ArticleMethods (San Diego, Calif.)2021
The cognitive science of COVID-19: Acceptance, denial, and belief change.
Article in Methods (San Diego, Calif.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cultural differences in healthcare: An investigation using cognitive-affective mapping.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- Cognitive-affective maps extended logic: Proposing tools to collect and analyze attitudes and belief systems.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Meta-analysis and Meta-regression for Uncertain Areas and the Estimation of Possible Benefit of Future Therapies.European cardiology · 2025Review
- Denial as an ethical problem: the example of ICU triage in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.Asian journal of medical humanities · 2024Article
- Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on Czech citizens: how do depression and anxiety symptoms influence cognitive, behavioral, and emotional changes?Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Wicked problems in a post-truth political economy: a dilemma for knowledge translation.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2023Article
- Impact of Personal Experience of COVID-19 Disease on Recreational Anglers' Attitudes and Behaviors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A longitudinal study of vaccine hesitancy attitudes and social influence as predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the US.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Toward interdisciplinary methods appropriate for optimal epidemic control.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Because the spread of pandemics depends heavily on human choices and behaviors, dealing with COVID-19 requires insights from cognitive science which integrates psychology, neuroscience, computer modeling, philosophy, anthropology, and linguistics. Cognitive models can explain why scientists adopt hypotheses about the causes and treatments of disease based on explanatory coherence. Irrational deviations from good reasoning are explained by motivated inference in which conclusions are influenced by personal goals that contribute to emotional coherence. Decisions about COVID-19 can also be distorted by well-known psychological and neural mechanisms. Cognitive science provides advice about how to improve human behavior in pandemics by changing beliefs and by improving behaviors that result from intention-action gaps.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.