ArticleCommunications medicine2025
COVID-19 death toll predictions show that triggering counterfactual thinking deteriorates judgmental performance.
Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective communication during a health crisis is critical as it directly influences psychological and behavioral responses that will shape the further progression of the crisis. Past research has suggested that one type of cognitive mechanism that is likely to be affected by the framing of public health messages relates to counterfactual thinking.
methodsBased on 6731 incentivized daily forecasts collected over 377 days (from April 2020-May 2021), we investigate the role of triggering counterfactual thinking when interpreting public information regarding the daily US death toll from COVID-19.
resultsHere we show that individuals who engaged in thinking about "interventions that could have led to an alternative evolution of the death toll" prior to making forecasts exhibit greater judgmental bias in their predictions compared to the control group. Specifically, subjects in the treatment group tend to generate upward counterfactuals and underestimate the death toll, potentially due to anchoring on more favorable scenarios and insensitivity to trend changes. Interestingly, this behavior is also observed among individuals who had recovered from COVID-19 (or someone in their close social circle).
conclusionsOur findings underscore the importance of using debiasing strategies and neutral communication during health crises to mitigate the generation of upward counterfactuals, thus reducing the likelihood of systematic misperceptions and flawed decision-making.
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.