People interact closer when a face mask is worn but risk compensation is at best partial

Racial discrimination in helping situations depends on the cost of help: A large field experiment in the streets of Paris

Decades of field experiments show that White Americans are more likely to discriminate against Black Americans when the situation provides a nonracist rationalization for withholding help from a Black target - for instance, when the cost of helping looks unreasonable. However, work on racial discrimination in helping is scarcer outside of the US context. The present experiment extends this line of research to Europe and studies differences in helping asiatique (Asian), blanc (White) and noir (Black) men and women in France. In addition, it assesses to what extent racial discrimination in the probability to provide assistance is moderated by the perceived cost of help. The study rests on a sample of over 4500 independent observations collected through a factorial design that combines 12 testers (equally apportioned in race and gender groups), two social class conditions and four observation sites. Testers asked for directions to pedestrians in front of the traffic lights of a busy road, and pedestrians could provide different forms of help that varied in perceived cost. The analysis indicates that overall asiatique and noir testers receive help less often than their blanc counterparts. It also shows that racial discrimination is stronger when the perceived cost of helping is higher.

Perception of interpersonal distance and social distancing before and during COVID-19 pandemic

Since COVID-19 is easily transmitted among people in close physical proximity, the focus of epidemiological policy during the COVID-19 crisis included major restrictions on interpersonal distance. However, the way in which distance restrictions affected spatial perception is unclear. In the current study, we examined interpersonal distance preferences and perceptions at three time points: pre-pandemic, early post-pandemic, and late post-pandemic. The results indicate that following the pandemic outbreak, people perceived others as farther away than they actually were, suggesting that the distance restrictions were associated with an enlargement of perceived interpersonal distance. Interestingly, however, people maintained the same distance from one another as before the outbreak, indicating no change in actual distance behavior due to the risk of infection. These findings suggest that COVID-19 was associated with a change in the way distance is perceived, while in practice, people maintain the same distance as before. In contrast, COVID-related anxiety predicted both a preference for maintaining a greater distance and a bias toward underestimating perceived distance from others. Thus, individuals who were highly fearful of COVID-19 perceived other people to be closer than they actually were and preferred to maintain a larger distance from them. The results suggest that subjective risk can lead to an increased perception of danger and a subsequent change in behavior. Taken together, even when behaviors should logically change, the decision-making process can be based on distorted perceptions. This insight may be used to predict public compliance.