Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors

Abstract COVID-19 prevention behaviors may be seen as self-interested or prosocial. Using American samples from MTurk and Prolific (total n = 6850), we investigated which framing is more effective—and motivation is stronger—for fostering prevention behavior intentions. We evaluated messaging that em...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jillian J. Jordan, Erez Yoeli, David G. Rand
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Portfolio 2021-10-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97617-5
_version_ 1818883395519774720
author Jillian J. Jordan
Erez Yoeli
David G. Rand
author_facet Jillian J. Jordan
Erez Yoeli
David G. Rand
author_sort Jillian J. Jordan
collection DOAJ
description Abstract COVID-19 prevention behaviors may be seen as self-interested or prosocial. Using American samples from MTurk and Prolific (total n = 6850), we investigated which framing is more effective—and motivation is stronger—for fostering prevention behavior intentions. We evaluated messaging that emphasized personal, public, or personal and public benefits of prevention. In initial studies (conducted March 14–16, 2020), the Public treatment was more effective than the Personal treatment, and no less effective than the Personal + Public treatment. In additional studies (conducted April 17–30, 2020), all three treatments were similarly effective. Across all these studies, the perceived public threat of coronavirus was also more strongly associated with prevention intentions than the perceived personal threat. Furthermore, people who behaved prosocially in incentivized economic games years before the pandemic had greater prevention intentions. Finally, in a field experiment (conducted December 21–23, 2020), we used our three messaging strategies to motivate contact-tracing app signups (n = 152,556 newsletter subscribers). The design of this experiment prevents strong causal inference; however, the results provide suggestive evidence that the Personal + Public treatment may have been more effective than the Personal or Public treatment. Together, our results highlight the importance of prosocial motives for COVID-19 prevention.
first_indexed 2024-12-19T15:32:58Z
format Article
id doaj.art-8c5676f0d584477c83efb0c16bc1effc
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2045-2322
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-19T15:32:58Z
publishDate 2021-10-01
publisher Nature Portfolio
record_format Article
series Scientific Reports
spelling doaj.art-8c5676f0d584477c83efb0c16bc1effc2022-12-21T20:15:41ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222021-10-0111111710.1038/s41598-021-97617-5Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviorsJillian J. Jordan0Erez Yoeli1David G. Rand2Harvard Business SchoolSloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologySloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyAbstract COVID-19 prevention behaviors may be seen as self-interested or prosocial. Using American samples from MTurk and Prolific (total n = 6850), we investigated which framing is more effective—and motivation is stronger—for fostering prevention behavior intentions. We evaluated messaging that emphasized personal, public, or personal and public benefits of prevention. In initial studies (conducted March 14–16, 2020), the Public treatment was more effective than the Personal treatment, and no less effective than the Personal + Public treatment. In additional studies (conducted April 17–30, 2020), all three treatments were similarly effective. Across all these studies, the perceived public threat of coronavirus was also more strongly associated with prevention intentions than the perceived personal threat. Furthermore, people who behaved prosocially in incentivized economic games years before the pandemic had greater prevention intentions. Finally, in a field experiment (conducted December 21–23, 2020), we used our three messaging strategies to motivate contact-tracing app signups (n = 152,556 newsletter subscribers). The design of this experiment prevents strong causal inference; however, the results provide suggestive evidence that the Personal + Public treatment may have been more effective than the Personal or Public treatment. Together, our results highlight the importance of prosocial motives for COVID-19 prevention.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97617-5
spellingShingle Jillian J. Jordan
Erez Yoeli
David G. Rand
Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors
Scientific Reports
title Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors
title_full Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors
title_fullStr Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors
title_full_unstemmed Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors
title_short Don’t get it or don’t spread it: comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors
title_sort don t get it or don t spread it comparing self interested versus prosocial motivations for covid 19 prevention behaviors
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97617-5
work_keys_str_mv AT jillianjjordan dontgetitordontspreaditcomparingselfinterestedversusprosocialmotivationsforcovid19preventionbehaviors
AT erezyoeli dontgetitordontspreaditcomparingselfinterestedversusprosocialmotivationsforcovid19preventionbehaviors
AT davidgrand dontgetitordontspreaditcomparingselfinterestedversusprosocialmotivationsforcovid19preventionbehaviors