Is the world divided into serious and reckless? Experts explain the exit of many from their homes to challenge Corona

While the Corona virus is applied to many regions around the world, many countries and governments are trying to implement a quarantine that faces clear resistance, as the presence of crowds in some markets indicates, and a head of state has given a lesson in ethics to its citizens.

It is a phenomenon that has been interested in some research that mixes economics and psychology, in order to explain this irrational behavior, and how to reduce it.

French President Emmanuel Macron said this week that many French people "underestimate" the isolation, at a time when his citizens were forced to stay in their homes as much as possible since March 17 this year to stop the spread of the "Covid-19" epidemic.

And just before the announcement of these measures, social media circulated pictures of crowds in the Paris gardens in the sun.

Since the introduction of the isolation measures, video recordings of crowded markets in the French capital have continued to spread.

In other countries in Europe, the German authorities are reluctant to impose a mandatory stone while many Germans, most of them young adults, are underestimating the official calls to stay in their homes.

Even in Italy, the first European country to impose strict and comprehensive isolation measures, this phenomenon still exists to a large extent, and as a result the government has become intent on taking tougher measures.

Is the world divided into two camps?
The current quarantine, commitment to it, or defiance of it by some, made many wonder: Has the world divided into two groups, one of which consists of serious people who remain in their homes in the interest of the common interest, and the second consists of selfish people who only think about what makes them happy?

Commenting on this, said professor of behavioral economics at the French Institute of Trade Angela Sotan Burgundy School of Business that it is not so because there is a group of hesitants who constitute the majority under this type of situation in general.

"The problem is that these people are the most important and the most dangerous," she told AFP, noting that "if they notice that others are not cooperating, they stop cooperating."

These data are based on research into behavioral economics that lies between economics and psychology and attempts to explain why irrational behaviors emerged from a purely economic background.

One of the most important experts in this field is the Austrian Ernst Fierre who conducted a study at the beginning of the third millennium indicating how to share habits, starting with a specific number of people placed in isolation.

It turns out that a quarter of the study sample contributes to the public interest, whatever the situation, and there is a quarter who think only about themselves. The remaining half, called "conditional contributors," are waiting to see how the majority behave.

Welcome social pressure
In this atmosphere, Sotan expressed regret that social networks "tend to overly show bad examples, which gives the impression that there are only these." She added that this "leads to a vicious circle."

But this can have a beneficial effect by allowing the disaffected to spread social opposition that will push the egoists to reconsider the costs and benefits of their behavior.

"They have the impression that they are benefiting from going to the park because they have done a brave job," Sutan said, but "with the threat of social protests, it becomes very expensive because that's all we currently have."

What is the solution?
But what is the best tactic for authorities to popularize insulation? Is it resorting to force and the imposition of fines in the thousands on the hikers, as happened in France and Italy? Or focus on the responsibility of citizens, as did Macron?

Many economists see it as a mixture of two things, considering that asking the French to write a form based on their sincerity to justify their extraordinary moves is beneficial.

"When we sign a paper, there is a psychological reaction that makes people who tend to respect the rules and seek to respect their pledge," said researcher Niyari Aimar, who studies at the University of Political Science in Paris.

He added that "this signature will create psychological mechanisms that require respect for the pledge to avoid a form of inconsistency in behavior." He continued, "For the majority of people who basically respect social norms, the brain will enhance self-discipline."

But the effect can go away in the long run, depending on what others do.

"If opportunistic behaviors emerge, the position of those who respect orders can naturally change in the wrong direction," Aimar said, but he saw no speculation in the face of an unprecedented situation.