{"title":"Covid-19:信任度较高的社会是否表现得更好?","authors":"Bernard H Casey","doi":"10.1007/s44155-023-00035-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Social trust<b>-</b>between governments and people and between individuals-and trust in science were proposed as prerequisites for tackling covid. Others suggested less democratic societies were more able to impose strict rules stopping the virus. These propositions were tested for a group of mainly advanced countries. The dependent variable is cumulated deaths from covid. Findings are broken down between (a) OECD member countries, (b) these and countries having cooperation agreements with it, and (c) all these plus China. They are also broken down by time-between (a) the period before the appearance of \"new variants\" in late 2020 and (b) the period from then until end September 2021. The best, most parsimonious, models explain nearly half of the changes in the level of deaths. Trust in government improves outcomes, as does interpersonal trust. Vaccine antipathy does not play a role. Also, there is little indication that authoritarian regimes performed better than higher trust societies. In the first period, increasing wealth inequality-indicating a more divided society-is related to higher death rates. Hospital bed availability is important then, but not thereafter. Furthermore, as the pandemic persisted, the importance of pre-existing levels of social trust declined. The paper warns that institutions and cultures cannot easily be transferred from one country to another. Nor would all transfers be desired. It also suggests that some other lessons of what contributed to better outcomes under covid might be relevant for the monkeypox virus-its successor public health emergency.</p>","PeriodicalId":29972,"journal":{"name":"Discover Social Science and Health","volume":"3 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10026204/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Covid-19: did higher trust societies fare better?\",\"authors\":\"Bernard H Casey\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44155-023-00035-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Social trust<b>-</b>between governments and people and between individuals-and trust in science were proposed as prerequisites for tackling covid. Others suggested less democratic societies were more able to impose strict rules stopping the virus. These propositions were tested for a group of mainly advanced countries. The dependent variable is cumulated deaths from covid. Findings are broken down between (a) OECD member countries, (b) these and countries having cooperation agreements with it, and (c) all these plus China. They are also broken down by time-between (a) the period before the appearance of \\\"new variants\\\" in late 2020 and (b) the period from then until end September 2021. The best, most parsimonious, models explain nearly half of the changes in the level of deaths. Trust in government improves outcomes, as does interpersonal trust. Vaccine antipathy does not play a role. Also, there is little indication that authoritarian regimes performed better than higher trust societies. In the first period, increasing wealth inequality-indicating a more divided society-is related to higher death rates. Hospital bed availability is important then, but not thereafter. Furthermore, as the pandemic persisted, the importance of pre-existing levels of social trust declined. The paper warns that institutions and cultures cannot easily be transferred from one country to another. Nor would all transfers be desired. It also suggests that some other lessons of what contributed to better outcomes under covid might be relevant for the monkeypox virus-its successor public health emergency.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discover Social Science and Health\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10026204/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discover Social Science and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44155-023-00035-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discover Social Science and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44155-023-00035-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Social trust-between governments and people and between individuals-and trust in science were proposed as prerequisites for tackling covid. Others suggested less democratic societies were more able to impose strict rules stopping the virus. These propositions were tested for a group of mainly advanced countries. The dependent variable is cumulated deaths from covid. Findings are broken down between (a) OECD member countries, (b) these and countries having cooperation agreements with it, and (c) all these plus China. They are also broken down by time-between (a) the period before the appearance of "new variants" in late 2020 and (b) the period from then until end September 2021. The best, most parsimonious, models explain nearly half of the changes in the level of deaths. Trust in government improves outcomes, as does interpersonal trust. Vaccine antipathy does not play a role. Also, there is little indication that authoritarian regimes performed better than higher trust societies. In the first period, increasing wealth inequality-indicating a more divided society-is related to higher death rates. Hospital bed availability is important then, but not thereafter. Furthermore, as the pandemic persisted, the importance of pre-existing levels of social trust declined. The paper warns that institutions and cultures cannot easily be transferred from one country to another. Nor would all transfers be desired. It also suggests that some other lessons of what contributed to better outcomes under covid might be relevant for the monkeypox virus-its successor public health emergency.
期刊介绍:
Discover Social Science and Health is an interdisciplinary, international journal that publishes papers at the intersection of the social and biomedical sciences. Papers should integrate, in both theory and measures, a social perspective (reflecting anthropology, criminology, economics, epidemiology, policy, sociology, etc) and a concern for health (mental and physical). Health, broadly construed, includes biological and other indicators of overall health, symptoms, diseases, diagnoses, treatments, treatment adherence, and related concerns. Drawing on diverse, sound methodologies, submissions may include reports of new empirical findings (including important null findings) and replications, reviews and perspectives that construe prior research and discuss future research agendas, methodological research (including the evaluation of measures, samples, and modeling strategies), and short or long commentaries on topics of wide interest. All submissions should include statements of significance with respect to health and future research. Discover Social Science and Health is an Open Access journal that supports the pre-registration of studies.
Topics
Papers suitable for Discover Social Science and Health will include both social and biomedical theory and data. Illustrative examples of themes include race/ethnicity, sex/gender, socioeconomic, geographic, and other social disparities in health; migration and health; spatial distribution of risk factors and access to healthcare; health and social relationships; interactional processes in healthcare, treatments, and outcomes; life course patterns of health and treatment regimens; cross-national patterns in health and health policies; characteristics of communities and neighborhoods and health; social networks and treatment adherence; stigma and disease progression; methodological studies including psychometric properties of measures frequently used in health research; and commentary and analysis of key concepts, theories, and methods in studies of social science and biomedicine. The journal welcomes submissions that draw on biomarkers of health, genetically-informed and neuroimaging data, psychophysiological measures, and other forms of data that describe physical and mental health, access to health care, treatment, and related constructs.