IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i3p1110-d484642.html

Sex Differences in Spatial Activity and Anxiety Levels in the COVID-19 Pandemic from Evolutionary Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Olga Semenova

    (Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences, 119334 Moscow, Russia)

  • Julia Apalkova

    (Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences, 119334 Moscow, Russia)

  • Marina Butovskaya

    (Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences, 119334 Moscow, Russia)

Abstract

Despite the enforced lockdown regime in late March 2020 in Russia, the phenomenon of the continued virus spreading highlighted the importance of studies investigating the range of biosocial attributes and spectrum of individual motivations underlying the permanent presence of the substantial level of spatial activity. For this matter, we conducted a set of surveys between March and June 2020 (N = 492). We found that an individual’s health attitude is the most consistent factor explaining mobility differences. However, our data suggested that wariness largely determines adequate health attitudes; hence, a higher level of wariness indirectly reduced individual mobility. Comparative analysis revealed the critical biosocial differences between the two sexes, potentially rooted in the human evolutionary past. Females were predisposed to express more wariness in the face of new environmental risks; therefore, they minimize their mobility and outdoor contacts. In contrast to them, the general level of spatial activity reported by males was significantly higher. Wariness in the males’ sample was less associated with the novel virus threat, but to a great extent, it was predicted by the potential economic losses variable. These findings correspond to the evolutionary predictions of sexual specialization and the division of family roles.

Suggested Citation

  • Olga Semenova & Julia Apalkova & Marina Butovskaya, 2021. "Sex Differences in Spatial Activity and Anxiety Levels in the COVID-19 Pandemic from Evolutionary Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1110-:d:484642
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1110/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1110/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nigel Nicholson & Emma Soane & Mark Fenton-O'Creevy & Paul Willman, 2005. "Personality and domain-specific risk taking," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 157-176, March.
    2. Thiemo Fetzer & Lukas Hensel & Johannes Hermle & Christopher Roth, 2021. "Coronavirus Perceptions and Economic Anxiety," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 103(5), pages 968-978, December.
    3. Christine R. Harris & Michael Jenkins & Dale Glaser, 2006. "Gender differences in risk assessment: Why do women take fewer risks than men?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 48-63, July.
    4. Tobias Greitemeyer & Andreas Kastenmüller & Peter Fischer, 2013. "Romantic motives and risk-taking: an evolutionary approach," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 19-38, January.
    5. Yang Xu & Shih-Lung Shaw & Ziliang Zhao & Ling Yin & Feng Lu & Jie Chen & Zhixiang Fang & Qingquan Li, 2016. "Another Tale of Two Cities: Understanding Human Activity Space Using Actively Tracked Cellphone Location Data," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 106(2), pages 489-502, March.
    6. Paul Slovic, 1999. "Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk‐Assessment Battlefield," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 689-701, August.
    7. Julio Torales & Marcelo O’Higgins & João Mauricio Castaldelli-Maia & Antonio Ventriglio, 2020. "The outbreak of COVID-19 coronavirus and its impact on global mental health," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 66(4), pages 317-320, June.
    8. Fenichel, Eli P., 2013. "Economic considerations for social distancing and behavioral based policies during an epidemic," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 440-451.
    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. Marina L. Butovskaya & Valentina N. Burkova & Ashley K. Randall & Silvia Donato & Julija N. Fedenok & Lauren Hocker & Kai M. Kline & Khodabakhsh Ahmadi & Ahmad M. Alghraibeh & Fathil Bakir Mutsher All, 2021. "Cross-Cultural Perspectives on the Role of Empathy during COVID-19’s First Wave," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-35, July.
    2. Valentina N. Burkova & Marina L. Butovskaya & Ashley K. Randall & Julija N. Fedenok & Khodabakhsh Ahmadi & Ahmad M. Alghraibeh & Fathil Bakir Mutsher Allami & Fadime Suata Alpaslan & Mohammad Ahmad Ab, 2021. "Predictors of Anxiety in the COVID-19 Pandemic from a Global Perspective: Data from 23 Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, April.

    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. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "How Safe Is Safe Enough for Self‐Driving Vehicles?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 315-325, February.
    2. Andeltová, Lucie & Catacutan, Delia C. & Wünscher, Tobias & Holm-Müller, Karin, 2019. "Gender aspects in action- and outcome-based payments for ecosystem services—A tree planting field trial in Kenya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 13-22.
    3. Samantha Garcia & Suellen Hopfer & Elouise Botes & Samuel Greiff, 2022. "Associations between Coronavirus Crisis Perception, Perceived Economic Risk of Coronavirus, General Self-Efficacy, and Coronavirus Anxiety at the Start of the Pandemic: Differences by Gender and Race," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-15, March.
    4. BARBER Dennis III & SAADATMAND Yassaman & KAVOORI Thomas, 2016. "Gender And Financial Risk: The U.S. And Brazil," Studies in Business and Economics, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 11(1), pages 15-25, April.
    5. Boto-García, David, 2023. "Investigating the two-way relationship between mobility flows and COVID-19 cases," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    6. Huhtala, Anni & Remes, Piia, 2017. "Quantifying the social costs of nuclear energy: Perceived risk of accident at nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 320-331.
    7. Saira Asif & Muhammad Rizwan Yaseen & Sofia Anwar & Muhammad Faraz Riaz, 2024. "Impact of Socio Economic, Demographic and Psychological Factors on Risk Taking Behavior: A Case Study of Punjab," Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 13(3), pages 102-108.
    8. Huhtala, Anni & Remes, Piia, 2016. "Dimming Hopes for Nuclear Power: Quantifying the Social Costs of Perceptions of Risks," Working Papers 57, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Roxanne E. Lewis & Michael G. Tyshenko, 2009. "The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 714-728, May.
    10. Toni M. Rudisill & Lauren Olivia Barbee & Brian Hendricks, 2023. "Characteristics of Fatal, Pedestrian-Involved, Motor Vehicle Crashes in West Virginia: A Cross-Sectional and Spatial Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    12. Brodeur, Abel & Clark, Andrew E. & Fleche, Sarah & Powdthavee, Nattavudh, 2021. "COVID-19, lockdowns and well-being: Evidence from Google Trends," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    13. Breaban, Adriana & van de Kuilen, Gijs & Noussair, Charles, 2016. "Prudence, Personality, Cognitive Ability and Emotional State," Other publications TiSEM 9a01a5ab-e03d-49eb-9cd7-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Julio Torales & Iván Barrios & Osvaldo Melgarejo & Noelia Ruiz Díaz & Marcelo O’Higgins & Rodrigo Navarro & Diego Amarilla & José Almirón-Santacruz & Israel González-Urbieta & Tomás Caycho-Rod, 2024. "Hope, resilience and subjective happiness among general population of Paraguay in the post COVID-19 pandemic," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 70(3), pages 489-497, May.
    15. Sleesman, Dustin J., 2019. "Pushing through the tension while stuck in the mud: Paradox mindset and escalation of commitment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 83-96.
    16. Miescu, Mirela & Rossi, Raffaele, 2021. "COVID-19-induced shocks and uncertainty," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    17. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2018. "Gender & Collaboration," Working Papers 856, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    18. Mary Callaghan & Colette Kelly & Michal Molcho, 2015. "Exploring traditional and cyberbullying among Irish adolescents," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 60(2), pages 199-206, February.
    19. Louis-Philippe Beland & Abel Brodeur & Taylor Wright, 2020. "COVID-19, Stay-at-Home Orders and Employment: Evidence from CPS Data," Carleton Economic Papers 20-04, Carleton University, Department of Economics, revised 19 May 2020.
    20. Matthew Goodkin-Gold & Michael Kremer & Christopher M. Snyder & Heidi Williams, 2024. "Optimal Vaccine Subsidies for Epidemic Diseases," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(4), pages 895-909, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1110-:d:484642. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.