How German and Italian Laypeople Reason about Distributive Shortages during COVID-19

Ronja Demel (), Francesco Grassi, Yasaman Rafiee, Michael R. Waldmann and Annekathrin Schacht
Additional contact information
Ronja Demel: Institute of Psychology, Georg-August University, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
Francesco Grassi: Institute of Psychology, Georg-August University, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
Yasaman Rafiee: Institute of Psychology, Georg-August University, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
Michael R. Waldmann: Institute of Psychology, Georg-August University, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
Annekathrin Schacht: Institute of Psychology, Georg-August University, 37073 Goettingen, Germany

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 19, 1-18

Abstract: (1) Background: The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity to investigate how moral reasoning is influenced by individuals’ exposure to a crisis and by personal, societal and temporal proximity. We examined how Italians and Germans judged different behaviors that arose because of the pandemic, which affected health and societal matters. (2) Methods: Over the course of four months and three assessment periods, we used an observational online survey to assess participants’ judgments regarding seven scenarios that addressed distributive shortages during the pandemic. (3) Results: Overall, there was no clear answering pattern across all scenarios. For a variation of triage and pandemic restrictions, most participants selected a mean value, which can be interpreted as deferring the choice. For the other scenarios, most participants used the extremes of the scale, thereby reflecting a clear opinion of the public regarding the moral issue. In addition, moral reasoning varied across the two countries, assessment periods, fear, and age. (4) Conclusions: By using scenarios that were taken from real-life experiences, the current study addresses criticism that moral research mostly relies on unrealistic scenarios that lack in external validity, plausibility, and proximity to everyday situations. In addition, it shows how lay people regard measures of public health and societal decision-making.

Keywords: moral reasoning; moral dilemmas; COVID-19; coronavirus; corona pandemic; triage; choice deferral (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12067/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12067/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12067-:d:923673

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().