IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/yp2jv.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

When Face Masks Signal Social Identity: Explaining the Deep Face-Mask Divide During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Powdthavee, Nattavudh
  • Riyanto, Yohanes Eko
  • Wong, Erwin C. L.
  • Xiong-Wei, Jonathan Yeo
  • Qi-Yu, Chan

Abstract

With the COVID-19 pandemic still raging and the vaccination program still rolling out, there continues to be an immediate need for public health officials to better understand the mechanisms behind the deep and perpetual divide over face masks in America. Using a random sample of Americans (N=615), following a pre-registered experimental design and analytic plan, we first demonstrated that mask wearers were not innately more cooperative as individuals than non-mask wearers in the Prisoners’ Dilemma (PD) game when information about their own and the other person’s mask usage was not salient. However, we found strong, revealed preference evidence of in-group favoritism among both mask and non-mask wearers when information about the other partner’s mask usage was known. Holding other things constant, non-mask wearers were 23 percentage points less likely to cooperate than mask wearers when facing a mask-wearing partner, and 26 percentage points more likely to cooperate than mask wearers when facing a non-mask wearing partner. Our analysis suggests social identity effects to be one of the main drivers of people’s decision whether to wear or shun face masks during the pandemic. Policy makers should therefore take social perception of face masks into account when designing not only what public messages to deliver, but also who to deliver these messages.

Suggested Citation

  • Powdthavee, Nattavudh & Riyanto, Yohanes Eko & Wong, Erwin C. L. & Xiong-Wei, Jonathan Yeo & Qi-Yu, Chan, 2021. "When Face Masks Signal Social Identity: Explaining the Deep Face-Mask Divide During the COVID-19 Pandemic," OSF Preprints yp2jv, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:yp2jv
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/yp2jv
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6071c23951f7ae0410f52e81/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/yp2jv?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorenz Goette & David Huffman & Stephan Meier, 2006. "The Impact of Group Membership on Cooperation and Norm Enforcement: Evidence Using Random Assignment to Real Social Groups," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 212-216, May.
    2. Tang, Simone & Morewedge, Carey M. & Larrick, Richard P. & Klein, Jill G., 2017. "Disloyalty aversion: Greater reluctance to bet against close others than the self," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Johanna Catherine Maclean & John Buckell & Joachim Marti, 2019. "Information Source and Cigarettes: Experimental Evidence on the Messenger Effect," NBER Working Papers 25632, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin & Wickens, Chris, 2016. "oTree—An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 88-97.
    5. Iris Bohnet & Fiona Greig & Benedikt Herrmann & Richard Zeckhauser, 2008. "Betrayal Aversion: Evidence from Brazil, China, Oman, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 294-310, March.
    6. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Htay-Wah Saw & Dana P. Goldman, 2020. "Political polarization in US residents’ COVID-19 risk perceptions, policy preferences, and protective behaviors," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 177-194, October.
    7. Colin J. Worby & Hsiao-Han Chang, 2020. "Face mask use in the general population and optimal resource allocation during the COVID-19 pandemic," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Meer, Jonathan, 2011. "Brother, can you spare a dime? Peer pressure in charitable solicitation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 926-941.
    9. Yan Chen & Sherry Xin Li, 2009. "Group Identity and Social Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 431-457, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eitan Altman & Mandar Datar & Francesco Pellegrini & Samir Perlaza & Daniel Sadoc Menasché, 2022. "The Mask Game with Multiple Populations," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 147-167, March.
    2. Hunter, P.V. & Ward, H.A. & Puurveen, G., 2023. "Trust as a key measure of quality and safety after the restriction of family contact in Canadian long-term care settings during the COVID-19 pandemic," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 18-27.
    3. Soo-Hyun Sung & You-Sang Baik & Ji-Eun Han & Eun-Jin Lee & Jihye Kim & Minjung Park & Ji-Yeon Lee & Jang-Kyung Park & Jung-Youn Park & Eunkyung Lee, 2022. "Traditional Korean Medicine Home Care for the Older Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-13, January.
    4. Ifie, Kemefasu & Mousavi, Sahar & Xie, Junyi, 2023. "Enforcement of service rules by frontline employees: A conceptual model and research propositions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rémi Suchon & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "Does upward mobility harm trust?," Post-Print halshs-01659021, HAL.
    2. Suchon, Rémi & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "The effects of status mobility and group identity on trust," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 430-463.
    3. Meier, Stephan & Pierce, Lamar & Vaccaro, Antonino & La Cara, Barbara, 2016. "Trust and in-group favoritism in a culture of crime," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 132(PA), pages 78-92.
    4. Kei Tsutsui & Daniel Zizzo, 2014. "Group status, minorities and trust," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(2), pages 215-244, June.
    5. Lorenz Goette & Egon Tripodi, 2021. "Social Influence in Prosocial Behavior: Evidence from a Large-Scale Experiment [“Social Distance and Social Decisions]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 2373-2398.
    6. Karla Hoff & Mayuresh Kshetramade & Ernst Fehr, 2011. "Caste and Punishment: the Legacy of Caste Culture in Norm Enforcement," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(556), pages 449-475, November.
    7. Bernard, Mark & Hett, Florian & Mechtel, Mario, 2016. "Social identity and social free-riding," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 4-17.
    8. Chavanne, David & McCabe, Kevin & Paganelli, Maria Pia, 2011. "Whose money is it anyway? Ingroups and distributive behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 31-39, January.
    9. Meer, Jonathan, 2017. "Does fundraising create new giving?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 82-93.
    10. Sun-Ki Chai & Dolgorsuren Dorj & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2018. "Cultural Values and Behavior in Dictator, Ultimatum, and Trust Games: An Experimental Study," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experimental Economics and Culture, volume 20, pages 89-166, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    11. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Peterle, Emmanuel, 2018. "Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 220-236.
    12. Drouvelis, Michalis & Marx, Benjamin M., 2022. "Can charitable appeals identify and exploit belief heterogeneity?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 631-649.
    13. Ernst Fehr, 2009. "On The Economics and Biology of Trust," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 235-266, 04-05.
    14. Taha Movahedi, 2020. "Group Uncertainty and Social Preferences," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2020-07, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    15. Erik Lindqvist & Robert Östling, 2013. "Identity and redistribution," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 469-491, June.
    16. Lohse, Johannes & McDonald, Rebecca, 2021. "Absolute groupishness and the demand for information," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242454, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    17. Yuning Tang & Qinxin Guo & Junyi Shen, 2022. "Revisiting the Effects of Group Identity and Information Diversity in a Leader-member Public Goods Experiment," Discussion Paper Series DP2022-35, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    18. Drouvelis, Michalis & Malaeb, Bilal & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Wahba, Jackline, 2021. "Cooperation in a fragmented society: Experimental evidence on Syrian refugees and natives in Lebanon," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 176-191.
    19. Masella, Paolo & Meier, Stephan & Zahn, Philipp, 2014. "Incentives and group identity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 12-25.
    20. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al‐Nowaihi, 2021. "Identity and Redistribution: Theory and Evidence," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 499-531, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:yp2jv. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.