Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct 10:13:951757.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.951757. eCollection 2022.

How perceived scarcity predicted cooperation during early pandemic lockdown

Claudia Civai  1 , Marta Caserotti  2 , Elisa Carrus  1 , Inge Huijsmans  3 , Enrico Rubaltelli  2
Affiliations

How perceived scarcity predicted cooperation during early pandemic lockdown

Claudia Civai et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Both material resources (jobs, healthcare), and socio-psychological resources (social contact) decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated whether individual differences in perceived material and socio-psychological scarcity experienced during the pandemic predicted preference for cooperation, measured using two Public Good Games (PGGs), where participants contributed money or time (i.e., hours indoors contributed to shorten the lockdown). Material scarcity had no relationship with cooperation. Increased perceived scarcity of socio-psychological wellbeing (e.g., connecting with family) predicted increased preference for cooperation, suggesting that missing social contact fosters prosociality, whilst perceived scarcity of freedom (e.g., limited movement) predicted decreased willingness to spend time indoors to shorten the lockdown. The importance of considering individual differences in scarcity perception to best promote norm compliance is discussed.

Keywords: cooperation; pandemic lockdown; prosociality; scarcity; social norms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Scree plot of the EFA: (A) Material Scarcity factors; (B) Socio-Psychological Scarcity factors.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Factor loadings for each item: (A) Material Scarcity loadings; (B) Socio-Psychological Scarcity loadings.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Adler N., Stewart J. (2007). The MacArthur Scale of subjective Social Status and Psychosocial Working Group MacArthur Research Network on SES & Health. Available at: http://www.macses.ucsf.edu/research/psychosocial/subjective.php (Accessed April 20, 2020).
    1. Agnoli S., Pittarello A., Hysenbelli D., Rubaltelli E. (2015). “Give, but give until it hurts”: the modulatory role of trait emotional intelligence on the motivation to help. PLoS One 10:e0130704. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130704, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anand P., Lea S. (2011). The psychology and behavioural economics of poverty. J. Econ. Psychol. 32, 284–293.
    1. Association of Taxation Technicians (ATT) (2020). COVID-19: Job retention scheme to 31 October 2020. Available at: https://www.att.org.uk/Covid-19-job-retention-scheme-31-october-2020 (Accessed May 20, 2021).
    1. Bago B., Bonnefon J. F., De Neys W. (2021). Intuition rather than deliberation determines selfish and prosocial choices. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 150, 1081–1094. doi: 10.1037/xge0000968, PMID: - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources