Search for: All records

Abstract. We tested whether temporary social needs satisfaction through social surrogacy would ensure greater willingness to adhere to social distancing recommendations elicited by the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were randomly assigned to social exclusion or inclusion via Cyberball ( n = 534) followed by either a social surrogacy manipulation (imagine favorite TV show), or one of two control states. No restorative effects emerged following a social surrogacy prime. An exploratory analysis considering age as a moderator ( M Age  = 36.89 years, SD = 10.88, range = 19–70 years) found that excluded adults (i.e., middle and older ages) reported more intentions to deviate following surrogacy experiences relative to control experiences; no effects emerged for younger adults in this analysis. We discuss the limitations of social surrogacy in fostering compliance with social distancing initiatives. 

Abstract Humans are an intensely social species with a pervasive need for affiliation and social interaction. However, satisfying this fundamental motive comes with risk, including increased exposure to others' communicable pathogens. Consequently, disease mitigation strategies may require humans to downregulate their interest in socialization when pathogenic threat is elevated. Subsequent unsatisfactorily met affiliation needs can result in downregulation of disease avoidance goals in the service of social inclusion, albeit at the cost of putting individuals at greater risk for pathogen exposure. The current review summarizes past work in social and evolutionary psychology demonstrating affiliation and disease‐avoidance motivation tradeoffs. We then apply this research by articulating strategies to support and maintain social distancing behaviors in the face of loneliness, which is of particular importance during pandemic outbreaks such as COVID‐19. Finally, we propose novel and integrative research questions related to affiliation/pathogen‐avoidance tradeoffs.