Effects of age, psychological distress, and compassion on people’s decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic
Main Article Content
Abstract
If one thinks of the COVID-19 pandemic as a natural experiment, the most important quasi-experimental manipulation for psychologists was the overall increase in people’s psychological distress. Notably, however, distress in adults decreased as a function their age, revealing a perhaps unexpected resiliency. That resiliency may reflect the well-established decrease in neuroticism with age, but it was also associated with an age-related increase in compassion. This, in turn, was associated with both more social distancing and a greater likelihood of revaccination if recommended. Taken together, these findings suggest an altruistic motivation for such pandemic decisions, which while they may protect the person doing the distancing or getting the vaccination, also protects those around the person who is engaging in these behaviors. Indeed, social distancing may be the most altruistic because it involves giving up desired activities and doing so repeatedly. Finally, it should be noted that the relations among Neuroticism, Distress, and Compassion as well as with Distancing and Vaccination were hardly diminished by statistically controlling for Age, suggesting that the observed relations, both positive and negative, hold throughout adulthood. An important implication of this finding is that decreasing people’s distress may make them more compassionate, regardless of their age. Although a person’s acquaintances and political ideology also matter, decreasing anxiety may be key to increasing prosocial attitudes and behavior.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. Twenge JM, Joiner TE, Rogers ML, Martin GN. Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clin Psychol Sci 2018;6(1):3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702617723376.
3. Hale S, Myerson J, Strube MJ, Green L, Lewandowski AB. Distress signals: Age differences in psychological distress before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2023;20(4): 3549.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043549
4. Myerson J, Strube MJ, Green L, Hale S. Individual differences in COVID-19 mitigation behaviors: The roles of age, gender, psychological state, and financial status. PLoS One 2021;16(9):e0 257658. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257658
5. Myerson J, Strube MJ, Green L, Hale S, Bernstein B. Decision-making during the pandemic: Compassion, trust, and the altruistic paradox. COVID 2023;3(5):744-756.
https://doi.org/10.3390/covid3050055
6. Trivers RL (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly review of biology 1971;46 (1):35-57.
7. Trivers R. Reciprocal altruism: 30 years later. Cooperation in primates and humans: Mechanisms and evolution 2006; 67-83.
8. Enticott J, Dawadi S, Shawyer F, et al. Mental health in Australia: Psychological distress reported in six consecutive cross-sectional national surveys from 2001 to 2018. Front Psychiatry 2022; 13:815904. https://doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.815904
9. Pierce M, Hope H, Ford T, et al. Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population. Lancet Psychiatry 2020;7(10):883-892. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S2215-0366(20)30308-4
10. Zacher H, Rudolph CW. Individual differences and changes in subjective wellbeing during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Am Psychol 2021;76(1):50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110694
11. Daly M, Robinson E. Longitudinal changes in psychological distress in the UK from 2019 to September 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from a large nationally representative study. Psychiatry Res 2021;300:113920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113920
12. Myerson J, Strube MJ, Green L, Hale S, Bernstein B. Differential effects of psychological distress on mitigation and vaccination: A public health conundrum. Frontiers Psychol 2022;13:9230 56. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.923056
13. Luo J, Zhang B, Cao M, et al. The stressful personality: A meta-analytical review of the relation between personality and stress. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2023;27(2):128-194.
14. Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR, Löckenhoff CE. Personality across the life span. Annu Rev Psychol 2019;70:423–448.
15. Van Bavel JJ, Gadarian SK, Knowles E, Ruggeri K. (2024). Political polarization and health. Nat Med 2024;30; 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-024-03307-w
16. Rayner K, Schotter ER, Masson ME, Potter MC, Treiman R. So much to read, so little time: How do we read, and can speed reading help? Psychol Sci Public Interest 2016;17:4–34.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615623267.
17. Zigmond RP, Snaith AS. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.
18. Morey JN, Boggero IA, Scott AB, Segerstrom SC. Current directions in stress and human immune function. Curr Opin in Psychol 2015;5:13-17.
https://doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.03.007
19. Hughes ME, Waite LJ, Hawkley LC, Cacioppo JT. (2004). A short scale for measuring loneliness in large surveys: Results from two population-based studies. Res Aging 2004;26(6):655-672.
https://doi:10.1177/0164027504268574
20. Breslau J, Finucane ML, Locker AR, Baird MD, Roth EA, Collins RL. (2021). A longitudinal study of psychological distress in the United States before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prev Med 2021;143:106362.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106362
21. Bruine de Bruin W. Age differences in COVID-19 risk perceptions and mental health: Evidence from a national US survey conducted in March 2020. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2021; 76(2):e24-e29. https://doi:10.1093/geronb/gbaa074
22. Sparrow EP, Swirsky LT, Kudus F, Spaniol J. Aging and altruism: A meta-analysis. Psychol Aging 2021;36(1):49-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pag0000447
23. Wiepking P, James RN 3rd. Why are the oldest old less generous? Explanations for the unexpected age-related drop in charitable giving. Ageing Soc 2013;33(3):486–510.
24. Del Giudice M, Gangestad SW, Kaplan HS. Life history theory and evolutionary psychology. In: Buss, DM, editor. The handbook of evolutionary psychology – Vol 1: Foundations (2nd ed.), John Wiley & Sons Inc. 2015. pp. 88-114.
25. Uziel L, Seemann M, Schmidt‐Barad T. From being alone to being the only one: Neuroticism is associated with an egocentric shift in an alone context. J Pers 2020;88(2):339-355.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12494.
26. Alessi G. (1992). Models of proximate and ultimate causation in psychology. Am Psychol 1992; 47(11):1359–1370. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.11.1359.
27. Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Fauci AS. A centenary tale of two pandemics: The 1918 influenza pandemic and COVID-19, Part I. Am J Public Health 2021;111(6):1086–1094.
28. Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Fauci AS. A centenary tale of two pandemics: The 1918 influenza pandemic and COVID-19, Part II. Am J Public Health 2021;111(7):1267-1272. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306326
29. Evans WD, Thomas CN, Favatas D, Smyser J, Briggs J. Digital segmentation of priority populations in public health. Health Educ Behav 2019;46:81–89. https://doi.10.1177/1090198119871246
30. Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 2020;395:912–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736.
31. Witte K, Allen M. A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Educ Behav 2000;27(5):591-615.