Taking Stock and Looking Forward to the Future of Pathogen Politics in Light of New Insights and Recommendations: COVID-19 Threat Was Meaningfully Associated With Support for Liberal Policies in the United States

Infectious disease outbreaks are expected to predict support for conservative policies. However, earlier studies (January-June, 2020) reached conflicting findings regarding the association between COVID-19 threat and policy preferences in the United States. We revisit this issue by analyzing five nationally representative surveys conducted during the relatively severe periods of the pandemic (August 2020-December, 2020; total N = 82,753). Using Bayesian inference, we find strong evidence that subjective (e.g., fear of infection and pandemic outrage) but not objective (e.g., local cases and deaths) threat predicted support for liberal policies (e.g., immigration and universal health care). Meta-analyses revealed that the estimates depend on the type of subjective (.05 ≥ r ≤ .60) or objective (.00 ≥ r ≤ .14) COVID-19 threat. We propose an emotion-mediated dual-process model of pathogen management suggesting that infectious disease outbreaks activate both avoidance and caregiving motives that translate, respectively, into support for right-wing and left-wing policies.

The Effect of Infectious Disease Threat on Malevolent Creativity

The behavioral immune system (BIS), which evolved to protect humans from infectious disease threats, prompts people to be sensitive to disease-connoting cues. A common denominator of many disease-connoting cues is benign physical abnormalities, such as birthmarks and obesity. Previous studies found that among people whose BIS was activated (e.g., people who were exposed to situational disease prime or chronically concerned about disease threat), disease-connoting cues could make people feel threatened by infectious disease and induce their malevolence. Malevolence is a necessary feature of malevolent creativity (MC), which is defined as creativity that deliberately leads to harmful or immoral results. According to the motivated focus account of creativity, a threat could promote creativity when creativity is relevant to the threat. Thus, infectious disease threats might increase malevolent creativity. However, whether infectious disease threats could influence MC is unknown. Therefore, the current study aims to explore the effect of infectious disease threat on MC by two disease-connoting cues (birthmark, obesity). In Study 1 (n = 174), a 2 (threat prime: infectious disease, natural disaster) × 2 (disease-connoting cue: birthmarked face, normal face) between-subjects design was used. Participants were asked to complete a malevolent creativity task (MCT). In Study 2 (n = 131), we used a perceived vulnerability to disease scale (PVD) to assess people's dispositional tendencies of concerns about disease and selected high as well as low PVD participants. A 2 (PVD: high, low) × 2 (disease-connoting cue: obese, average-weight) between-subjects design was used. Participants were asked to complete the negotiation task to assess their MC. The results of Study 1 showed that, compared with participants in the normal face condition, participants in the birthmarked face condition showed higher MC fluency and total MC when they were exposed to situational disease prime. Compared with the natural disaster prime group, the infectious disease prime group showed higher MC fluency and total MC when they were provoked by a birthmark person. The results of Study 2 showed that, compared with the average-weight condition, the obese condition led to higher MC fluency and originality among high PVD participants. Compared with low PVD participants, high PVD participants showed higher MC fluency and originality when they negotiated with an obese person. Our studies suggest that among people whose BIS is situationally or chronically activated, birthmarks and obesity could increase MC, and people's malevolent creativity might be induced by disease-connoting cues during the pandemic.

Pandemic vulnerability, policy feedback and support for immigration: Evidence from Asia

Past studies have shown that disease threat increases people's hostility towards immigrants. However, in our survey (N = 9571) conducted in five advanced Asian economies during the outbreak of COVID‐19, we found that COVID‐19 vulnerability was positively associated with support for immigration. Drawing on insight from policy feedback theories, we propose that the positive association is caused by the presence of widespread border crossing restrictions, which have changed the meaning and cost implications of COVID‐19. As the outbreak expands, the pandemic has become not just a threat to people's health but also a barrier to globalization. Consequently, people who are worried about the disease may see globalization processes, including migration, as signs of pandemic relief. We find supportive evidence in our analysis. First, the positive association between COVID‐19 vulnerability and support for immigration is more salient among respondents who considered restrictions on international travel to be stringent. Second, the positive association between COVID‐19 vulnerability and immigration attitude was mediated by perceived economic threat from the pandemic and contribution by immigrants towards the containment of the pandemic. These findings suggest that disease control measures adopted at the global level may alter certain widely accepted effects of disease threat on immigration attitudes.

Trust in Institutions and the COVID-19 Threat: A Cross-Sectional Study on the Public Perception of Official Recommendations and of Othering in Switzerland

Objectives: To explore how perceived disease threat and trust in institutions relate to vaccination intent, perceived effectiveness of official recommendations, and to othering strategies. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of Swiss adults in July 2020. Outcome variables were vaccination intent, perceived effectiveness of official recommendations and othering strategies (labelling a given social group as responsible for the disease and distancing from it). Independent variables were perceived disease threat, trust in various institutions, perceived health-related measures, and sociodemographic variables. Linear and logistic regressions were performed. Results: The response rate was 20.2% (1518/7500). Perceived disease threat and trust in medical/scientific institutions were positively associated with vaccination intent and perceived effectiveness of official recommendations for coronavirus mitigation measures. Only disease threat was associated with a perception of effectiveness among othering strategies. Age and education levels were associated with vaccination intent. Conclusion: Reinforcing trust in medical/scientific institutions can help strengthen the perceived effectiveness of official recommendations and vaccination. It however does not prevent adherence to ineffective protecting measures such as othering strategies, where decreasing perceptions of epidemic threat appears to be more efficient.

Psychology and the Threat of Contagion: Feeling Vulnerable to a Disease Moderates the Link Between Xenophobic Thoughts and Support for Ingroup-Protective Actions

The widespread threat of contagious disease disrupts not only everyday life but also psychological experience. Building on findings regarding xenophobic responses to contagious diseases, this research investigates how perceived vulnerability to a disease moderates the psychological link between people's xenophobic thoughts and support for ingroup-protective actions. Three datasets collected during the time of Ebola (N = 867) and COVID-19 (Ns = 992 and 926) measured perceived disease risk, group-serving biases (i.e., xenophobic thoughts), and support for restrictive travel policies (i.e., ingroup-protective actions). Using correlational and quasi-experimental analyses, results indicated that for people who perceive greater disease risk, the association between group-serving bias and restrictive policy support is weakened. This weakened association occurred because people who felt more vulnerable to these diseases increased support for ingroup-protective actions more strongly than xenophobic thoughts. This research underscores the importance of understanding the impact of threats on psychological processes beyond the impact on psychological outcomes.

Disease Salience Effects on Desire for Affiliation With In-Group and Out-Group Members: Cognitive and Affective Mediators

This study tested the hypothesis that threats related to infectious diseases would make persons less willing to affiliate with out-groups and that feelings of disgust and beliefs about the out-group members would mediate this effect. To test this hypothesis, American participants of European descent were presented with either a disease threat or control threat. Then they were shown a photograph of someone of the same race or different race. Participants were asked to indicate whether they would avoid the target person and to state their emotional and cognitive responses to the person. As predicted, disease salience decreased the desire to affiliate with out-group members, and both feelings of disgust and beliefs about the infection risk posed by the target person mediated this relationship.

Risk Overgeneralization in Times of a Contagious Disease Threat

People’s assessment of risks is swayed by their current feelings. COVID-19 invokes powerful feelings because it is (i) a salient, enormous threat, (ii) unfamiliar, and (iii) intertwined with xenophobia. These three factors are known to exert predictable influence on people’s risk overgeneralization, policy preference, and sociopolitical attitudes. We provide a succinct, illustrative review of empirical work on these dynamics in times of a disease outbreak (e.g., the 2009 H1N1 swine flu, the 2014 Ebola). Theoretical and applied implications for the present COVID-19 pandemic include the value of salience in motivating public opinion change, the importance of reducing unfamiliarity for curbing risk-averse tendencies, and the need for policies that guard against xenophobia-driven racism in collaborative efforts.

Disease Threat and the Functional Flexibility of Ingroup Derogation

While the findings from previous studies directly relate the ingroup derogation phenomenon to the evolved response of the behavioral immune system, there are three major limitations in the previous studies on the functional flexibility of ingroup derogation. The present study further investigated the functional flexibility of ingroup derogation by conducting three behavioral experiments on Chinese participants. In Experiment 1, we tested whether exposing to situational disease primes leads to an exaggerated ingroup derogation attitude by adopting a more rigorous control. In Experiment 2, we manipulated the source of disease threats to test whether the ingroup derogation mechanism adjusts its response according to the specific perceived vulnerabilities to the disease threats posed by ingroup and outgroup members. In Experiment 3, we tested whether recent illness promotes the expression of ingroup derogation attitudes. Results of the three experiments consistently showed that, the Chinese participants adjusted their ingroup derogation attitudes according to the external environmental disease cues (Experiments 1 and 2) and the internal physiological disease cues (Experiment 3). The results also showed that the ingroup derogation mechanism was sensitive to the specific perceived vulnerabilities to the ingroup disease threat and the outgroup disease threat (Experiment 2). Taken together, these results support the evolutionary hypothesis of ingroup derogation and suggest that the ingroup derogation found in East Asian cultures could be accounted by a functionally flexible disease-avoidance mechanism.

Infections and Elections: Did an Ebola Outbreak Influence the 2014 U.S. Federal Elections (and if so, How)?

In the studies reported here, we conducted longitudinal analyses of preelection polling data to test whether an Ebola outbreak predicted voting intentions preceding the 2014 U.S. federal elections. Analyses were conducted on nationwide polls pertaining to 435 House of Representatives elections and on state-specific polls pertaining to 34 Senate elections. Analyses compared voting intentions before and after the initial Ebola outbreak and assessed correlations between Internet search activity for the term "Ebola" and voting intentions. Results revealed that (a) the psychological salience of Ebola was associated with increased intention to vote for Republican candidates and (b) this effect occurred primarily in states characterized by norms favoring Republican Party candidates (the effect did not occur in states with norms favoring Democratic Party candidates). Ancillary analyses addressed several interpretational issues. Overall, these results suggest that disease outbreaks may influence voter behavior in two psychologically distinct ways: increased inclination to vote for politically conservative candidates and increased inclination to conform to popular opinion.

Health at the ballot box: disease threat does not predict attractiveness preference in British politicians

According to disease avoidance theory, selective pressures have shaped adaptive behaviours to avoid people who might transmit infections. Such behavioural immune defence strategies may have social and societal consequences. Attractiveness is perceived as a heuristic cue of good health, and the relative importance of attractiveness is predicted to increase during high disease threat. Here, we investigated whether politicians' attractiveness is more important for electoral success when disease threat is high, in an effort to replicate earlier findings from the USA. We performed a cross-sectional study of 484 members of the House of Commons from England and Wales. Publicly available sexiness ratings (median 5883 ratings/politician) were regressed on measures of disease burden, operationalized as infant mortality, life expectancy and self-rated health. Infant mortality in parliamentary constituencies did not significantly predict sexiness of elected members of parliament (p = 0.08), nor did life expectancy (p = 0.06), nor self-rated health (p = 0.55). Subsample analyses failed to provide further support for the hypothesis. In conclusion, an attractive leader effect was not amplified by disease threat in the UK and these results did not replicate those of earlier studies from the USA concerning the relationship between attractiveness, disease threat and voting preference.