, barriers, and communication recommendations for promoting face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic: Survey findings from a diverse sample

State and local health departments have been tasked with promoting the use of face coverings to decrease the spread of COVID-19 in their respective communities. However, little is known about motivations and barriers to wearing face coverings in the context of COVID-19 prevention, particularly among communities of color who are at an increased risk of serious illness from the disease. The purpose of this study was to identify common motivations and barriers to face covering use, as well as explore perceptions of messages encouraging the use of face coverings among a racially and ethnically diverse sample. A survey was distributed electronically to North Carolina (NC) residents through NC Department of Health and Human Services listservs in July 2020. Participants self-categorized as Latino/a (33.5%), Black (39.1%), or white or another race (27.5%). The most commonly endorsed motivations for wearing face coverings were to avoid spreading COVID-19 (77%), as well as to protect people who are vulnerable (76%) and one's community (72%). Being uncomfortable (40%) was the most commonly endorsed barrier. Messages that included a clear request (ex. please wear a face covering) and a direct benefit (ex. keep community safe) were more commonly endorsed than those that did not. Commonly endorsed motivations, behaviors, and messages differed by race and ethnicity. Increased attention to message content, message structure, and access to information and resources may aid local officials in increasing consistent use of face coverings.

A behavioral economics perspective on the COVID-19 vaccine amid public mistrust

The COVID-19 vaccine development, testing, and approval processes have moved forward with unprecedented speed in 2020. Although several vaccine candidates have shown promising results in clinical trials, resulting in expedited approval for public use from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, recent polls suggest that Americans strongly distrust the vaccine and its approval process. This mistrust stems from both the unusual speed of vaccine development and reports about side effects. This article applies insights from behavioral economics to consider how the general public may make decisions around whether or not to receive a future COVID-19 vaccine in a context of frequent side effects and preexisting mistrust. Three common cognitive biases shown to influence human decision-making under a behavioral economics framework are considered: confirmation bias, negativity bias, and optimism bias. Applying a behavioral economics framework to COVID-19 vaccine decision-making can elucidate potential barriers to vaccine uptake and points of intervention for clinicians and public health professionals.

Altering Intention to Mudik during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Salient Cue and Simple Reminder Nudge

Mudik is a unique exodus in Indonesia where people travel to hometown during Eid festive season. It posed a challenge for the government to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Several reports have identified that people still stick with their plan to Mudik amidst the latest Mudik ban. Thus, a scientific nudge campaign is pivotal to influence Mudik behaviour. The present study designed and tested five visual campaigns to identify key elements which can reduce Mudik intention. A pre-post field experiment used six between-subject groups designed on Qualtrics collected 767 responses measuring intention to Mudik. We asked participants respective Mudik ban institution in anticipating the latest nation-wide Mudik ban. Mother visual and a lethal virus for elderly reminder are of which sufficient reducing Mudik intention. The treatment effect holds in certain people conditions. The study yielded an initially worked nudge campaign to support government Mudik ban policy.

How peer influence shapes value computation in moral decision-making

Moral behavior is susceptible to peer influence. How does information from peers influence moral preferences? We used drift-diffusion modeling to show that peer influence changes the value of moral behavior by prioritizing the choice attributes that align with peers' goals. Study 1 (N = 100; preregistered) showed that participants accurately inferred the goals of prosocial and antisocial peers when observing their moral decisions. In Study 2 (N = 68), participants made moral decisions before and after observing the decisions of a prosocial or antisocial peer. Peer observation caused participants' own preferences to resemble those of their peers. This peer influence effect on value computation manifested as an increased weight on choice attributes promoting the peers' goals that occurred independently from peer influence on initial choice bias. Participants' self-reported awareness of influence tracked more closely with computational measures of prosocial than antisocial influence. Our findings have implications for bolstering and blocking the effects of prosocial and antisocial influence on moral behavior.

Does culture matter social distancing under the COVID-19 pandemic?

This paper is the first to examine the role of the cultural dimension in practising social distancing across the world. By drawing the data from the Google COVID-19 community mobility reports and the Hofstede cultural factors for 58 countries over the period from 16 February to 29 March 2020, we find that countries with higher 'Uncertainty Avoidance Index' predict the lower proportion of people gathering in public such as retail and recreation, grocery and pharmacy, parks, transit stations, workplaces. However, we do not find any predictive factor in having a relationship with the percentage of citizens staying in their residential areas. Our results are robust by adding the control variable as the wealth status, GDP per capita. Hence, this paper suggests some effective communications to contain the COVID-19 pandemic by emphasizing the role of uncertainties.

Changes in risk perception and self-reported protective behaviour during the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

Efforts to change behaviour are critical in minimizing the spread of highly transmissible pandemics such as COVID-19. However, it is unclear whether individuals are aware of disease risk and alter their behaviour early in the pandemic. We investigated risk perception and self-reported engagement in protective behaviours in 1591 United States-based individuals cross-sectionally and longitudinally over the first week of the pandemic. Subjects demonstrated growing awareness of risk and reported engaging in protective behaviours with increasing frequency but underestimated their risk of infection relative to the average person in the country. Social distancing and hand washing were most strongly predicted by the perceived probability of personally being infected. However, a subgroup of individuals perceived low risk and did not engage in these behaviours. Our results highlight the importance of risk perception in early interventions during large-scale pandemics.

Changes in risk perception and self-reported protective behaviour during the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

Efforts to change behaviour are critical in minimizing the spread of highly transmissible pandemics such as COVID-19. However, it is unclear whether individuals are aware of disease risk and alter their behaviour early in the pandemic. We investigated risk perception and self-reported engagement in protective behaviours in 1591 United States-based individuals cross-sectionally and longitudinally over the first week of the pandemic. Subjects demonstrated growing awareness of risk and reported engaging in protective behaviours with increasing frequency but underestimated their risk of infection relative to the average person in the country. Social distancing and hand washing were most strongly predicted by the perceived probability of personally being infected. However, a subgroup of individuals perceived low risk and did not engage in these behaviours. Our results highlight the importance of risk perception in early interventions during large-scale pandemics.

Changes in risk perception and self-reported protective behaviour during the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

Efforts to change behaviour are critical in minimizing the spread of highly transmissible pandemics such as COVID-19. However, it is unclear whether individuals are aware of disease risk and alter their behaviour early in the pandemic. We investigated risk perception and self-reported engagement in protective behaviours in 1591 United States-based individuals cross-sectionally and longitudinally over the first week of the pandemic. Subjects demonstrated growing awareness of risk and reported engaging in protective behaviours with increasing frequency but underestimated their risk of infection relative to the average person in the country. Social distancing and hand washing were most strongly predicted by the perceived probability of personally being infected. However, a subgroup of individuals perceived low risk and did not engage in these behaviours. Our results highlight the importance of risk perception in early interventions during large-scale pandemics.

The social cost of gathering information for trust decisions

Trust decisions are inherently uncertain, as people usually have incomplete information about the trustworthiness of the other person prior to their decision to trust or not trust. Therefore, it is typically beneficial to gather information about a trustee's past behaviour before deciding whether or not to trust them. However, elaborate inquiries about a trustee's behaviour may change the trustee's willingness to reciprocate, causing either a decrease due to the trustee's negative impressions of the investor or an increase because the investor appears to be highly betrayal-averse to the trustee. In turn, such a change could cause the investor to gather less or more information, respectively. Here, we examine how information acquisition is modulated by social context, monetary cost, and the trustee's trustworthiness. We gave participants the opportunity to sequentially sample information about a trustee's reciprocation history before they decided whether or not to invest. Participants sampled less when there was a monetary cost and when the gathered information was more conclusive. On some trials, we induced a social context by telling the participant that the trustee would learn how much the participant sampled ("overt sampling"). Crucially, when sampling was free, participants sampled less when sampling was overt than when it was covert, suggesting that they avoided leaving negative impressions. We find that the data were well accounted for by a Bayesian heuristic model, in which the agent continues sampling until uncertainty about trustworthiness-as measured by the width of the posterior belief-drops below a level that they find tolerable. This study opens the door to broader applications of the tools and models of information sampling to social decision-making.

Perceived efficacy of COVID-19 restrictions, reactions and their impact on mental health during the early phase of the outbreak in six countries

The COVID-19 pandemic forced millions of people to drastically change their social life habits as governments employed harsh restrictions to reduce the spread of the virus. Although beneficial to physical health, the perception of physical distancing and related restrictions could impact mental health. In a pre-registered online survey, we assessed how effective a range of restrictions were perceived, how severely they affected daily life, general distress and paranoia during the early phase of the outbreak in Brazil, Colombia, Germany, Israel, Norway and USA. Most of our over 2000 respondents rated the restrictions as effective. School closings were perceived as having the strongest effect on daily life. Participants who believed their country reacted too mildly perceived the risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 to be higher, were more worried and expressed reduced beliefs in the ability to control the outbreak. Relatedly, dissatisfaction with governmental reactions corresponded with increased distress levels. Together, we found that satisfaction with one's governmental reactions and fear appraisal play an important role in assessing the efficacy of restrictions during the pandemic and their related psychological outcomes. These findings inform policy-makers on the psychological factors that strengthen resilience and foster the well-being of citizens in times of global crisis.

Affective evaluation of others' altruistic decisions under risk and ambiguity

Gratitude arises when one is the target of an altruistic decision, particularly when this decision incurs cost to the agent. Here we examined how individuals evaluate others' altruistic decisions under risky (uncertainty with known probabilities) and ambiguous (uncertainty with unknown probabilities) costs and respond with gratitude and reciprocity. Participants played an interactive game in an fMRI scanner in which they would receive painful electric shocks. An anonymous co-player either intentionally (Human conditions) or unintentionally (Computer conditions) decided whether to help the participant reduce half of the pain by undertaking an amount of pain (i.e., cost) with varying level of uncertainty (Certain vs. Risky vs. Ambiguous). Participants could then transfer monetary points to the co-player knowing that the co-player was unaware of this transfer. Behaviorally, monetary allocation and gratitude rating increased as the uncertainty level of cost increased in Human conditions; these effects were reduced in Computer conditions. The effect of cost uncertainty on gratitude was mediated by the perceived kind intention behind the help. FMRI revealed both shared and differential neurocognitive substrates for evaluating the benefactor's altruistic decisions under risk and ambiguity: both were associated with fear- and anxiety-related processes, involving right lateral orbitofrontal cortex and anterior insula; ambiguity additionally recruited mentalizing- and conflict monitoring-related processes, involving dorsal medial prefrontal cortex and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. These findings underscore the crucial role of social uncertainty perception in the generation of gratitude.

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.

Psychology of personal data donation

Advances in digital technology have led to large amounts of personal data being recorded and retained by industry, constituting an invaluable asset to private organizations. The implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation in the EU, including the UK, fundamentally reshaped how data is handled across every sector. It enables the general public to access data collected about them by organisations, opening up the possibility of this data being used for research that benefits the public themselves; for example, to uncover lifestyle causes of poor health outcomes. A significant barrier for using this commercial data for academic research, however, is the lack of publicly acceptable research frameworks. Data donation—the act of an individual actively consenting to donate their personal data for research—could enable the use of commercial data for the benefit of society. However, it is not clear which motives, if any, would drive people to donate their personal data for this purpose. In this paper we present the results of a large-scale survey (N = 1,300) that studied intentions and reasons to donate personal data. We found that over half of individuals are willing to donate their personal data for research that could benefit the wider general public. We identified three distinct reasons to donate personal data: an opportunity to achieve self-benefit, social duty, and the need to understand the purpose of data donation. We developed a questionnaire to measure those three reasons and provided further evidence on the validity of the scales. Our results demonstrate that these reasons predict people’s intentions to donate personal data over and above generic altruistic motives. We show that a social duty is the strongest predictor of the intention to donate personal data, while understanding the purpose of data donation also positively predicts the intentions to donate personal data. In contrast, self-serving motives show a negative association with intentions to donate personal data. The findings presented here examine people’s reasons for data donation to help inform the ethical use of commercially collected personal data for academic research for public good.

Dynamic influences on cooperation in a social dilemma: How type of experience and communication affect behavioral spillovers

In many work and decision situations, realizing cooperation among individuals is important. However, decision making environments of individuals are far from stable, resulting in changes in task complexity and the social settings they encounter. We argue that past experiences with cooperative behavior can result in different cooperative norms and expectations about the behavior of others and will have an effect on an individual's subsequent behavior in new situations. This study experimentally investigates these dynamics of cooperative behavior in social dilemmas and addresses the role of communication to provide empirical evidence about a cognitive mechanism that may lead to these spillovers. Specifically, the experimental design randomly assigns subjects to one type of repetitive interactions in the first social dilemma (single partner or different partners) and we then examine how this impacts the propensity to behave cooperatively in subsequent social dilemmas with unfamiliar partners (either single or different). Because of the variety in complexity of decision-making environments in practice, we do so by examining behavioral spillovers across three different social dilemmas that vary in difficulty to make cooperation successful. Our findings show that individuals cooperate more during initial interactions with a single partner. More importantly, this has positive spillover effects for subsequent behavior and communication, even to settings without repeated interactions with a single partner. However, environmental conditions affect the ability to transfer established norms of cooperation to subsequent interactions, as an initially learned cooperative norm is gradually replaced by a more competitive attitude when individuals start to interact with unfamiliar others in a setting in which cooperative success is more difficult to achieve. Our findings illustrate the power of repeated interactions for establishing and sustaining cooperation in other settings and enhance understanding of how cooperative decisions can be shaped by both incentives and the broader behavioral context of individuals.