Summary: Cognitive shortcuts help explain why some people resist or inconsistently follow public health recommendations such as masking and vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Source: University of Notre Dame
If close friends or family who contracted COVID-19 experienced only mild illness and recovered quickly, or if someone nearby had an adverse vaccine reaction, your mind may use that limited experience to assume you would have the same outcome.
This tendency is part of what psychologists call the availability heuristic: a mental shortcut that makes vivid or recent examples seem more representative than they actually are. Heuristics conserve cognitive energy and often produce useful, adaptive judgments—choosing a faster route to work or an easier method to solve a problem, for example.
However, these same cognitive shortcuts can become dangerous in a public health crisis. “Heuristics that normally save time and effort can mislead people about disease risk and protective behaviors during a pandemic,” warn Theodore Beauchaine, William K. Warren Foundation Professor of Psychology at the University of Notre Dame, and his co-authors.
In a recent paper in Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, Beauchaine and colleagues analyze several heuristics that distort risk perception and decision-making related to COVID-19. Their discussion highlights how mental shortcuts influence attitudes toward mask use, vaccination, social distancing, and other infection-avoidance behaviors.
Another common mental shortcut is the representativeness heuristic. When the brain relies on this shortcut, it can produce misleading conclusions—such as assuming only older adults are likely to contract or suffer severely from COVID-19—despite substantial evidence that people of many ages can be infected and hospitalized.
“We may ignore fundamental facts about SARS-CoV-2 and decide to interact with people we believe pose little risk, even though everyone is potentially exposed to this novel virus,” the researchers note.
Two patterns within representativeness pose particular danger. The first, insensitivity to predictability, leads people to conclude that a friend with mild symptoms is not contagious or will not face long-term consequences—an inference that can underestimate transmission risk and post-infection complications. The second, insensitivity to sample size, causes people to generalize from small, nonrandom gatherings and assume those observations reflect the broader population infection rate.
Small social circles often differ dramatically from the general population: members may share the same workplaces, social networks, or risk behaviors, producing infection rates that deviate exponentially from average community rates. Relying on such limited samples can therefore create a false sense of safety and increase opportunities for the virus to spread.
The anchoring heuristic describes our tendency to cling to initial pieces of information, even after new, more accurate data appears. An early example in the pandemic was the initial statement by a top official that masks were ineffective; despite later research demonstrating benefits of mask use, that early message continues to influence some people’s beliefs and behavior.
The concept of heuristics dates back to the work of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in the 1970s. Their research demonstrated that people from all walks of life—including physicians and mental health professionals—rely on mental shortcuts to preserve cognitive resources. Importantly, extensive experience and education do not always eliminate these biases and can sometimes reinforce them.
Beauchaine and colleagues emphasize that recognizing the role of heuristics is essential for improving public health communication and decision-making. Education, awareness campaigns, and targeted research on how heuristics shape behavior can support more accurate risk assessments and safer choices throughout a pandemic.
To better protect ourselves and our communities, the authors recommend designing messages and interventions that counter misleading heuristics—by highlighting representative data, clarifying the limits of anecdotal evidence, and updating initial impressions with clear, repeated evidence showing how behaviors like masking and vaccination reduce transmission and severe outcomes.
About this psychology research news
Author: Colleen Sharkey
Source: University of Notre Dame
Contact: Colleen Sharkey – University of Notre Dame
Image: The image is in the public domain
Original Research: Open access.
Title: “Risk assessment and heuristics: How cognitive shortcuts can fuel the spread of COVID-19” by Annelise A. Madison et al., published in Brain, Behavior, and Immunity
Abstract
Risk assessment and heuristics: How cognitive shortcuts can fuel the spread of COVID-19
Humans rely on multiple layers of defense against pathogens: behavior (for example, avoidance and hygiene), physical skin and mucosal barriers, the rapid generalized innate immune response, and the slower, specific adaptive immune response. SARS-CoV-2 is a novel virus capable of transmission even from people without symptoms, which makes behavioral precautions—such as mask wearing and social distancing—especially important. Given the rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 in many regions, widespread and sometimes inconsistent adherence to public health guidelines presents a puzzle.
Large surveys across the United States during 2020 showed notable declines in adherence to many protective behaviors over time, with the notable exception of steady or increased mask use in some populations. Demographic factors and political affiliation shaped behavior: women, Asian and Black Americans, older adults, those with higher education, and those identifying with certain political affiliations tended to report higher compliance with recommended precautions.
Even individuals who generally follow guidelines can lapse. Common heuristics and cognitive biases—mental shortcuts people use to make rapid judgments—can systematically distort how individuals assess risk and therefore help explain why risky behaviors persist during a pandemic. Understanding these cognitive processes is crucial for developing public health strategies that effectively promote protective behaviors and reduce transmission of COVID-19.