How Your Brain Tricks You Into Taking Risks During the Pandemic

20 mins read

It was mid-February and Maria Konnikova — a psychologist, author and champion poker participant — was on a multicity journey. From her lodge room in New Orleans, she referred to as her sister, a physician, to debate the rising COVID-19 pandemic. Konnikova noticed there have been early instances in Los Angeles, the place she was headed for a poker match.

The odds of Konnikova getting contaminated or spreading the virus by collaborating in a big indoor occasion have been unknown. But as a poker participant she had loads of expertise pondering by the possible dangers related to totally different choices. So she performed it conservatively. She minimize quick her journey and went house to quarantine in New York.

Konnikova’s psychology experience tells her that most individuals have a tough time pondering by the uncertainty and chances posed by the pandemic. People are inclined to be taught by expertise, and we’ve by no means lived by something like COVID-19. Every day, folks face disagreeable and unsure dangers related to their conduct, and that ambiguity goes in opposition to how we are inclined to assume. “The brain likes certainty,” she stated. “The brain likes black and white. It wants clear answers and wants clear cause and effect. It doesn’t like living in a world of ambiguities and gray zones.”

Many months into the pandemic, whilst the nation faces its highest common each day case counts thus far, folks nonetheless don’t agree on stay in the period of COVID-19. We know defend ourselves — washing our palms, carrying masks and staying socially distant — however many individuals nonetheless take pointless dangers, even at the highest ranges of presidency.

In late September, the White House hosted an indoor get together celebrating the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. It turned a potential superspreader occasion because attendees did not wear masks and ignored social distancing recommendations. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie didn’t put on a masks at the occasion. He additionally went with out one when he helped President Donald Trump put together for his first debate. Christie later spent every week in intensive care with COVID-19 after which wrote an opinion article in The Wall Street Journal titled “I Should Have Worn a Mask.” “I let my guard down,” he wrote.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention called on Americans to wear masks in July. So why is it so onerous for folks to masks up and apply different established behaviors to forestall the unfold of COVID-19? The drawback, specialists who examine the manner we expect say, is that the unprecedented nature of the pandemic makes us susceptible to refined biases that undermine how we course of info and assess danger. Our brains can play tips on us. That causes some folks to underestimate their danger, the specialists stated.

When Las Vegas reopened, crowds showed up with out masks. An estimated 365,000 people attended the annual Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota. Many didn’t put on helmets or masks. The festivities included a non-socially distanced live performance by Smashmouth. And despite the fact that masks have been distributed and required at a recent Trump campaign rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, some attendees didn’t put on them, and the marketing campaign packed folks into crowded buses.

It might not at all times appear to be it, however individuals are rational and weigh the prices and advantages after they make choices, stated Eve Wittenberg, a call scientist at the Center for Health Decision Science at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “People are not stupid here,” she stated. But they haven’t any expertise pondering by a pandemic and are additionally getting combined and conflicted messages from leaders, she stated. That creates uncertainty and may lead folks to depend on patterns of danger notion that will not be correct.

The Power of Social Norms and Personal Experience

People could also be extra more likely to take part in riskier actions as a result of they have a tendency to behave in response to the norms that encompass them, stated Lisa Robinson, a senior analysis scientist at the Center for Health Decision Science. If we’re surrounded by individuals who behave a sure manner, she stated, we usually tend to behave the similar manner.

At this level the details about COVID-19 are nicely established. It’s extraordinarily contagious and transmitted by way of droplets that come from an contaminated particular person’s mouth or nostril. This can occur throughout speech, coughing, sneezing or respiration — whether or not an individual is experiencing signs or not. Older and sicker individuals are at increased danger of significant sickness or dying. But younger, wholesome folks can nonetheless turn into contaminated and sick, and so they also can put others in danger by spreading the virus.

A widely known historic instance of individuals being directed by social norms is smoking, Robinson stated. For many years the societal norm stated smoking was cool, even after it was identified to kill folks. That contributed to lots of people smoking, keen to take the danger. Then the norm flipped and smoking turned uncool, and fewer folks smoked. “We take a lot of cues from our environment,” Robinson stated. “If I see a lot of people wearing a mask, I wear a mask.”

Betsy Paluck, a professor of psychology and public coverage at Princeton University and MacArthur “Genius” Fellow, research how these social norms are shaped and the way they shift over time.

“There’s a lot of competing information out there,” Paluck stated. “Your individual decisions are very real to you, of course, but they need to be validated by other people in your neighborhood, your organization.”

Paluck stated everyone seems to be influenced by social norms, together with her. She has a new child and aged mother and father, so she’s been cautious throughout the pandemic. But it’s getting more durable to watch out as folks broaden their social lives.

She talked lately to a pal who’s holding her children out of college, choosing all digital instruction. The pal’s determination felt like an enormous reduction as a result of it affirmed Paluck’s personal emotions. It confirmed her how a lot all of us depend on our shared actuality. “Holding the line on your own is just not tenable,” she stated.

Personal expertise additionally has an outsized position in decision-making. People who have been in the sizzling zones of New York City and New Jersey throughout the preliminary unfold of COVID-19 witnessed the results of the virus. They might have turn into contaminated themselves or identified others who turned sick and even died. They may need identified well being care employees who cared for the sick, doubtlessly exposing themselves in the course of. Meanwhile, folks in elements of the nation that haven’t been hit onerous by the virus won’t have had that have and subsequently fail to understand the danger.

Poker gamers, together with people like meteorologists, horse race handicappers and attorneys who work on a contingency foundation are routinely rewarded or punished primarily based on the odds. This provides them a uncommon visceral, experiential understanding of percentages and lets them short-circuit a cognitive impact referred to as the “description-experience gap,” which leads folks to underestimate danger primarily based on their very own private experiences.

Even Nobel Prize-winning economists are susceptible to it. The pandemic is past the limits of human instinct, stated the psychologist and economist Daniel Kahneman on Konnikova’s podcast.

Wittenberg pointed to the work of Kahneman and Amos Tversky, who coined the time period “availability” to explain how we base our pondering on what we’ve seen or skilled. We see it present up when an individual assesses his or her danger of a coronary heart assault by recalling situations amongst acquaintances, the two researchers wrote of their 1974 paper, “Judgment Under Uncertainty.”

The researchers additionally famous how some situations would possibly come to thoughts extra simply than others and thus get extra closely weighted in decision-making. Other situations could be extra salient or might have occurred extra often, so they arrive to thoughts quicker. Relying on “availability” to make choices introduces biases, in response to Kahneman and Tversky. “It is a common experience that the subjective probability of traffic accidents rises temporarily when one sees a car overturned by the side of the road,” the researchers wrote.

The Need for Leaders and Institutions to Guide Us

The confusion surrounding COVID-19 was magnified by a scarcity of testing in the early days of the pandemic after which delays in take a look at outcomes, Wittenberg stated. That meant folks didn’t have clear knowledge to anchor their danger evaluation.

The confusion referred to as for leaders to information the public with clear public well being messages, however as an alternative they’ve exacerbated the issues. It was well-known comparatively early in the pandemic that carrying a masks may assist stop the unfold of the virus, however it took till July earlier than Trump wore one in public for the first time. Some governors have downplayed the danger posed by the virus, others have emphasised it. That’s left the public “grappling with mixed and conflicted messages,” Wittenberg stated.

Baruch Fischhoff, a psychologist who research danger and decision-making at Carnegie Mellon University, stated individuals are good at perceiving danger if they’re getting info from a reliable supply. But the dangers related to the coronavirus, which is invisible, are usually not intuitive, he stated. It’s onerous for folks to mission the exponential unfold of the virus, he stated. Our minds don’t simply extrapolate it, so we’d like leaders to assist defend us from ourselves, he stated.

The state of affairs could possibly be in comparison with how the authorities protects folks at practice crossings, Fischhoff stated. Drivers are good at estimating the pace of different automobiles. But analysis from accidents at practice crossings has proven that drivers are usually not good at estimating the pace of oncoming trains, that are a lot greater. “Our brains are calibrated to treat a train like a car,” he stated, “but it’s going faster than it looks.”

To keep secure from an oncoming practice, drivers both must go in opposition to their instinct, have somebody warn them in a manner they may keep in mind or have one thing block the crossing when a practice approaches. “Somebody needs to protect you,” he stated.

Good public well being communication requires testing messages to verify they’re interpreted accurately by a variety of individuals, Fischhoff stated. “Our official communicators have dropped the ball, and they have been undermined by people who don’t have the public’s interest at heart,” he stated.

Paluck, the social psychologist, stated sure leaders and influencers stick out like vivid colours. They’re charismatic and we glance to them once we verify our personal conduct. “What they say and do becomes the anchor we use,” she stated.

People additionally put religion in reliable establishments, she stated, even when they might not agree with what the establishment is saying. She and a colleague discovered one thing suprising after they studied the effect of the Supreme Court legalizing same-sex marriage. A better variety of folks supported same-sex marriage due to the Supreme Court’s determination, even when that they had not modified their private views. “They thought that there was a bigger consensus in the United States that same-sex marriage was a good thing,” Paluck stated. “So that’s the power of an institution.”

Optimism Bias and Why Institutions Failed to Act

Optimism bias is a sample of pondering that causes our brains to see future outcomes as rosier than they are surely. It transcends gender, tradition and age. It seems to be extremely useful in most conditions. There’s just one subset of the inhabitants that doesn’t expertise optimism bias, Konnikova stated — folks affected by despair.

“This is actually something that’s very psychologically protective,” she stated. “It ends up that seeing the world as it is makes you clinically depressed.”

When it involves institutional conduct, nevertheless, optimism bias can result in poor planning and dangerous decision-making.

Dr. Eric Toner is a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and says that the pandemic has taught him about the energy of denial. The international public well being neighborhood realized in mid-January about the extent of neighborhood transmission of the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China, Toner stated. The most blatant signal of concern, he stated, got here when China took the dramatic step of locking down Wuhan, one among its largest cities. Something actually unhealthy is occurring, he thought to himself.

And but, public well being officers in the United States have been sluggish to sound an alarm. “People have trouble recognizing when they’re facing a catastrophic threat and on the other hand they exaggerate minor threats,” Toner stated. “We needed messaging from the top of the government that says this is a serious threat.”

“Until you hear the message from somebody who is in a position of authority, I think there is a tendency to really want to not believe it. People don’t want to believe really bad news.”

Toner stated the Center for Health Security heard time and again that hospital CEOs wouldn’t be satisfied of the dire menace posed by the pandemic till the federal authorities determined to say one thing. But by then a lot time had been misplaced.

When public well being officers did sound an early alarm, their voices have been squelched. Dr. Nancy Messonnier, one among the senior leaders at the CDC, warned on Feb. 25 that there can be neighborhood unfold of the virus, and that protecting measures would possibly embrace college closures and dealing from house. As ProPublica previously reported, her feedback prompted the inventory market to drop, which infuriated Trump. Vice President Mike Pence was put in as communicator-in-chief, and the CDC officers have been sidelined. “When it mattered most, they shut us up,” a senior CDC official informed ProfessionalPublica.

Toner’s group is in command of designing pandemic preparedness workout routines. Some of them are eerily just like our present state of affairs. He stated he’s usually requested the way it’s potential that we did all these workout routines and nonetheless had such a foul response to the COVID-19 pandemic. His reply: The workout routines superior the subject, however that they had their limits. “They didn’t inoculate us against really bad decision-making,” he stated.


Charlene is a Bay Area journalist who hails from the small community of Fresno. Drawing from her experience writing for her college paper, Charlene continues to advocate for free press and local journalism. She also volunteers in all the beach cleanups she can because she loves the water.

Delivered weekly to your inbox📰

Stay connected with the heart of the Bay Area! Subscribe to the SF Times Friday Paper for your weekly dose of local news, events, business updates, and more from San Francisco and surrounding areas. Don't miss out on what's happening in your city.


We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

You have Successfully Subscribed!