4 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Changes in social norms during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic across 43 countries
Data availability:
The data generated in this study have been deposited in the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/STKFR). Non-experimental data included in our datasets (i.e., intensity of government response to COVID-19 is the Stringency Index, COVID-19 deaths and cases per million) are taken from the Oxford COVIDâ19 Government Response Tracker [22 Hale, T. et al. A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVIDâ19 Government Response Tracker). Nat. Human Behav. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8 (2021).] and Our World in Data [38 Ritchie, H. et al. Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19). Our World in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus (2020).] (downloaded November 2020). Wave 0 data are from [3 Gelfand, M. J. et al. Differences between tight and loose cultures: a 33-nation study. Science 332, 1100â1104 (2011).[ and Wave 1 data are from [5 Eriksson, K. et al. Perceptions of the appropriate response to norm violation in 57 societies. Nat. Commun. 12, 1481 (2021).].Code availability:
The survey and analysis code are available at the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/STKFR).Supplementary information is available online at: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-44999-5#Sec40 .The emergence of COVID-19 dramatically changed social behavior across societies and contexts. Here we study whether social norms also changed. Specifically, we study this question for cultural tightness (the degree to which societies generally have strong norms), specific social norms (e.g. stealing, hand washing), and norms about enforcement, using survey data from 30,431 respondents in 43 countries recorded before and in the early stages following the emergence of COVID-19. Using variation in disease intensity, we shed light on the mechanisms predicting changes in social norm measures. We find evidence that, after the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, hand washing norms increased while tightness and punishing frequency slightly decreased but observe no evidence for a robust change in most other norms. Thus, at least in the short term, our findings suggest that cultures are largely stable to pandemic threats except in those norms, hand washing in this case, that are perceived to be directly relevant to dealing with the collective threat.Knut and Wallenberg Grant âHow do human norms form and change?â 2016.0167. (G.An.). The Swedish Research Council grant âNorms & Risk: Do social norms help dealing with collective threatsâ 2021-06271 (G.An.). Ministero dellâIstruzione dellâUniversitĂ e della Ricerca, PRIN 2017, prot. 20178TRM3F (D.B.). Universidad de Los Andes, Fondo VicerrectorĂa de Investigaciones (J.-C.C.). Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary, National Research, Development and Innovation Fund NKFIH-OTKA K135963 (M.F.). Grant 23-061770âS of the Czech Science Foundation (M.H. and S.G.). RVO: 68081740 of the Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences (M.H. and S.G.). RA Science Committee, research project N.20TTSH-070 (A.Gr. and N.Khac.). Open University of Israel, 511687 (R.N.). HSE University Basic Research Program (E.O.). Project BASIC (PID2022-141802NB-I00) funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by âERDF A way of making Europeâ (A.SĂĄ.). US Army Research Office Grant W911NF-19-1-910281 (B.S.). Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, 019.183SG.001 (E.S.). Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, VI.Veni.201âG.013 (E.S.). European Commission, Horizon 2020-ID 870827 (E.S.). UKRI Grant âSecret Powerâ No. EP/X02170X/1 awarded under the European Commissionâs âEuropean Research Council - STGâ Scheme (G.A.T.)
Two Sides of the Same Coin or Two Different Currencies? Representations of Happiness and Unhappiness among Finnish Women
Recommended from our members
Author Correction: Perceptions of the appropriate response to norm violation in 57 societies (Nature Communications, (2021), 12, 1, (1481), 10.1038/s41467-021-21602-9).
Copyright © The Author(s) 2021. The original version of this Article contained an error in the author affiliations. Cecilia Reyna was incorrectly associated with âUniversidad Nacional de CĂłrdoba (UNC). Facultad de PsicologĂa (UNC), Ciudad Universitaria, Bv. de la Reforma esquina, Enfermera Gordillo s/n, CĂłrdoba, Argentina.â instead of the correct âInstituto de Investigaciones PsicolĂłgicas (IIPsi), Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas (CONICET), CABA, RepĂșblica Argentina.â This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article