An assumption was made early on in the coronavirus pandemic response. It goes something like this: If we tell people that wearing masks and social distancing will protect vulnerable others, they’ll want to do both. Why? Because most people don’t want to be selfish.
Let’s look at this reasoning. First, wearing masks and social distancing from vulnerable people require empathy. That’s not too much to ask. Right? But wait. Empathy is not limitless. Nor, as psychologist Paul Ekman explains, does it always lead to compassionate action.
As a young researcher in preventive medicine working to encourage people to protect themselves from sexually transmitted diseases, I developed a persuasive protocol. On paper it was beautiful. However, five minutes into the first hospital waiting room intervention a young woman exclaimed, “I can’t do any of this!” She knew the dangers of STDs, but her life didn’t allow the steps our team was promoting. Listening to her and others, we learned ways of making it possible for people to protect themselves on their own terms – with techniques and habits suited to their lives.
Often, making the assumption that people will do what you consider the right thing is a surefire way to miss the mark. I don’t mean to blame medical experts who are pushing for empathic actions; I’m simply waving a red flag about acting on untested assumptions. To effectively slow the infection rate of Covid-19, we must understand the various target populations involved, acknowledge the obstacles they face to changing behavior, develop customized messages that they’ll likely heed for the long term and be sure these are delivered by the right people.
It’s understandable that some public health officials see one size fits all as a logical approach to take when time is of the essence. Unfortunately, it’s not working. Effective persuasion isn’t about addressing what people should do, so much as what they can do. It takes listening and learning – and the sooner the better.
