Drawing from social domain theory, this study examined people’s evaluation of society-level disease-prevention regulations (e.g., school closure) and personal precautions (e.g., wearing a facemask) during the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis, as assessed in Spring, 2020. Participants from three countries (United States [US], China, and Japan; N = 528) rated their acceptance of a range of society-level and individual-level preventive measures and then indicated their main reasons for these ratings, which were categorized as moral, societal, personal, and prudential based on social domain theory. Consistent with this theoretical framework, we found both similarities and differences across the three societies. Specifically, we found that, across the three societies, moral considerations predicted higher acceptance of society-level preventive measures, whereas personal considerations predicted lower acceptance of both society-level and individual-level preventive measures. However, a stronger link between societal considerations and higher acceptance of society-level preventive measures was found for Chinese participants than for US and Japanese participants.
BasabeN.RosM. (2005). Cultural dimensions and social behavior correlates: Individualism-collectivism and power distance. International Review of Social Psychology, 18(1), 189–225.
2.
BondR.SmithP. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch’s (1952b, 1956) line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 111–137. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.111
CalvilloD. P.RossB. J.GarciaR. J.SmelterT. J.RutchickA. M. (2020). Political ideology predicts perceptions of the threat of COVID-19 (and susceptibility to fake news about it). Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(8), 1119–1128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620940539
5.
ChenX. P.WastiS. A.TriandisH. C. (2007). When does group norm or group identity predict cooperation in a public goods dilemma? The moderating effects of idiocentrism and allocentrism. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(2), 259–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2006.02.004
6.
ClarkC.DavilaA.RegisM.KrausS. (2020). Predictors of COVID-19 voluntary compliance behaviors: An international investigation. Global Transitions, 2, 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glt.2020.06.003
7.
DuncanL. A.SchallerM.ParkJ. H. (2009). Perceived vulnerability to disease: Development and validation of a 15-item self-report instrument. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(6), 541–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.05.001
8.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
9.
FincherC. L.ThornhillR. (2012). Parasite-stress promotes in-group assortative sociality: The cases of strong family ties and heightened religiosity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(2), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X11000021
10.
GermaniA.BurattaL.DelvecchioE.MazzeschiC. (2020). Emerging adults and COVID-19: The role of individualism–collectivism on perceived risks and psychological maladjustment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(10), 3497. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103497
HarperC. A.SatchellL. P.FidoD.LatzmanR. D. (2020). Functional fear predicts public health compliance in the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00281-5
13.
HelwigC. C. (1995). Adolescents’ and young adults’ conceptions of civil liberties: Freedom of speech and religion. Child Development, 66(1), 152–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00862.x
HofstedeG.BondM. H. (1988). The confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(88)90009-5
16.
ImhoffR.LambertyP. (2020). A bioweapon or a hoax? The link between distinct conspiracy beliefs about the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and pandemic behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(8), 1110–1118.
17.
InglehartR. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization. Princeton University Press.
18.
JordanR. E.AdabP.ChengK. K. (2020). Covid-19: Risk factors for severe disease and death. British Medical Journal, 368, m1198. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1198
19.
KesslerT.CohrsJ. C. (2008). The evolution of authoritarian processes: Fostering cooperation in large-scale groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.12.1.73
20.
KimH. S.ShermanD. K.UpdegraffJ. A. (2016). Fear of Ebola: The influence of collectivism on xenophobic threat responses. Psychological Science, 27(7), 935–944. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616642596
21.
KraemerM. U.YangC. H.GutierrezB.WuC. H.KleinB.PigottD. M.Open COVID-19 Data Working Group., du PlesisL.FariaN. R.LiR.HanageW. P.ScarpinoS. V.LayanM.VespignaniA.TianH.DyeC.BrownsteinJ. S. (2020). The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science, 368(6490), 493–497. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb4218
22.
LachmanM. E.WeaverS. L. (1998). The sense of control as a moderator of social class differences in health and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 763–773. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.763
23.
LeeM.YouM. (2020). Psychological and behavioral responses in South Korea during the early stages of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(9), 2977. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17092977
24.
MackeyT. K.LiangB. A. (2012). Lessons from SARS and H1N1/A: Employing a WHO–WTO forum to promote optimal economic-public health pandemic response. Journal of Public Health Policy, 33(1), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1057/jphp.2011.51
25.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
26.
MurrayD. R.SchallerM.SuedfeldP. (2013). Pathogens and politics: Further evidence that parasite prevalence predicts authoritarianism. PloS One, 8(5), e62275. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062275
27.
NucciL. (1981). Conceptions of personal issues: A domain distinct from moral or societal concepts. Child Development, 52(1), 114–121. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129220
28.
OysermanD.CoonH. M.KemmelmeierM. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 3–72. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3
PlohlN.MusilB. (2020). Modeling compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines: The critical role of trust in science. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 26(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2020.1772988
Reinders FolmerC. R.BrownleeM.FineA.KuiperM. E.OlthuisE.KooistraE. B.de BruijnA. L.van RooijB. (2020). Social distancing in America: Understanding long-term adherence to Covid-19 mitigation recommendations (Amsterdam Law School Research Paper No. 2020-62). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3736683
34.
SchallerM.ParkJ. H. (2011). The behavioral immune system (and why it matters). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(2), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411402596
35.
SmetanaJ. G. (2011). Adolescents’ social reasoning and relationships with parents: Conflicts and coordinations within and across domains. In AmselE.SmetanaJ. G. (Eds.), Adolescent vulnerabilities and opportunities: Developmental and constructivist perspectives (Vol. 38, pp. 139–158). Cambridge University Press.
36.
SmetanaJ. G.JambonM.BallC. (2014). The social domain approach to children’s social and moral judgments. In KillenM.SmetanaJ. (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (pp. 23–45). Psychology Press.
37.
SyedQ.SopwithW.ReganM.BellisM. A. (2003). Behind the mask. Journey through an epidemic: Some observations of contrasting public health responses to SARS. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 57(11), 855–856. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.57.11.855
38.
TanB. C.WeiK. K.WatsonR. T.ClapperD. L.McleanE. R. (1998). Computer-mediated communication and majority influence: Assessing the impact in an individualistic and a collectivistic culture. Management Science, 44(9), 1263–1278. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.9.1263
39.
TisakM. S.TurielE. (1984). Children’s conceptions of moral and prudential rules. Child Development, 55(3), 1030–1039. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130154
40.
TriandisH. C.BontempoR.VillarealM. J.AsaiM.LuccaN. (1988). Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-ingroup relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(2), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.2.323
41.
TurielE. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge University Press.
42.
TurielE. (2002). The culture of morality. Cambridge University Press.
43.
TurielE. (2006). The development of morality. In DamonW.LernerR. M.EisenbergN. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (Vol. 3, 6th ed., pp. 789–857). Wiley.
44.
WiseT.ZbozinekT. D.MicheliniG.HaganC. C.MobbsD. (2020). Changes in risk perception and protective behavior during the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. PsyArXiv. https://psyarxiv.com/dz428/
WuB. P.ChangL. (2012). The social impact of pathogen threat: How disease salience influences conformity. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(1), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.02.023
49.
ZhuN.HawkS. T.SmetanaJ. G. (2020). The influence of power on US and Chinese individuals’ judgments and reasoning about intrasocietal conflicts. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 51(1), 77–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022119893109
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
