IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/30493.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating Perceptions of the Relative COVID Risk of Different Social-Distancing Behaviors from Respondents' Pairwise Assessments

Author

Listed:
  • Ori Heffetz
  • Matthew Rabin

Abstract

How do people compare bundles of social-distancing behaviors? During the COVID pandemic, we showed 676 online respondents in the US, UK, and Israel 30 pairs of brief videos of acquaintances meeting. We asked them to indicate which in each pair depicted greater risk of COVID infection. Their choices imply that on average respondents considered talking 14 minutes longer to be as risky as standing 1 foot closer, being indoors as standing 3 feet closer, and removing a properly worn mask by either party as standing 4–5 feet closer. We explore subpopulations and perceived nonlinear and interacted effects of combined behaviors.

Suggested Citation

  • Ori Heffetz & Matthew Rabin, 2022. "Estimating Perceptions of the Relative COVID Risk of Different Social-Distancing Behaviors from Respondents' Pairwise Assessments," NBER Working Papers 30493, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:30493
    Note: AG EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w30493.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:nbr:nberwo:30493. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.