People have limited capacity to process and integrate multiple sources of information, so how do they integrate multiple contextual risk factors for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection? In June 2020, we elicited risk perceptions from a nationally representative sample of the public (N = 800) using three psychologically-distinct tasks. Responses were compared to a sample of medical experts who completed the same tasks. Relative to experts, the public perceived lower risk associated with environmental factors (such as whether a gathering takes place indoors or outdoors) and were less inclined to treat risk factors as multiplicative. Our results are consistent with a heuristic simply to "avoid people" and with a coarse (e.g., "safe or unsafe") classification of social settings. A further task, completed only by the general public sample, generated novel evidence that when infection risk competes with risk in another domain (e.g., a different medical risk), people perceive a lower likelihood of contracting the virus. These results inform the policy response to the pandemic and have implications for understanding differences between expert and lay perception of risk. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

在室外会见 100 人还是在室内会见 14 人风险更大？比较公众和专家对 COVID-19 风险的看法。

人们处理和整合多种信息来源的能力有限，那么他们如何整合冠状病毒病 (COVID-19) 感染的多种背景风险因素？2020 年 6 月，我们使用三个心理上不同的任务从具有全国代表性的公众样本 (N = 800) 中得出风险认知。将回答与完成相同任务的医学专家样本进行比较。相对于专家，公众认为与环境因素（例如聚会是在室内还是室外进行）相关的风险较低，并且不太倾向于将风险因素视为乘数。我们的结果与简单地“避开人”的启发式方法和粗略的（例如，“安全或不安全”）社会环境分类相一致。进一步的任务，仅由普通公众样本完成，产生了新的证据，表明当感染风险与另一个领域的风险（例如，不同的医疗风险）竞争时，人们认为感染病毒的可能性较低。这些结果为应对这一流行病的政策提供了信息，并有助于理解专家和外行对风险的看法之间的差异。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。