一夫一妻制可以预防COVID-19?非一夫一妻制的耻辱和风险(错误)的看法

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy Pub Date : 2022-09-27 DOI:10.1111/asap.12325
Terri D. Conley, Jennifer L. Piemonte, Ishita Shukla, Ananya Mangla, Nainika Mateti, Soha Tariq
{"title":"一夫一妻制可以预防COVID-19?非一夫一妻制的耻辱和风险(错误)的看法","authors":"Terri D. Conley,&nbsp;Jennifer L. Piemonte,&nbsp;Ishita Shukla,&nbsp;Ananya Mangla,&nbsp;Nainika Mateti,&nbsp;Soha Tariq","doi":"10.1111/asap.12325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>COVID-19 public health messages largely communicated that Americans were “safer at home.” Implicit in this advice are messages about protections ostensibly also offered by monogamy–that having more relationships is always more dangerous than having fewer relationships and that closer relationships are always safer–from a disease transmission perspective–than unfamiliar relationships. These heuristics may have led people to discount other COVID-19 dangers (such as spending more time with others of unknown infection status) and to ignore COVID-specific safety measures (such as mask-wearing, and ventilation). We conducted three studies in which we used experimental vignettes to assess people's perceptions of COVID-risky targets in monogamous relationships with a close, committed partner versus targets who were described as non-monogamous with casual partners but relatively COVID-safe. Participants perceived monogamous-but-COVID-riskier targets as more responsible and safer from COVID-19. Non-monogamy stigma seems to extend analogously to COVID-19 risk. Public health messages that fail to attend to the specifics and nuances of close relationships risk contributing to this stigma and ultimately undermining the goals of reducing the spread of infectious disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"22 3","pages":"763-793"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9538616/pdf/ASAP-9999-0.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Monogamy as protection against COVID-19?: Non-monogamy stigma and risk (Mis)perception\",\"authors\":\"Terri D. Conley,&nbsp;Jennifer L. Piemonte,&nbsp;Ishita Shukla,&nbsp;Ananya Mangla,&nbsp;Nainika Mateti,&nbsp;Soha Tariq\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/asap.12325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>COVID-19 public health messages largely communicated that Americans were “safer at home.” Implicit in this advice are messages about protections ostensibly also offered by monogamy–that having more relationships is always more dangerous than having fewer relationships and that closer relationships are always safer–from a disease transmission perspective–than unfamiliar relationships. These heuristics may have led people to discount other COVID-19 dangers (such as spending more time with others of unknown infection status) and to ignore COVID-specific safety measures (such as mask-wearing, and ventilation). We conducted three studies in which we used experimental vignettes to assess people's perceptions of COVID-risky targets in monogamous relationships with a close, committed partner versus targets who were described as non-monogamous with casual partners but relatively COVID-safe. Participants perceived monogamous-but-COVID-riskier targets as more responsible and safer from COVID-19. Non-monogamy stigma seems to extend analogously to COVID-19 risk. Public health messages that fail to attend to the specifics and nuances of close relationships risk contributing to this stigma and ultimately undermining the goals of reducing the spread of infectious disease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"22 3\",\"pages\":\"763-793\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9538616/pdf/ASAP-9999-0.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.12325\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.12325","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

COVID-19的公共卫生信息主要传达的是美国人“在家更安全”。这种建议暗含着一夫一妻制表面上也提供的保护信息——拥有更多的关系总是比拥有更少的关系更危险,而从疾病传播的角度来看,更亲密的关系总是比不熟悉的关系更安全。这些启发式方法可能导致人们忽视了COVID-19的其他危险(例如与感染状况未知的其他人共度更多时间),并忽视了针对COVID-19的安全措施(例如戴口罩和通风)。我们进行了三项研究,在这些研究中,我们使用实验小片段来评估人们对与亲密、忠诚的伴侣建立一夫一妻制关系中有covid - 11风险的目标的看法,以及被描述为与随意伴侣建立非一夫一妻制但相对安全的目标的看法。参与者认为,一夫一妻制但面临COVID-19风险的目标更负责任,更安全。非一夫一妻制的耻辱似乎类似地延伸到COVID-19风险。如果公共卫生信息没有注意到亲密关系的具体细节和细微差别,就有可能助长这种耻辱,并最终破坏减少传染病传播的目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Monogamy as protection against COVID-19?: Non-monogamy stigma and risk (Mis)perception

COVID-19 public health messages largely communicated that Americans were “safer at home.” Implicit in this advice are messages about protections ostensibly also offered by monogamy–that having more relationships is always more dangerous than having fewer relationships and that closer relationships are always safer–from a disease transmission perspective–than unfamiliar relationships. These heuristics may have led people to discount other COVID-19 dangers (such as spending more time with others of unknown infection status) and to ignore COVID-specific safety measures (such as mask-wearing, and ventilation). We conducted three studies in which we used experimental vignettes to assess people's perceptions of COVID-risky targets in monogamous relationships with a close, committed partner versus targets who were described as non-monogamous with casual partners but relatively COVID-safe. Participants perceived monogamous-but-COVID-riskier targets as more responsible and safer from COVID-19. Non-monogamy stigma seems to extend analogously to COVID-19 risk. Public health messages that fail to attend to the specifics and nuances of close relationships risk contributing to this stigma and ultimately undermining the goals of reducing the spread of infectious disease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Recent articles in ASAP have examined social psychological methods in the study of economic and social justice including ageism, heterosexism, racism, sexism, status quo bias and other forms of discrimination, social problems such as climate change, extremism, homelessness, inter-group conflict, natural disasters, poverty, and terrorism, and social ideals such as democracy, empowerment, equality, health, and trust.
期刊最新文献
Associations between negative sexual messaging in childhood and sex guilt in adulthood Anti‐egalitarianism motivates denial of male privilege Do I have to blame the perpetrator if I can't blame the victim anymore? Bystander responsibility in contact sexual violence scenarios Dehumanization in the United States carceral system: Pathways to policy reform Expectancy violations after moral transgressions: Exploring the role of moral disengagement on online vindictive word of mouth
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1