Differences in and associations between belief in just deserts and human rights restrictions over a 3-year period in five countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

Discrimination and prejudice against infectious diseases are global public health issues. Historically, outbreaks of infectious diseases have led to discrimination and prejudice. Even when the mechanisms of infection are scientifically unknown, isolation from infected individuals is considered effective. Exclusionary control measures are often taken not only against infected individuals, but also against out-groups that are different from themselves. The plague pandemic of the 14th century led to the discrimination and persecution of Jews (Cantor, 2001). In recent years, there has been repeated discrimination and prejudice against infected individuals and certain groups regarding acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, Zika virus, leprosy, and other diseases (Baldassarre et al., 2020; Rahman et al., 2022; Stuber, Meyer & Link, 2008).

Discrimination and prejudice against specific races and occupations have occurred worldwide since the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak (Bhanot et al., 2021; Devakumar et al., 2020; Lu et al., 2021). In addition, “self-restraint police” or “groups of local vigilantes” demanded strong infection control measures from others in several countries, including Japan and the United States (US) (Denyer & Kashiwagi, 2020; Ortiz, 2020). One psychological factor that potentially promotes such discrimination and prejudice is the belief in just deserts (BJD; i.e., the belief that the infected individual deserves to be infected) (Miura, Hiraishi & Nakanishi, 2020; Murakami et al., 2022). The BJD is based on belief in immanent justice (BIJ; i.e., the tendency to perceive or see justice in the events that have occurred) (Maes, 1998), which is one of the subscales of belief in a just world (i.e., the belief that individuals live in a just world where they get what they deserve and deserve what they get) (Lerner, 1980).

People who believe in a just world report higher levels of various prejudices such as race, fatness, depression, and cancer patients (Crandall & Eshleman, 2003). After the COVID-19 outbreak, studies reported a preliminary result that BJD in Japan was higher than that in the US, the United Kingdom (UK), Italy, and China in March 2020 (Miura, Hiraishi & Nakanishi, 2020). Further, there was a positive association between BJD and human rights restrictions (HRR; i.e., the degree of individuals’ agreement with government restrictions on citizens’ behavior during emergencies) in August 2020 in Japan (Murakami et al., 2022). However, although it has been noted that sociopsychological factors related to infectious diseases, such as risk perception of COVID-19 and adherence to infection control measures, vary among countries (Dryhurst et al., 2020; Van Bavel et al., 2022), it is unclear how BJD and HRR vary among countries and years.

Furthermore, one interpretation of the association between BJD and HRR in Japan (Murakami et al., 2022) is that those with a high BJD tend to seek strong restrictions against others, just as those with high BIJ tend to consider that some harm is the victim’s fault or to punish the victim (Murayama & Miura, 2015). However, it is unclear whether the association between BJD and HRR would hold true in countries other than Japan or for a certain period of time after 2020. The direction of the association between the BJD and HRR remains unclear. Clarifying this would provide evidence for proposing control measures to mitigate discrimination and prejudice and resolve conflicts among different cultures. However, to the best of our knowledge, no such study has been conducted thus far.

Therefore, this study firstly aimed to investigate the differences in BJD and HRR among countries and years. Secondly, the associations between BJD and HRR in each country and year were analyzed in an exploratory manner. Finally, the direction of the associations between BJD and HRR in countries where positive associations between BJD and HRR were identified was examined. Toward this goal, a 3-year survey was conducted in five countries (Japan, the US, the UK, Italy, and China), and a cross-lagged panel model was used to examine the direction of the associations.

Methods

Results

Directionality of the associations between BJD and HRR using the cross-lagged panel model

Tables S10 and 11 show the BJD and HRR for each year in Japan and Italy, respectively, for those who participated in the three surveys. Interaction terms were not significant for either BJD or HRR (partial η² = 0.008 for BJD and 0.017 for HRR). For BJD, country differences were significant but year differences were not. For the HRR, the country and year differences were both significant. However, these results had a weak statistical power owing to the small sample size. Overall, the trends in BJD and HRR were similar to those observed in the analyses of all participants (Tables 2 and 3).

The associations between the BJD and HRR for each year and country are shown in Table S12. In Japan, positive associations were found between 2021 and 2022. In Italy, this association was weak in 2020 and strong in 2022. The Pearson correlation coefficient for 2022 in Italy tended to be particularly higher compared to that analyzed for all participants (Table 4).

The cross-lagged panel model was found to have a good fit based on the following results (Fig. 1): chi-square (CMIN) < 0.001, CFI = 0.887, SRMR = 0.069, and RMSEA = 0.088. Between 2021 and 2022, positive associations were found between BJD and HRR and between HRR and BJD in Japan. A similar trend was observed in Italy, although the statistical power was particularly weak because the sample size was 51. There was no large difference in structure between Japan and Italy, except for the path from the BJD in 2021 to the BJD in 2022 and the partial correlation between the BJD and HRR in 2022.

Discussion

This study investigated the BJD and HRR in five countries (i.e., Japan, the US, the UK, Italy, and China), as well as their trends from 2020 to 2022. The associations between BJD and HRR in each country and each year were further investigated, and the direction of the associations between BJD and HRR was examined using a cross-lagged panel model in Japan and Italy. The results showed differences by country and year in BJD and HRR. The BJD increased from 2020 to 2021 in Japan, the US, the UK, and Italy.

Given the potential for BJD to promote discrimination and prejudice, it is important to understand the underlying reasons for the increase in BJD from 2020 to 2021. Furthermore, there were no large differences in BJD between 2021 and 2022, although the number of COVID-19 patients markedly increased from 2020 to 2021 and from 2021 to 2022 in these countries (Mathieu et al., 2020). We considered two possible interpretations. The first hypothesis is that the knowledge of infection control measures improved after the COVID-19 outbreak. For example, avoidance of the three Cs (i.e., closed spaces, close-contact settings, and crowded places), mask wearing, ventilation, and disinfection are known effective measures that have been promoted in many countries, resulting in increased adherence to infection control measures by 2020 (Petherick et al., 2021). Knowledge of these infection control measures may lead people to believe that infected individuals are infected because of the lack of adherence.

The second hypothesis is an increased threat related to COVID-19. Jackson et al. (2019) analyzed observational and intervention studies and reported that prejudice increases via increased tightness (i.e., strong norms and low tolerance of deviant behavior) in response to severe environments, including infectious diseases and natural disasters. Similar to the association between severe threats and tightness, it is also possible that the growing threat posed by the increasing number of individuals with COVID-19 increased the BJD, particularly between 2020 and 2021, before the wide availability of the vaccine.

In contrast, the HRR declined over time in Japan, the US, the UK, and Italy. This might be because the citizens in these countries regarded years of 2021 and 2022 as no longer “emergencies.” Alternatively, it might be that political control measures, such as lockdowns and staying at home, have led to the recognition of various disadvantages (e.g., slowed economic activity). “Pandemic fatigue” was reported to have occurred worldwide by 2020 owing to the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic (Petherick et al., 2021).

The differences in the BJD and HRR among the countries were interesting. The BJD was higher in Japan and lower in the UK. In contrast, the HRR was lower in Japan and higher in China. The trends in HRR were consistent with the strength of regulatory control measures in each country: requests for self-restraint and no legal restrictions were applied in Japan; there were lockdowns with penalties in the US, the UK, and Italy; and China had the strictest controls (Otsuyama et al., 2020). The strength of national regulatory control measures may reflect the HRR of each country, or vice versa. As noted above, there have been small changes in the BJD and HRR over time in China. This might reflect a refusal bias rather than the participants’ thoughts about BJD and HRR. Munro (2018) noted that refusal bias can influence responses to politically relevant questions in China. A similar refusal bias may have occurred in the present study.

Unlike those for HRR, cross-country differences in the BJD were challenging to interpret. Therefore, we attempted to examine the differences among countries concerning items similar to the BJD. First, comparable results were obtained for the BIJ, the item on which the BJD was based, at least between Japan and the U.S. (Murayama, Miura & Furutani, 2021). A previous study (Murayama, Miura & Furutani, 2021) measured BIJ assuming a hypothetical scenario where a character was injured in an accident. BIJ was found to be higher in Japan than in the US under a low moral condition (i.e., assuming that the character has a low moral): Cohen’s d was calculated as 0.92 from their arithmetic means and standard deviations. For the BJD in Japan and the US in this study, Cohen’s d was calculated from their arithmetic means and standard deviations to be 0.87 in 2020, 0.57 in 2021, and 0.75 in 2022. Second, a similar item that helps in interpreting the differences in BJD among countries observed in this study is tightness. Environmental threats increase tightness, eventually reinforcing prejudice, as reported by Jackson et al. (2019); among the four countries included in their study, tightness was the highest in Japan and lowest in the UK; Italy was excluded from the survey. Another study showed higher tightness in Japan than in the other four countries (Gelfand et al., 2011). Thus, it can be summarized that the differences in the BJD regarding COVID-19 among countries obtained in this study were similar to the differences in not only BIJ but also tightness among countries. Differences in BJD among countries may be partially related to this culturally shaped tightness in response to perceived threats from the environment, including past infectious disease outbreaks and natural disasters.

Positive associations were found between BJD and HRR in Japan and Italy. Interestingly, the strength of this association varied by country. However, a similar trend of positive association was also observed in the US in 2021 and 2022 and in the UK in 2021. Thus, it was possible that the associations between BJD and HRR were common in Japan, Italy, the US, and the UK, although the strength of the associations varied by country and year. As mentioned above, in Japan and Italy, although the BJD increased and the HRR decreased over time, the positive associations were stronger in 2022 than in 2020. This did not mean that participants had an unbiased decline in HRR and an increase in BJD in the population as a whole; rather, it meant that the HRR declined for those who had low BJD and relatively high HRR or that the BJD increased for those who had high HRR and relatively low BJD, or both. That is, either a weakening of HRR in those with low BJD, an increase in BJD in those with high HRR, or both might occur.

The cross-lagged panel model showed that bidirectional associations between BJD and HRR occurred between 2021 and 2022. That is, Japan and Italy experienced both a weakening of HRR in those with low BJD and an increase in BJD in those with high HRR. It should be noted that while the BJD in Japan and Italy did not increase from 2021 to 2022 (Table 2), the HRR in Italy decreased significantly (Table 3), and the HRR decreased for panel participants in both countries (Table S11). It is likely that the weakening of the HRR, especially among those with low BJD, between 2021 and 2022 led to a decrease in the HRR for the population as a whole.

Except for the BJD from 2021 to 2022 and the partial correlation between the BJD and HRR in 2022, there were no large differences in structure between Japan and Italy. The cross-lagged panel model included those who participated in all three surveys, and the results showed that changes in BJD and HRR over time were similar to those in the analysis of all participants. However, the trend for the association between BJD and HRR was different in Italy. There was a bias specific to participants who participated in all three surveys in Italy, which might explain the higher partial correlation between the BJD and HRR in 2022 (Fig. 1).

The following mechanism can be used to interpret the impact of BJD on the HRR. Those with a low BJD did not think that the infection was caused by the victim or that punishment should be imposed against the victim, resulting in disagreement with the rules enacted by the government. The influence of the HRR on the BJD can be interpreted as follows: those with high HRR strictly followed the rules and reinforced the belief that infected individuals must have broken the rules, leading to increased BJD.

Therefore, it may be beneficial to approach people with a high HRR during the early stages of an infectious disease outbreak to decrease the BJD, eventually reducing discrimination and prejudice. In addition to promoting infection control measures, it is important to disseminate public messages that infection is not necessarily the fault of the infected individuals. Such awareness-raising activities have been conducted since the COVID-19 outbreak (Ministry of Justice, 2022), but it is necessary to develop more effective approaches for individuals with a high HRR. The development of individualized messages effective for specific populations is promising. However, it should be noted that there are differences in BJD, HRR, and their associations between countries, as shown in this study. Approaches that are effective in Japan and Italy may not be as effective in other countries. Developing approaches to reduce discrimination and prejudice must be undertaken according to the characteristics of the country.

This study has several limitations. First, the online surveys conducted may have included a selection bias. Selection bias results from the choices made by the participants and investigators (i.e., researchers). Regarding the former, we attempted to reduce bias by providing rewards to participants. This had the advantage of encouraging participation even among those who were not interested in the research topic. Regarding the latter, we attempted to reduce the bias by adjusting for age, gender, academic career, and presence or absence of children and elderly people. Although efforts were made to reduce the effects of bias in this study, future studies should be conducted using alternative survey methods, such as postal and visiting methods, to further verify the external validity of the results. Secondly, this was an observational study. Although the cross-lagged panel model demonstrated the direction of the association between BJD and HRR, a causal relationship was not identified. Therefore, interventional studies aimed at decreasing the incidence of BJD are needed to verify the findings. Third, although this study revealed differences in BJD, HRR, and their associations across countries, it did not fully identify the underlying mechanism. This warrants further observational or interventional studies to investigate which factors, such as the cultural characteristics of each country and environmental threats (Jackson et al., 2019), govern BJD and HRR. Fourth, the study was conducted until the early stages of the omicron variant outbreak, when the number of infected individuals increased rapidly. Therefore, our study did not include how the subsequent deregulation of COVID-19 in each country changed the course of BJD and HRR. Further longitudinal surveys are required to determine the relationship between deregulation and BJD and HRR.

Conclusions

This study found that the BJD was higher in Japan and lower in the UK. The BJD increased significantly from 2020 to 2021 in all countries, except China. There were no significant changes in BJD between 2021 and 2022. Meanwhile, the HRR was lower in Japan and higher in China. The HRR decreased from 2020 to 2021 in Japan and from 2020 to 2022 in the US, the UK, and Italy. In Japan and Italy, there were significant positive associations between BJD and HRR. The cross-lagged panel model revealed positive bidirectional associations between BJD and HRR in Japan and Italy. This highlighted that HRR weakened for those with low BJD and BJD increased for those with high HRR. In Japan and Italy, it is promising to develop and disseminate effective public messages for those with a high HRR during the early stages of an infectious disease outbreak to decrease the BJD, eventually reducing discrimination and prejudice.

Supplemental Information