"How big do you think the probability that the new coronavirus will trigger a life-threatening illness in you over the next twelve months?" In the past few months, this question was asked to around 5800 participants in the socio-economic panel, a long-term study that is ongoing in Germany. A percentage was requested as an answer.
Anyone who, given the reports on the protests against the corona measures, suspects that the respondents rate their personal risk as very low, is wrong. The opposite is the case: the result suggests that people overall overestimate their personal risk, but that individual risk factors such as previous illnesses are definitely considered.
The respondents stated on average that there was a probability of around 26 percent that they would get life-threatening from Covid-19 in the coming year, reports Ralph Hertwig's team from the Max Planck Institute for Human Development. Older people and people with previous illnesses estimate their risk to be higher on average than younger people and people without previous illnesses - which is realistic. In other areas, too, the researchers see that the respondents assessed their risk according to their personal circumstances. For example, people in eastern Germany reported a lower risk - in fact, there were also lower numbers of infections, so the risk of infection was also lower. People who lived in multi-person households also saw themselves at a slightly higher risk than those living alone.
One exception: women rated the likelihood of developing life-threatening illnesses as higher than men. So far, however, various studies have shown that in the event of a coronavirus infection, men are more likely to become seriously ill than women. One possible explanation is that women generally have a lower risk appetite than men, writes Hertwig's team. In other words, you are obviously more concerned.
Only around 14 percent of those surveyed saw their risk at zero. Around 28 percent saw their risk at more than 50 percent.
People were interviewed several times from early April to early July. It was found that the respondents rated the risk even higher at the beginning, namely at an average of almost 30 percent. This value fell to 24 percent at the end of June.
What would be realistic?
Which information on the probability would be realistic? Of course, there is no clear answer to that. The research group makes the following calculation in order to find a maximum value: If, if the infections flared up again, this number of infections would occur again in addition to the around 200,000 proven infected people in Germany, so that we would have and would have 400,000 cases in the country by next spring If all these people actually rate them as life-threatening illnesses, then 0.6 percent of the adult population would be affected - the value is far from 24 or 30 percent.
Of course, this 0.6 percent is only an estimate. At this point in time, no one can answer whether 200,000 people in Germany will be infected with the coronavirus by next spring or whether there will be much fewer or many more cases - because it depends, among other things, on how consistently against the spread of the pathogen will be fought.
Why do the respondents overestimate their risk? The phenomenon also applies to other relatively rare but serious risks such as terrorism threats and also tends to apply to completely new risks, the group writes. However, it is noticeable with Covid-19 that the respondents apparently consider important risk factors against this background of overestimation when they are supposed to assess their personal risk.
The researchers warn against accepting this risk overestimation as a "welcome gift" because it motivates people to adhere to the corona protective measures. The opposite could be the case:If people get the impression that their own perception is very different from the actual risk, this can lead to a fundamental change in their attitude. In this case, it could mean that risks from Covid-19 are no longer perceived as significant and preventive measures are even perceived as unnecessary, invasive and paternalistic. It is important to keep people well informed. Because without protective measures, the risk would actually be significantly higher.
Icon: The mirrorwbr
