Search

Lockdowns were implemented to reduce the transmission of the COVID-19 virus. However, it is unclear how severely curtailed physical interaction shapes individual behaviors that are considered vital for socioeconomic development. In this exploratory study, we investigate the behavior of college students who experienced a strict campus-wide lockdown and those who did not. Employing a combination of experimental and survey methodologies, we elicit students’ behavioral variables, which are then integrated with administrative records from the university. We find that those exposed to the lockdown were more likely to trust others and be honest; however, their creativity was lower. Exposure to the lockdown was not found to significantly affect students’ trustworthiness, risk preferences, or competitiveness. A follow-up study reveals that the lower creativity among students may be attributed to reduced communication frequency with friends during the lockdown, mediating the lockdown’s impact. Conversely, the effects of the lockdown on trust and honesty may operate through a direct pathway, independent of changes in daily activities during the lockdown. Further analysis reveals a gender-dependent trend, with lockdowns exerting a more pronounced influence on male students than their female counterparts. These results underscore the consequences of lockdowns and advocate for enhanced support networks, emphasizing the importance of communicating with friends in similar circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Donations are often made through charitable intermediaries that can fund themselves from these same donations. After intermediation, only a fraction of the amount donated may reach the intended beneficiary. The price of charitable output is therefore higher after intermediation than if donors donated directly toward the end cause. At the same time, this price is hidden from donors since they cannot verify how much intermediaries pass on. We show that while donors reduce their donation in intermediation itself, and also reduce their donation because they expect the price of charitable output to increase, both reactions are either fully or partly compensated by their ethical preferences for the recipient's rights. Charitable output, therefore, can be a Giffen-good. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]