It is crucial to understand why people comply with measures to contain viruses and their effects during pandemics. We provide evidence from 35 countries (Ntotal = 12,553) from 6 continents during the COVID-19 pandemic (between 2021 and 2022) obtained via cross-sectional surveys that the social perception of key protagonists on two basic dimensions-warmth and competence-plays a crucial role in shaping pandemic-related behaviors. Firstly, when asked in an open question format, heads of state, physicians, and protest movements were universally identified as key protagonists across countries. Secondly, multiple-group confirmatory factor analyses revealed that warmth and competence perceptions of these and other protagonists differed significantly within and between countries. Thirdly, internal meta-analyses showed that warmth and competence perceptions of heads of state, physicians, and protest movements were associated with support and opposition intentions, containment and prevention behaviors, as well as vaccination uptake. Our results have important implications for designing effective interventions to motivate desirable health outcomes and coping with future health crises and other global challenges.

Astana Medical University Astana Kazakhstan

Comenius University in Bratislava Bratislava Slovakia

Copenhagen Business School Frederiksberg Denmark

Department of Psychology Durham University South Road Durham DH1 3LE UK

Eastern Mediterranean University Famagusta Cyprus

Esade Ramon Llull University Barcelona Spain

FernUniversität in Hagen Hagen Germany

GESIS Leibniz Institut für Sozialwissenschaften Mannheim Germany

HSE University Moscow Russia

Ilia State University Tbilisi Georgia

Jagiellonian University Krakow Poland

M Narikbayev KAZGUU University Astana Kazakhstan

National University of Uzbekistan Tashkent Uzbekistan

Rutgers University New Brunswick USA

Sofia University St Kliment Ohridski Sofia Bulgaria

Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne Australia

SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities Warsaw Poland

Tampere University Tampere Finland

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv Kyiv Ukraine

The Czech Academy of Sciences Prague Czechia

The University of British Columbia Vancouver Canada

Transilvania University of Brasov Brașov Romania

Universidad Católica de Cuyo National Scientific and Technical Research Council San Juan Argentina

Universidade Portucalense Porto Portugal

Université Catholique de Louvain Louvain la Neuve Belgium

University of Bergen Bergen Norway

University of Bern Bern Switzerland

University of Brasilia Brasília Brazil

University of Canterbury Christchurch New Zealand

University of Cyprus Nicosia Cyprus

University of Ghana Accra Ghana

University of Innovative and Social Economics Tashkent Uzbekistan

University of Limerick Limerick Ireland

University of Milano Bicocca Milan Italy

University of Porto Porto Portugal

University of Strasbourg Strasbourg France

Yerevan State University Yerevan Armenia

Erratum v

Sci Rep. 2023 Jan 12;13(1):648. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-27832-9. PubMed

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Davies S. Pandemics and the consequences of COVID-19. Econ. Aff. 2020;40:131–137. doi: 10.1111/ecaf.12415. DOI

Mathieu E, et al. A global database of COVID-19 vaccinations. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2021;5:947–953. doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01122-8. PubMed DOI

Douglas KM. COVID-19 conspiracy theories. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 2021;24:270–275. doi: 10.1177/1368430220982068. DOI

Søraa RA, et al. Othering and deprioritizing older adults’ lives: Ageist discourses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur. J. Psychol. 2020;16:532–541. doi: 10.5964/ejop.v16i4.4127. PubMed DOI PMC

Khan ML, Malik A, Ruhi U, Al-Busaidi A. Conflicting attitudes: Analyzing social media data to understand the early discourse on COVID-19 passports. Technol. Soc. 2022;68:101830. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101830. PubMed DOI PMC

Pascual-Ferrá P, Alperstein N, Barnett DJ, Rimal RN. Toxicity and verbal aggression on social media: Polarized discourse on wearing face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Big Data Soc. 2021;8:205395172110235. doi: 10.1177/20539517211023533. DOI

Burke PF, Masters D, Massey G. Enablers and barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake: An international study of perceptions and intentions. Vaccine. 2021;39:5116–5128. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.07.056. PubMed DOI PMC

Dong G, et al. Self-interest bias in the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-cultural comparison between the United States and China. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 2021;52:663–679. doi: 10.1177/00220221211025739. DOI

Enea V, et al. Intentions to be vaccinated against COVID-19: The role of prosociality and conspiracy beliefs across 20 countries. Health Commun. 2022;0:1–10. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2021.2018179. PubMed DOI

Pagliaro S, et al. Trust predicts COVID-19 prescribed and discretionary behavioral intentions in 23 countries. PLoS ONE. 2021;16:e0248334. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248334. PubMed DOI PMC

Romano A, et al. Cooperation and trust across societies during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 2021;52:622–642. doi: 10.1177/0022022120988913. DOI

Schumpe BM, et al. Predictors of adherence to public health behaviors for fighting COVID-19 derived from longitudinal data. Sci. Rep. 2022;12:3824. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-04703-9. PubMed DOI PMC

Van Bavel JJ, et al. National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic. Nat. Commun. 2022;13:517. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-27668-9. PubMed DOI PMC

Zhu N, Smetana JG, Chang L. Acceptance of Society-level and individual-level preventive measures during the COVID-19 pandemic among college students in three societies. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 2021;52:606–621. doi: 10.1177/0022022121995971. DOI

Visintin EP. Contact with older people, ageism, and containment behaviours during the COVID -19 pandemic. J. Commu. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2021;31:314–325. doi: 10.1002/casp.2504. PubMed DOI PMC

Alston L, Meleady R, Seger CR. Can past intergroup contact shape support for policies in a pandemic? Processes predicting endorsement of discriminatory Chinese restrictions during the COVID-19 crisis. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 2022;25:122–132. doi: 10.1177/1368430220959710. DOI

Ahluwalia SC, Edelen MO, Qureshi N, Etchegaray JM. Trust in experts, not trust in national leadership, leads to greater uptake of recommended actions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Risk Hazards Crisis Public Policy. 2021;12:283–302. doi: 10.1002/rhc3.12219. PubMed DOI PMC

Siegrist M, Earle TC, Gutscher H. Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks. Risk Anal. 2003;23:705–716. doi: 10.1111/1539-6924.00349. PubMed DOI

Wynen J, et al. Taking a COVID-19 vaccine or not? Do trust in government and trust in experts help us to understand vaccination intention? Adm. Soc. 2022 doi: 10.1177/00953997211073459. DOI

Fiske ST, Cuddy AJC, Glick P, Xu J. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2002;82:878–902. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878. PubMed DOI

Cuddy AJC, Fiske ST, Glick P. The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2007;92:631–648. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.631. PubMed DOI

Abele AE, Ellemers N, Fiske ST, Koch A, Yzerbyt V. Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups. Psychol. Rev. 2021;128:290–314. doi: 10.1037/rev0000262. PubMed DOI

Froehlich L, Schulte I. Warmth and competence stereotypes about immigrant groups in Germany. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:e0223103. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223103. PubMed DOI PMC

Kotzur PF, Friehs M-T, Asbrock F, van Zalk MHW. Stereotype content of refugee subgroups in Germany. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 2019;49:1344–1358. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2585. DOI

Friehs MT, Aparicio-Lukassowitz F, Wagner U. US tereotype content of occupational groups in Germany. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2022;52:459–475. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12872. DOI

He JC, Kang SK, Tse K, Toh SM. Stereotypes at work: Occupational stereotypes predict race and gender segregation in the workforce. J. Vocat. Behav. 2019;115:103318. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103318. DOI

Kervyn N, Chan E, Malone C, Korpusik A, Ybarra O. Not all disasters are equal in the public’s eye: The negativity effect on warmth in brand perception. Soc. Cogn. 2014;32:256–275. doi: 10.1521/soco.2014.32.3.256. DOI

Fiske ST, Nicolas G, Bai X. The stereotype content model: How we make sense of individuals and groups. In: Van Lange PAM, Higgins ET, Kruglanski AW, editors. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. 3. The Guilford Press; 2021. pp. 392–410.

Sevillano V, Fiske ST. Stereotypes, emotions, and behaviors associated with animals: A causal test of the stereotype content model and BIAS map. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 2019;22:879–900. doi: 10.1177/1368430219851560. DOI

Bick, N., Froehlich, L., Friehs, M.-T., Kotzur, P. F., & Landmann, H. Social evaluation at a distance - Facets of stereotype content about student groups in higher distance education. Int. Rev. Soc. Psychol.35, 12 (2022).

Tajfel H, Turner J. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Hatch MJ, Schultz M, editors. Organizational Identity: A Reader. Oxford University Press; 1979. pp. 56–65.

Koch A, et al. Groups’ warmth is a personal matter: Understanding consensus on stereotype dimensions reconciles adversarial models of social evaluation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2020;89:103995. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103995. DOI

Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc; 1986.

Zaccaro SJ, Blair V, Peterson C, Zazanis M. Collective efficacy. In: Maddux JE, editor. Self-efficacy, Adaptation, and Adjustment. Springer; 1995. pp. 305–330.

Lee K, Worsnop CZ, Grépin KA, Kamradt-Scott A. Global coordination on cross-border travel and trade measures crucial to COVID-19 response. Lancet. 2020;395:1593–1595. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31032-1. PubMed DOI PMC

Miskulin M, et al. Vaccination attitudes and experiences of medical doctors in Croatia amid the COVID-19 pandemic: A social roles conflict? Vaccines. 2022;10:399. doi: 10.3390/vaccines10030399. PubMed DOI PMC

Young M, Marotta R, Lee I, Phan J, Jacobs RJ. Differences in attitudes of front-line clinicians, healthcare workers, and non-healthcare workers toward COVID-19 safety protocols. Cureus. 2022;14:e20936. PubMed PMC

Ullah I, Khan KS, Tahir MJ, Ahmed A, Harapan H. Myths and conspiracy theories on vaccines and COVID-19: Potential effect on global vaccine refusals. Vacunas. 2021;22:93–97. doi: 10.1016/j.vacun.2021.01.001. PubMed DOI PMC

Ajzen I, Fishbein M, Lohmann S, Albarracín D. The influence of attitudes on behavior. In: Albarracín D, Johnson BT, Zanna MP, editors. The Handbook of Attitudes. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2005. pp. 173–221.

Ajzen I, Fishbein M. The prediction of behavior from attitudinal and normative variables. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1970;6:466–487. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(70)90057-0. DOI

Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychol. Bull. 1977;84:888–918. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888. DOI

Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A. Beyond WEIRD: Towards a broad-based behavioral science. Behav. Brain Sci. 2010;33:111–135. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X10000725. DOI

Brunswik E. Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology. Psychol. Rev. 1955;62:193–217. doi: 10.1037/h0047470. PubMed DOI

Brunswik E. Perception and the Representative Design of Psychological Experiments. University of California Press; 1956.

Asparouhov T, Muthén B. Multiple-group factor analysis alignment. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 2014;21:495–508. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2014.919210. DOI

Lasco G. Medical populism and the COVID-19 pandemic. Glob. Public Health. 2020;15:1417–1429. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2020.1807581. PubMed DOI

Wagner U, Friehs M-T, Kotzur PF. Das Bild der Polizei bei jungen Studierenden [The image of the police in the eyes of German students] Poliz. Wiss. 2020;3:16–23.

Southwell PL. The effect of political alienation on voter turnout, 1964–2000. J. Polit. Mil. Sociol. 2008;36:131–145.

Stoker G, Evans M. The, “democracy-politics paradox”: The dynamics of political alienation. Democr. Theory. 2014;1:26–36. doi: 10.3167/dt.2014.010203. DOI

Bartusevičius H, Bor A, Jørgensen F, Petersen MB. The psychological burden of the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with antisystemic attitudes and political violence. Psychol. Sci. 2021;32:1391–1403. doi: 10.1177/09567976211031847. PubMed DOI

Timoshenkova EP. Angela Merkel’s leadership lessons: The secret of political longevity (2013–2021) Her. Russ. Acad. Sci. 2022;92:S119–S125. doi: 10.1134/S1019331622080111. DOI

Day G, Robert G, Leedham-Green K, Rafferty AM. An outbreak of appreciation: A discursive analysis of tweets of gratitude expressed to the National Health Service at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Expect. 2022;25:149–162. doi: 10.1111/hex.13359. PubMed DOI PMC

Garcia LP. Gratidão ao sistema único de saúde do Brasil. Epidemiol. E Serviços Saúde. 2020;29:e2020333. doi: 10.1590/s1679-49742020000500024. PubMed DOI

Rahaman MdS, Rahman MdM, Ali Reza SM, Reza MN, Chowdhury MdS. Thank you, COVID-19: Positive social psychology towards the new normal. J. Public Aff. 2021 doi: 10.1002/pa.2766. PubMed DOI PMC

Yun EK, Kim JO, Byun HM, Lee GG. Topic modeling and keyword network analysis of news articles related to nurses before and after. J. Korean Acad. Nurs. 2021;51:442–453. doi: 10.4040/jkan.20287. PubMed DOI

Festinger L. Informal social communication. Psychol. Rev. 1950;57:271–282. doi: 10.1037/h0056932. PubMed DOI

Festinger L. A theory of social comparison processes. Hum. Relat. 1954;7:117–140. doi: 10.1177/001872675400700202. DOI

Cornwell JFM, Bajger AT, Higgins ET. Judging political hearts and minds: How political dynamics drive social judgments. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2015;41:1053–1068. doi: 10.1177/0146167215589720. PubMed DOI

Friehs M-T, et al. Examining the structural validity of stereotype content scales: A preregistered re-analysis of published data and discussion of possible future directions. Int. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2022;35:1–18. doi: 10.5334/irsp.613. DOI

Bunge EM, et al. The changing epidemiology of human monkeypox: A potential threat? A systematic review. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2022;16:e0010141. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010141. PubMed DOI PMC

Raju E, Boyd E, Otto F. Stop blaming the climate for disasters. Commun. Earth Environ. 2022;3:1–2. doi: 10.1038/s43247-021-00332-2. DOI

Lichterman A. The peace movement and the Ukraine war: Where to now? J. Peace Nucl. Disarm. 2022;5:185–197. doi: 10.1080/25751654.2022.2060634. DOI

Fiske ST, North MS. Measures of stereotyping and prejudice. In: Boyle GJ, Saklofiske DH, Matthews G, editors. Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs. Academic Press; 2015. pp. 684–718.

Harkness J. Questionnaire translation. In: Harkness J, Van De Vijver FJR, Mohler PP, editors. Cross-Cultural Survey Methods. Wiley; 2003. pp. 35–36.

Kotzur PF, et al. ‘Society thinks they are cold and/or incompetent, but I do not’: Stereotype content ratings depend on instructions and the social group’s location in the stereotype content space. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 2020;59:1018–1042. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12375. PubMed DOI

GESIS Panel Team GESIS panel special survey on the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in Germany, ZA5667 Datenfile Version 1.1.0. GESIS Datenarchiv. 2020 doi: 10.4232/1.13520. DOI

Enders CK, Bandalos DL. The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 2001;8:430–457. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_5. DOI

Brislin RW. Comparative research methodology: Cross-cultural studies. Int. J. Psychol. 1976;11:215–229. doi: 10.1080/00207597608247359. DOI

Goh JX, Hall JA, Rosenthal R. Mini meta-analysis of your own studies: Some arguments on why and a primer on how. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass. 2016;10:535–549. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12267. DOI

Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2. Erlbaum; 1988.