The impact of cognitive bias about infectious diseases on social well-being.

Frontiers in epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-12-04 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fepid.2024.1418336
Radomir Pestow
{"title":"The impact of cognitive bias about infectious diseases on social well-being.","authors":"Radomir Pestow","doi":"10.3389/fepid.2024.1418336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We investigate the relationship between bias, that is, cognitive distortions about the severity of infectious disease and social well-being.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>First, we establish empirically the existence of bias and analyze some of its causes; specifically, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, we derive an integrated economic-epidemiological differential equation model from an agent-based model that combines myopic rational choice with infectious disease dynamics. Third, we characterize axiomatically a model of an ethical, impartial, eudaemonistic and individualist observer. We prove that such an observer evaluates the state of society (social welfare or social well-being) according to the utilitarian principle.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We show numerically that while increased risk-perception indeed improves epidemiological outcomes such as peak of infections and total incidence, the impact on social well-being is ambiguous.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This result urges to look beyond cases and deaths. We also discuss problematic aspects of the simplified utilitarian principle.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Finally, we point out three possible future research directions and highlight some critical issues that arise in the normative direction.</p>","PeriodicalId":73083,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in epidemiology","volume":"4 ","pages":"1418336"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11652146/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fepid.2024.1418336","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: We investigate the relationship between bias, that is, cognitive distortions about the severity of infectious disease and social well-being.

Materials and methods: First, we establish empirically the existence of bias and analyze some of its causes; specifically, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, we derive an integrated economic-epidemiological differential equation model from an agent-based model that combines myopic rational choice with infectious disease dynamics. Third, we characterize axiomatically a model of an ethical, impartial, eudaemonistic and individualist observer. We prove that such an observer evaluates the state of society (social welfare or social well-being) according to the utilitarian principle.

Results: We show numerically that while increased risk-perception indeed improves epidemiological outcomes such as peak of infections and total incidence, the impact on social well-being is ambiguous.

Discussion: This result urges to look beyond cases and deaths. We also discuss problematic aspects of the simplified utilitarian principle.

Conclusion: Finally, we point out three possible future research directions and highlight some critical issues that arise in the normative direction.

传染病认知偏见对社会福祉的影响。
引言:我们调查偏见之间的关系,即关于传染病严重程度的认知扭曲和社会福祉。材料与方法:首先,实证地确立了偏差的存在,并分析了偏差产生的一些原因;特别是在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间。其次,我们从基于主体的模型中推导出一个综合的经济-流行病学微分方程模型,该模型将近视理性选择与传染病动力学相结合。第三,我们从公理上描述了一个道德的、公正的、唯美主义的和个人主义的观察者的模型。我们证明这样一个观察者根据功利主义原则来评估社会状态(社会福利或社会福祉)。结果:我们在数字上表明,虽然风险认知的增加确实改善了流行病学结果,如感染高峰和总发病率,但对社会福祉的影响是模糊的。讨论:这一结果促使我们超越病例和死亡。我们还讨论了简化的功利主义原则的问题方面。结论:最后,我们指出了未来可能的三个研究方向,并强调了在规范方向上出现的一些关键问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信