Written By Chris Rider

4 mins read

Welcome to the second installment of BE in the news. This week we’ll be looking at Coronavirus (Covid-19) and the psychology behind panic-buying.

Empty supermarket shelves in Hong Kong.

Source: Phlip Fong/AFP via Getty Images

Who’s acting up?

With the non-stop news coverage of Coronavirus, hand-washing how-to’s and decreasing holiday destination options, we’ve seen some peculiar behaviours make the news. People are starting to panic-buy ‘essential’ products in the hope of protecting themselves from the virus, which it seems is here to stay for the foreseeable future. The most extreme being a knife-point heist in Hong Kong for £100 worth of toilet rolls, black Friday-like queues at US retailers , as well as the emergence of the ‘Wuhan shake’– not to be confused with 2013’s very different Harlem Shake craze.

To see the effects of panic-buying for myself, I went hunting for hand sanitiser around Bath. But, despite visits to Boots, Superdrug and Poundland, I wasn’t able to find a single bottle! A quick look online revealed hand sanitiser on Amazon going for as much as £130! Now although I appreciate this particular sanitiser bottle comes with a handy retractable clip, this seems excessively priced. However, with the need for hand sanitiser feeling over-whelming, I promptly ordered three.

But, why do people feel the need to panic-buy? And is it rational?

Why do we panic-buy?

On the one hand, panic-buying seems quite logical. If there’s an item you need regularly, such as petrol or toilet roll, and you’re worried there’ll be a shortage or you’ll have to isolate yourself, it makes sense from an individual’s point of view to stock up. However, this is often to the detriment of society as a whole, as product shortages occur.

So what are the psychological drivers behind panic-buying?

1. Illusion of Control: One explanation offered by psychologists is that the news coverage makes people feel stressed and uncertain, so in return we seek for ways to compensate our seeming loss of control. Studies have found that by buying products we consider ‘practical’ in assisting us with a problem, this calms us by helping us re-establish our feeling of being in control (even if the control is just an illusion). Particularly relevant given reports that hand sanitiser and face masks may not be that effective after all! (Forbes, 2020).

This is supported by psychologist Thompson (1999) who suggests that as humans we are prone to overestimating our personal influence on situations. This helps explain why items such as face masks or hand sanitiser continue to be in high demand, despite reports suggesting that they offer precious little protection from catching coronavirus and government assurances that there will be no break in supply.

2. Groupthink: A further theory is that when we hear stories of shortages and panic-buying, humans as social, herd animals will seek to copy each other’s behaviour. So when we hear that our friends are stocking up on hand sanitiser or tins of dog food (yes, really), this encourages us to want to conform to the ‘group behaviour’ and begin to stock up ourselves. Often referred to as the bandwagon effect.

This is exacerbated in situations of perceived threats, such as Covid-19. Neuroscientists explain that when faced with threats, the amygdala (the part of the brain which processes fear) is over-activated. This inhibits our ability to reason rationally, exacerbating our susceptibility to groupthink and desire to follow the crowd (Chan, 2020).

3. Anti-authority Bias: Trust in world governments will be a major factor in how people act over the coming weeks and months. As seen in Iran last week, a lack of confidence in their government has meant reassurances of ample supplies has fallen on deaf ears. This lack of trust is now considered to be a major-contributory factor behind panic-buying in the country. This is a form of “anti-authority bias” where we reject information from a figure of authority as a consequence of previous instances of dishonesty (OECD, 2013). Governments should be careful to project confidence to help keep the public onside.

4. Scarcity: Psychologists have found that when we consider something to be in short supply, we ascribe a greater value to it (Cialdini, 2001). Particularly when it’s an item which we’re used to having in abundance so we’re not used to it being scarce. This can vary from physical objects, such as toilet roll, to more abstract notions, such as time. Often shops use scarcity when promoting deals to motivate us to buy, such as “sale ends 8 March” or “while stocks last”. It works because we dislike something becoming unavailable which restricts our freedom, an effect described by psychologists as ‘reactance’.

What can we do?

While coronavirus is obviously a threat, it is worth reminding ourselves of the stats so far. By keeping a grounded, fact-based perspective this will help make sure we’re not blowing the situation out of proportion and unnecessarily over-activating our amygdalas, stopping us from thinking logically.

Current figures show over 99% of deaths so far have been people who already had underlying health issues, and only 2% of deaths have been people under 60 (Worldometers). So if you’re young and healthy, keep those amygdalas cool and buying decisions rational, while I try to cancel my Amazon order before it’s too late!

Source: Pugh, Daily Mail 02/03/2020

Last Week

If you liked this post and didn’t catch last week’s, check out our blog article on the psychology behind negative newspaper headlines here.

References

BBC (2020). Coronavirus: Armed robbers steal hundreds of toilet rolls in Hong Kong. BBC. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51527043

BBC (2020). Coronavirus: The ‘Wuhan shake’ or the elbow bump?. BBC. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-china-51726440/coronavirus-the-wuhan-shake-or-the-elbow-bump

Bozorgmehr, N. (2020). Iran tries to combat public distrust on coronavirus. Financial Times. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from: https://www.ft.com/content/56214762-5647-11ea-abe5-8e03987b7b20

Chan, C. (2020). Why people engage in panic buying in the face of the Coronavirus outbreak? How to manage our panic? Dr Cindy Chan Blog. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from: https://drcindychan.com/why-people-engage-in-panic-buying-in-the-face-of-the-coronavirus-outbreak-how-to-manage-our-panic/

Chen, C., Lee, L. & Yap, A. (2016). Control Deprivation Motivates Acquisition of Utilitarian Products. Journal of Consumer Research, 43 (6).

Cialdini, R. (2009). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. New York, USA: Harper Business.

Haelle, T. (2020). No you do not need face masks for coronavirus they might increase your infection risk. Forbes. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2020/02/29/no-you-do-not-need-face-masks-for-coronavirus-they-might-increase-your-infection-risk/#3ed4439f676c

Nadeau, R., Cloutier, E. & Guay, J. New Evidence About the Existence of a Bandwagon Effect in the Opinion Formation Process. International Political Science Review, 14 (2).

OECD. (2013). Trust in government, policy effectiveness and the governance agenda. Government at a Glance. https://doi.org/10.1787/gov_glance-2013-en

Thompson, S. (1999). Illusions of Control: How We Overestimate Our Personal Influence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8 (6).

Worldometer. (2020). Age, Sex, Existing Conditions of COVID-19 Cases and Deaths. Worldometer. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

Yap, A. (2020). The Psychology Behind Coronavirus Panic Buying. Insead. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from: https://knowledge.insead.edu/economics-finance/the-psychology-behind-coronavirus-panic-buying-13451