Spreading Prosocial Norms in Times of Corona
Using behavioral science to improve communication and the spread of positive social norms.
I have the privilege of being a student of Behavioral and Decision Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania at a time when social and behavioral change are of the utmost importance. In this unscripted period, insights from such sciences are invaluable in helping people to graciously navigate uncharted waters. Their power lies in the fact that they can lead to life-changing interventions that do not rely on legal agreements, formal sanctions, or extensive resources, but on the mere power of smart collective action. Studying under Professor Cristina Bicchieri, an authority in all things social norms, has inspired me to report some of her insights, among other things, on how to make such collective action possible. In the following sections, I will be shedding light on the behaviors people have been trying to affect, the human biases that drive them, and ways to spread more effective messages to promote prosocial behaviors that would, in the long run, benefit us all.
If you are mainly interested in Professor Bicchieri’s communication advice, feel free to skip to Part III of the article. Additionally, here is a Behavioral Grooves podcast on which she discusses her six recommendations to promote prosocial behaviors amidst the current corona virus pandemic.
I. Relevant cognitive biases in the current pandemic
We all suffer from the same cognitive biases that impair our judgements and decision-making processes, especially in times of crisis.
One thing that this awful pandemic does a wonderful job of highlighting is our shared humanity. There are many biases that can help explain the specific behaviors we have been observing; I decided to focus on the ones that I deemed most relevant for the purposes of this article. Being aware of these biases will not make you immune to them, but it is a first step towards trying to counter their negative effects while being more tolerant of others’ shortcomings.
- Optimism bias consists of overestimating the likelihood that good things will happen to us while underestimating the probability that negative events might too. This has made some people, especially younger ones, more prone to ignore recommended public health behaviors as they believe they are much less likely to get sick than they actually are, putting everyone around them at greater risk.
- Psychological reactance refers to the theory that when individual freedoms are reduced or threatened, people tend to be motivated to regain those freedoms. This has led some, especially in societies that highly value individual freedom, to go as far as doing the opposite of what experts recommend them to do. Remember when your mom used to tell you to wear a sweatshirt because it was cold outside, and you went out in a T-shirt instead? This is similar: people are being mandated to stay at home, and are inherently motivated to go out instead…
- Motivated reasoning is a crucial bias to be aware of in times of uncertainty because when faced with ambiguous information, people tend to interpret it in a self-serving way. It won’t come as a surprise that right after the CDC put out the guideline to “Avoid discretionary travel, shopping trips, and social visits”, “discretionary travel” was one of the most-searched terms on Google. That is only because it is, quite literally, a matter of life or death… The issue is that the term “discretionary” inherently implies a level of subjectivity. Can going to the dentist be considered discretionary travel? How about taking my pet to the vet? The point is, people are more likely to interpret such information in a self-serving way than go through the trouble of researching what it means, especially when doing so is burdensome and cognitively straining.
- Dissemination bias coupled with the affect heuristic, whereby: a) information is disseminated on the basis of the direction or strength of the finding, and b) people tend to let their emotions shape their beliefs and memories. These are important biases in general as the media mostly report on sensationalized events to generate more clicks precisely because people are drawn to such news. One example is the greater media attention given to the number of deaths from the virus versus the number of people who have recovered, as well as the greater ability of people to recall the former figure rather than the latter. It is easy to discount important information when this information is not made salient, and especially when it is not inherently memorable.
- Egocentric bias leads people to believe that situations that favor them are fair, even if they think that favoring others in a similar way would be unjust. This has been observed with people who were so-called “hoarding” or “panic-buying” toilet paper and hand sanitizer (note that I use quotation marks here precisely to avoid normalizing alarmist language that would undermine the sense of humanity and collectivity that I am striving to promote in this article.) The truth of the matter is that when people suddenly perceive others as competitors for the same resources, cognitive systems will kick in to help justify their irrational behaviors. Using self-distancing language is one way to mitigate the effect of this bias. In other words, ask yourself “What should [insert own name here] do?”, or “WWJD?” if easier… This brings me to the next related bias:
- Zero-sum thinking, which leads people to believe that another person’s gain means one’s own loss and vice versa, and drives them to do things like bulk-buying. This way of thinking contradicts the very non-zero-sum nature of viruses whereby my infection could mean many people in my community’s infection. So, my buying more hand sanitizer than I need, means less people in my surroundings being able to properly sanitize their hands, ultimately putting me at greater risk of catching the disease … which is what I was trying to avoid in the first place!
The above biases can help explain many of our subpar, yet perfectly human, behaviors. Speaking of which, one such behavior that viruses, as opposed to humans, do not engage in, is discrimination. This is thus an opportunity for people to prioritize cooperative and collective action, by recasting previously “othered” people as in-group, a.k.a. humans, instead. So how can messaging be effectively used to this end?
II. Social Norms 101
In order to understand the reason behind the following recommendations, it is essential to first lay out some of Professor Crisitna Bicchieri’s fundamental social norms concepts pertinent to the case at hand:
1. The behaviors we are trying to promote are interdependent, i.e., based on conditional preferences. That is, whether one follows the behavior is dependent on whether they think others will, too.
In the case of behaviors like physical distancing or self-isolation, individuals’ preference to adopt these behaviors is conditional on their social expectations of their friends/family, both approving of these behaviors and enacting them.
2. There are two kinds of social expectations: empirical and normative.
The social expectations that shape an individual’s preference to behave in a given way are twofold: 1) empirical expectations, which pertain to our expectations of others’ actions and which can be observed, and 2) normative expectations, which pertain to our expectations of what others approve or disapprove of. Both of these can be manipulated to change social expectations but…
3. Empirical expectations are more powerful for social change than normative ones.
Think about how you would react to these two bits of information:
A) “hundreds of people in Florida still go to the beach everyday” (empirical)
B) “most people in Florida disapprove of going to the beach” (normative)
Which one shapes your social expectations of people in Florida the most? The empirical one, of course!
III. Guidelines to effective communication that drives prosocial behaviors
With these three tenets in mind, here are some recommendations, as conceived by Professor Bicchieri, on how to spread effective prosocial behaviors through messaging:
1. Pair both empirical and normative information in your messages, when possible.
Sending a message that reads:
“Most millennials like us are staying at home, and strongly approve of people doing the same thing” ,
accompanied by a picture of me laying on my couch will be much more effective in influencing my peers to do the same than if I said: “most people are staying at home” (empirical) or “most people approve of self-isolation” (normative). In fact, the latter of those two options actually says nothing about whether staying at home is the behavior commonly being enacted.
However, if I posted that initial message, and then decided to casually hang out with my friends in the park and shared a picture about it, I cannot blame people from inferring that what I recently posted is cheap talk and that I actually don’t believe that it is best to stay home. Be true to your word, and do not spread conflicting information.
2. Give people empirical information about what others are doing ONLY when those behaviors are positive and prosocial.
This is crucial! Spreading information about antisocial behaviors will only help normalize it. For example, news outlets showing images of overcrowded beaches in Florida is NOT a good strategy to encourage people to stop going to the beach. Instead, it can backfire by strengthening the idea that people can go out and still get away with it.
3. Ensure that you are choosing the appropriate reference network.
As much as I love my grandparents and want them to be safe, knowing that they are self-isolating 5,685 miles away from me is NOT what is going to make me self-isolate. On the other hand, telling me that all of my friends, who live 5 minutes away from me, (i.e., my reference network for this behavior) are staying at home doing work is more likely to motivate me to do the same, even if I do not necessarily like this specific behavior.
4. Be clear, precise, scientific; otherwise, please refrain from posting.
Avoid ambiguous language such as “most people are staying at home”, because it could easily lead to thought-processes such as this one:
“Most people are older than me, right? Yes. And most older people are more vulnerable than me, right? Yes. And most vulnerable people should stay home, right? Yes. But I don’t necessarily belong to this category, right? Yes. So, I could argue that I am not like “most people” and don’t need to stay at home as much.”
You get the point…
Also, if in doubt about the quality of a piece of information or advice, refrain from reposting or sharing it until you’ve fact-checked it by ensuring the source is reliable. If you are not sure that gargling with ginger tea will cure your cousin from COVID-19, then do not suggest it to her, and most importantly, do not post a video of her doing it on social media.
5. Disseminate information communicated by trusted messengers, and ensure that your audience believes you are credible.
Messages sent and recommendations made by trusted sources are more effective because of the authority bias, which is the tendency to attribute greater accuracy to, and be influenced by, the opinion of an authority figure. Of course, such acts should be prompted by ordinary people like you and me, but celebrities and public figures have an especially important role to play because of their wide following.
A couple of good examples of that are Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Twitter post, and Melinda Gates’ LinkedIn video in which they attempt to shape both their audience’s empirical and normative expectations by sharing clear prosocial information, while enacting their recommendations. Some would say it is much easier to follow guidelines when you have pet-donkeys to keep you entertained at home and staircases in your bathroom you can use in lieu of a StairMaster; and to that I say “true!” The important point, however, is that these people, other than being privileged, have millions of followers many of whom look up to them, and can therefore move the needle when it comes to promoting positive collective behaviors.
6. Avoid moralizing messages… and forget about shaming too.
First, messages that employ language that can be construed as moralizing or shaming often undermine empathy, and empathy is not something we can ever have enough of, especially in times like these. Second, the implicit information that comes with one feeling compelled to send a moralizing message is that people are currently doing the opposite of what is being preached. This, again, could normalize the harmful behavior by sending the wrong signal.
In sum, following these six simple guidelines would, a priori, contribute to the spread of prosocial behaviors. The onus is now on us to apply them.
Lastly, and on a slightly different note, I would like to take this opportunity to remind readers that mental illnesses, just like viruses, are invisible to the naked eye. The proverb “out of sight, out of mind” applies all too well to such illnesses, and it is up to us to make an active effort to remember that people suffer from them all around us. A global health crisis can only exacerbate feelings of angst and loneliness. So, I suggest listening to your loved ones with intent, and if you suspect a change in behavior, bring it to their attention in a mindful way and extend a helping hand. Similarly, if you notice new feelings within yourself, share them with people who care. There is no shame in being ill; there is no shame in needing and asking for help. Every dark cloud has a silver lining, and one of my many hopes coming out of this, is that COVID-19 will help bring us closer together and, perhaps, draw much needed attention to another modern illness called loneliness…
Keep safe.
