Discussion Group 4

1. Discussion Group 4

2. 2 Simple Questions to Address • Can we include social responses in bioterrorism/epidemic models, in ways helpful to decision-making? • Yes, but… • If so, how? • Simple questions, not so simple answers

3. Issues • What social responses need to be addressed? • Prediction vs. Control • What do decision-makers need to understand? • What policy options are open to them? • Consequences of under- or over-reaction • Movement • Compliance • Quarantine & Rebellion • Credibility and Trust – Willingness to seek treatment • Rumor • Rationality vs. Cognitive Biases • Risk perception is often not rational – rare technological hazards • Herd mentality & the role of emotion • Media Treatment • Subcultural Heterogeneity • Expected Economic Impacts – Delivery of Goods and Services • Health Care Professional Behavior and Individual Altruism

4. Summary • What social responses need to be addressed? • Perspective affects response(s) that you will be interested in examining • Those that can ameliorate/control the epidemic (number of cases) • eg. decreasing personal contacts • Means changing structure of the social network • What is the menu of political choices? • Policy options may be generated by analysts, but choice is ultimately up to policy maker • May be temporal constraints on options and efficacy may change with time • Distinction between collective and individual action • Some collective action might be influenced by a leader • Collective actions can be predicted • What actions are we talking about? • Mechanisms of collective action • Utilitarian motivation – selective incentives • Deontic – sense of obligation (social norm) • Authority – a leader can order action • A few (~6) ways in which collective action can be elicited

5. Summary • What is a social response? • Public Health Response • Aims to manipulate the social responses of the public • Consumer of the models that we create • PHR can elicit responses (positive or negative) from the public depending on sender and receiver characteristics • What are the strategies that can affect public behavior? • Redundancy in capabilities will improve probability of effective response • Redundancy in communication channels increase p(Hear) in Sorensen’s framework

6. Summary • Risk Communication • Use of best case scenario in a very bad situation • Leaders must deliver timely, effective messages through many channels, multiple times (transmitter control variables) • How leaders communicate risk is amenable to modeling (first step in modeling leadership panic) • Also must consider receiver trust/control variables • Communication from analysts to decision makers • Can use schematic graphical methods rather than numbers to convey analysis to decision makers • The right picture is worth a thousand words (or p values)

7. Summary • Much has been learned in the 50 years in the experimental behavioral social sciences • e.g., Prospect theory • Quantitative models that utilize this knowledge are lagging and are critical to this new ‘Manhattan Project’