當前世界,一些關鍵人群的新冠肺炎疫情經(jīng)歷可能導致今后發(fā)生的大流行病情況更加糟糕,這一觀點聽上去不可思議,但卻可能是事實。
這個驚人的理論來自于一項新的研究,該項研究由加利福尼亞大學伯克利分校(University of California at Berkeley)的巴里·艾肯格林、歐洲復興開發(fā)銀行(European Bank for Reconstruction and Development)的杰瓦特·吉拉伊·阿克索伊以及蘇塞克斯大學(University of Sussex)的奧坤·薩卡合作開展。
他們調(diào)查了全世界超過75,000名大流行病經(jīng)歷者的態(tài)度和行為,重點研究了疫情發(fā)生時處于18歲至25歲年齡段的人群。心理學家報告稱,18歲至25歲是人們長期態(tài)度形成階段,而該研究受訪群體所形成的某些態(tài)度在未來大流行病中可能會害人又害己。研究人員發(fā)現(xiàn),即使在一場疫情結束后數(shù)十年,人們在那些敏感脆弱時期的經(jīng)歷會“大大降低人們對科學家及其工作成果的信任度。”
更糟糕的是,這些人更易對疫苗持懷疑態(tài)度,并且不太可能讓他們的孩子接種疫苗。
在這個由科學主宰的時代,很難想象會有人以這種方式應對當今的疫情。全球對科學的信任程度達到了科學現(xiàn)狀指數(shù)(State of Science Index)年度調(diào)研啟動三年來的最高水平,該項調(diào)研由3M公司提供贊助;54%的受訪者表示,新冠肺炎疫情使他們更有可能倡導科學。調(diào)查中對科學持懷疑態(tài)度的受訪者人數(shù)首次下降。
然而,艾肯格林團隊的發(fā)現(xiàn)可能在這場非比尋常的疫情過后仍然成立。這是因為人們對科學的態(tài)度和對科學家的態(tài)度大不相同。研究人員發(fā)現(xiàn),在脆弱敏感時期經(jīng)歷一場大流行病并不會影響人們對科學的態(tài)度;理論上,人們認可科學的價值,因為它能夠促進社會的發(fā)展。研究人員寫道:“如果將以往發(fā)生的大流行病視為一個向導,病毒……將降低人們對某些科學家的信任,惡化人們對科學家學術誠信的認知,削弱人們對科學活動可以造福大眾的信心。”
這些研究結果與幾年前進行的其他研究的結果一致。當壞事發(fā)生時,人們傾向于責備個人,而不是整個機構。除此之外,研究人員在以往的調(diào)查中指出:“很大一部分受訪者認為科學家之間存在分歧,證明了科學家的結論都是基于個人信念(而不是數(shù)據(jù)和方法問題),或者僅僅表明相關研究人員不稱職。在疫情迅速蔓延的情況下,也有可能出現(xiàn)這一情況。”
研究表明,最惡劣的破壞性態(tài)度在低收入國家以及人均醫(yī)生數(shù)量很少的國家最為強烈,因此我們有理由期望,至少發(fā)達國家的人們在此次新冠疫情過后能夠避免產(chǎn)生這種態(tài)度。但是,另一項因素可能對美國和歐洲尤其不利。研究表明,在最嚴重的疫情過后,人們反科學家、反疫苗的態(tài)度會更加強烈,而新冠疫情對美國和歐洲的打擊幾乎比任何其他地方都嚴重;在人們的記憶中,這些國家還沒有經(jīng)歷過像新冠疫情這樣嚴重的大流行病。
這項新研究為決策制定者提供了非常有價值的幫助,他們希望在今后發(fā)生的大流行病中可以對科學、科學家以及疫苗的制定提供最大的支持。不要試圖去說服老年人,他們也束手無策。不用擔心孩子們,他們的長期態(tài)度要等到以后才會形成。從今天開始,把全部焦點放在Z世代身上。下一次疫情可能要到數(shù)年之后,但也許現(xiàn)在我們就能夠對其結局了解一二了。(財富中文網(wǎng))
翻譯:郝秀
審校:汪皓
當前世界,一些關鍵人群的新冠肺炎疫情經(jīng)歷可能導致今后發(fā)生的大流行病情況更加糟糕,這一觀點聽上去不可思議,但卻可能是事實。
這個驚人的理論來自于一項新的研究,該項研究由加利福尼亞大學伯克利分校(University of California at Berkeley)的巴里·艾肯格林、歐洲復興開發(fā)銀行(European Bank for Reconstruction and Development)的杰瓦特·吉拉伊·阿克索伊以及蘇塞克斯大學(University of Sussex)的奧坤·薩卡合作開展。
他們調(diào)查了全世界超過75,000名大流行病經(jīng)歷者的態(tài)度和行為,重點研究了疫情發(fā)生時處于18歲至25歲年齡段的人群。心理學家報告稱,18歲至25歲是人們長期態(tài)度形成階段,而該研究受訪群體所形成的某些態(tài)度在未來大流行病中可能會害人又害己。研究人員發(fā)現(xiàn),即使在一場疫情結束后數(shù)十年,人們在那些敏感脆弱時期的經(jīng)歷會“大大降低人們對科學家及其工作成果的信任度。”
更糟糕的是,這些人更易對疫苗持懷疑態(tài)度,并且不太可能讓他們的孩子接種疫苗。
在這個由科學主宰的時代,很難想象會有人以這種方式應對當今的疫情。全球對科學的信任程度達到了科學現(xiàn)狀指數(shù)(State of Science Index)年度調(diào)研啟動三年來的最高水平,該項調(diào)研由3M公司提供贊助;54%的受訪者表示,新冠肺炎疫情使他們更有可能倡導科學。調(diào)查中對科學持懷疑態(tài)度的受訪者人數(shù)首次下降。
然而,艾肯格林團隊的發(fā)現(xiàn)可能在這場非比尋常的疫情過后仍然成立。這是因為人們對科學的態(tài)度和對科學家的態(tài)度大不相同。研究人員發(fā)現(xiàn),在脆弱敏感時期經(jīng)歷一場大流行病并不會影響人們對科學的態(tài)度;理論上,人們認可科學的價值,因為它能夠促進社會的發(fā)展。研究人員寫道:“如果將以往發(fā)生的大流行病視為一個向導,病毒……將降低人們對某些科學家的信任,惡化人們對科學家學術誠信的認知,削弱人們對科學活動可以造福大眾的信心。”
這些研究結果與幾年前進行的其他研究的結果一致。當壞事發(fā)生時,人們傾向于責備個人,而不是整個機構。除此之外,研究人員在以往的調(diào)查中指出:“很大一部分受訪者認為科學家之間存在分歧,證明了科學家的結論都是基于個人信念(而不是數(shù)據(jù)和方法問題),或者僅僅表明相關研究人員不稱職。在疫情迅速蔓延的情況下,也有可能出現(xiàn)這一情況。”
研究表明,最惡劣的破壞性態(tài)度在低收入國家以及人均醫(yī)生數(shù)量很少的國家最為強烈,因此我們有理由期望,至少發(fā)達國家的人們在此次新冠疫情過后能夠避免產(chǎn)生這種態(tài)度。但是,另一項因素可能對美國和歐洲尤其不利。研究表明,在最嚴重的疫情過后,人們反科學家、反疫苗的態(tài)度會更加強烈,而新冠疫情對美國和歐洲的打擊幾乎比任何其他地方都嚴重;在人們的記憶中,這些國家還沒有經(jīng)歷過像新冠疫情這樣嚴重的大流行病。
這項新研究為決策制定者提供了非常有價值的幫助,他們希望在今后發(fā)生的大流行病中可以對科學、科學家以及疫苗的制定提供最大的支持。不要試圖去說服老年人,他們也束手無策。不用擔心孩子們,他們的長期態(tài)度要等到以后才會形成。從今天開始,把全部焦點放在Z世代身上。下一次疫情可能要到數(shù)年之后,但也許現(xiàn)在我們就能夠對其結局了解一二了。(財富中文網(wǎng))
翻譯:郝秀
審校:汪皓
It sounds crazy, but it could be true: The current pandemic experience of a crucial cohort of the world population could make future pandemics worse.
The surprising evidence comes from new research by Barry Eichengreen of the University of California at Berkeley, Cevat Giray Aksoy of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and Orkun Saka of the University of Sussex.
They examined the attitudes and behavior of more than 75,000 people worldwide who had lived through an epidemic, focusing on those who were age 18 to 25 at the time. That age range is when individuals form long-lasting attitudes, psychologists report, and some of the attitudes formed by those in the study could endanger themselves and others in a future pandemic. Even decades after enduring an epidemic, the researchers found, the experience during those impressionable years “significantly reduces trust in scientists and in the benefits of their work.”
Even worse, those people are more skeptical of vaccines and are less likely to get their children vaccinated.
It’s hard to believe anyone could respond that way to today’s pandemic, when science is the hero. Worldwide trust in science is the highest in the three years that 3M has been sponsoring an annual State of Science Index; 54% of respondents said COVID-19 has made them more likely to advocate for science. Skepticism of science declined for the first time in the survey.
Yet the findings of the Eichengreen team could hold up even after this extraordinary pandemic. That’s because there turns out to be a significant difference between people’s attitudes toward science and their attitudes toward scientists. The researchers found that going through an epidemic in the impressionable years didn’t affect attitudes toward science as an endeavor; in the abstract, people approve of it for its potential to improve society. But “if past epidemics are a guide,” the researchers write, “the virus...will reduce trust in individual scientists, worsen perceptions of their honesty, and weaken the belief that their activities benefit the public.”
Those results are consistent with other research going back years. When bad things happen, people tend to blame individuals rather than institutions. In addition, the researchers note that in previous surveys “a significant share of respondents take disagreement among scientists, which is not unlikely in the context of a swiftly unfolding pandemic, as evidence that their conclusions are based on personal belief (rather than on issues of data and methodology), or as simply indicating that the investigators in question are incompetent.”
There’s reason to hope that at least developed countries might escape the worst of the damaging attitudes that may be sparked by this pandemic, since the research found that such attitudes were strongest in countries with low incomes and few physicians per capita. But another factor could be especially bad news for the U.S. and Europe. In the study, anti-scientist, anti-vaccine attitudes were stronger after the most severe epidemics, and COVID-19 has hit the U.S. and Europe harder than almost anywhere else; those countries haven’t experienced a pandemic as severe as COVID-19 in living memory.
This new research offers valuable help to policymakers hoping to maximize support for science, scientists, and vaccines in future pandemics. Don’t bother trying to persuade oldsters; they’re beyond help. And don’t worry about kids; their lasting attitudes won’t be formed until later. Go all in on Gen Z, starting today. The next pandemic could be years away, but it’s outcome may be partially determined right now.