COVID-19 lockdown measures have stoked fears among the British public, a new study indicates.
A team of psychologists from German universities, including the Justus Liebig University Giessen, Technical University of Dresden (TU Dresden), and University of Witten/Herdecke, have published their findings in the journal Royal Society Open Science today. The research, led by Professor Lorraine Whitmarsh, sheds light on how government actions can influence the public's perception of various risks, using the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study.
Meanwhile, a separate study conducted by psychologists from Cardiff University, the University of Bath, and the University of Essex highlights the importance of asking the right questions in understanding public opinion during a crisis. The research findings suggest that more nuanced approaches to polling data could lead to a more accurate understanding of public opinions.
The German study found that most people's personal sense of threat does not relate to their support for restrictions, and raising their personal threat is unlikely to enhance their support for restrictive measures. Instead, people judge the severity of the COVID-19 threat based on the fact that the government imposed a lockdown.
Professor Whitmarsh suggests that bold actions, like stopping road building or blocking airport expansions, could increase public belief in the seriousness of other risks, such as climate change. However, any messaging that targets their personal sense of threat is unlikely to actually raise support for any further restrictions.
Dr Paul Hanel emphasizes the importance of asking the right questions in polling to avoid a limited and potentially misleading picture of public opinions. The researchers warn about a potential symbiotic relationship between public opinion and government policy, and call for more nuanced use of polling data during the pandemic to accurately gauge the diversity and complexity of public opinion.
The Cardiff University-led research indicates that the UK public may take the pandemic less seriously once restrictions are lifted. People supported lockdown yet thought many of its side effects were "unacceptable" in a cost-benefit analysis. The researchers warn that polling data from large samples might not fully capture the diversity and complexity of public opinions.
The new research is published in the journal Royal Society Open Science with DOI 10.1098/rsos.210678. The findings from both studies underscore the need for careful consideration of government actions and the questions asked in polling data to accurately gauge public opinion and make informed decisions.
